hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Kim Sønderholm : It obviously needs other work - it's very promotional - but it seems more than this.  It ahs been in CAT:NN for over 13 years.  Boleyn ( talk ) 10:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Radio ,  and Denmark .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 12:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment There does not seem to be much of substanceonline, all I could see were references to films he has appeared in.  Are these sufficient?  He is described as 'starring which suggests peolple might have heard of him.  TheLongTone ( talk ) 16:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, fails GNG and NBIO.  Single source in article is to a movie review without SIGCOV about the subject, ELs are two primary sources and a database.  BEFORE found nothing that meets BLPs requirement for strong sourcing from WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth .  Ping me if sources are found.  // Timothy :: talk 12:26, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
2023 Nevada air ambulance crash : Fails WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:SUSTAINED .  The last article giving information on the crash was a little more than a year ago.  Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 12:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , though it might prove to be worth WP:REFUND .  I say that because Blancolirio made three analyses of it ( 1 2 3 ) and it might end up resulting in rule changes or coverage.  tedder ( talk ) 16:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's usually what he does.  He usually covers an incident at least twice in the first few days.  All of his analyses were made in the first 2 weeks and since then, there hasn't been an update even though the NTSB's preliminary report was released.  Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 07:45, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .   As per the nomination.   There was an article about the one-year anniversary [42] , but that does not meet WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE .   The NTSB issued a preliminary report (WPR23MA113, see https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/basic-search and search for February 24, 2023).  Cxbrx ( talk ) 20:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Didaskalia (theatre) : Yet the page is a mere WP:DICDEF , and no other article references it, or even uses the word in this sense.  - Cal Engime ( talk ) 17:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : this makes sense.  The article also only cites dictionaries.  Mrfoogles ( talk ) 19:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Nek Muhammad Shaikh : Flounder fillet ( talk ) 18:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  samee converse 20:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Good catch! fails WP:GNG as well.  --— Saqib ( talk | contribs ) 20:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Does not pass WP:Prof .  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 22:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete -- the only citation for the notability of this assistant professor is a run-of-a-mill list of awards given by the university to its profs.   WP does lack articles on prominent Pakistani and other South Asian academics, so we should move more slowly here when evaluating, but based on the article there isn't enough to pass the average professor test.  -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Fails WP:GNG/ WP:NPROF.  Southati ( talk ) 14:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A mere stub with two poor-quality citations.  I did some cursory searches of my own and was unable to find anything noteworthy.  Apparently fails WP:PROF as well as WP:GNG .  X ( talk ) 19:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Metropolitan Police Public Order Operational Command Unit : Cannot find many reliable external sources on this unit, many are Wikipedia mirrors.  Elshad ( talk ) 11:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV .  Two out of three references do not talk about the subject at all.  Searching "Metropolitan Police Public Order Operational Command Unit" on Google shows mostly Wikipedia mirrors.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 11:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and England .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:28, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Ben Gray : Fails WP:GNG (previous AFD was for another Ben Gray).  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 17:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby league-related deletion discussions .  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 17:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  17:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 08:53, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Bonnee Buttered Beef Steaks : Ref 1 is a county directory, and although I haven't been able to find a copy of it, according to St. Louis City Directories , they were basically like the yellow pages, so they're hardly RS indicating notability.  Ref 2 is a book of random high school memories from people who grew up in St. Louis - again, hardly SIGCOV of this product.  Ref 3 was written by Sam Brown, who sold the things, so not independent.  Ref 4 is an obit of Mr. Brown and does not focus on the product.  I was not able to find anything further on a search, and I don't see any likely merge target.  ♠ PMC ♠ (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Products ,  and Missouri .  ♠ PMC ♠ (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This topic sounds like it needs newspaper, but even then I'm left wanting.  I found a brief mention in a 1994 column.  [1] There is also some coverage of the company's 1961 bankruptcy.  [2] [3] But the vast majority of hits in the Post-Dispatch are weekly grocery ads.  Delete.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 22:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ "Whatever happened to the Bonnee Butter Beefs..."  St. Louis Post-Dispatch .  October 9, 1994.  p.  Magazine 25 .  Retrieved July 26, 2023 – via Newspapers.com.  ^ "Bankruptcy Petition Filed Against Old Bonnee Co" .  St. Louis Post-Dispatch .  July 9, 1961.  p. 10A .  Retrieved July 26, 2023 – via Newspapers.com.  ^ "$559,644 Debts, Assets Of $1026 Listed For Firm" .  St. Louis Post-Dispatch .  September 6, 1961.  p. 3A .  Retrieved July 26, 2023 – via Newspapers.com.  Delete It is possible that the company itself could meet GNG (I didn't check on that), but the individual product does not.  The article seems to have been created by a fan of the meat who is also the author of the blog post listed here.  The article is promotional ("...could be cooked to perfection...") and possibly copied from advertising.  Lamona ( talk ) 17:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .   There are insufficient sources to support a proper article.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 05:55, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
List of remote companies : Coincindentally, all of the sources are from 2020.  previous discussion went against consensus by using presence of "remote work" keyword in 2+ sources to justify creating this unencyclopedic list .  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 03:58, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Lists .  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 03:58, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per बिनोद थारू .  An unclear and unnecessary list.  It will be quite difficult to expand/maintain this kind of a list.  killer bee 04:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This is a bit tricky.  The title itself doesn't appear to meet SALAT, however in practice this list is limited to blue-linked companies with RS, so it does meet WP:SALAT at this time.  Perhaps a better title is needed.  I also think it might be worth removing the second paragraph ("Benefits of being fully remote are:...") as it doesn't seem necessary or NPOV for such a list.  — siro χ o 04:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The main problem is that it applies to all non-essential companies during the pandemic बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 05:03, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unnecessary & unable to be maintained or expanded/minimized.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 04:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as an unmaintainable ephemeral attempt to grasp at a changing concept.  Companies aren't remote or not.  They exist on a continuum between 100% in an offices and buildings and 0% in an office (with no office).  If we keep this list, we'll have to decide what to do about a company that has one boss and one admin who work together in one head-office house, but employ 100,000 people world-wide working from their homes.  Is it truly remote?  It does have an office and an office-worker!  What actual ratio of home-workers to office-workers do you need to pass the threshold?  In future, most companies are going to live somewhere along that continuum, and merely classifying one group based on their being at an extreme end is unhelpful to our readers, hard to do, likely to be wrong a lot of the time, or very subjective (because every source-writer will have a different threshold).  And what are we going to do about all notable companies where no reliable source has actually assessed whether they're remote or not?  All the sources that I checked treat remoteness as a novelty.  It won't be a novelty for much longer, so the sourcing is going to dry up.  Elemimele ( talk ) 07:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The criteria of the list is also dubious.  Dympies ( talk ) 07:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Cameron Windust : But still zero in-depth independent sources.  Onel 5969 TT me 10:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - at risk of being verbally abused again like I was in the previous AfD, the subject still does not meet WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG , which would be the only relevant guidelines for Windust.  I would also recommend SALT due to the article being recreated multiple times and the previous AfD consensus not being respected (see here ).  If this gets sent to draft again, it will get moved back again and we will then need a 3rd AfD.  Same case as Jackson Khoury .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:51, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and SALT - nothing has changed since last AFD, no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 01:41, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Kravtsov family (Don Cossacks) : - Altenmann >talk 17:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Russia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Hwang Myong-chol : Simione001 ( talk ) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 04:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , No sources.  Samoht27 ( talk ) 20:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no sources, fails WP:GNG, etc.  Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 10:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Salma Phillips : Refs don't meet RS.  Cosmo ref looked promising until it turned out to be DL.  Nswix ( talk ) 00:17, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Nigeria .  Nswix ( talk ) 00:17, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nominator.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 01:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 04:56, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Felipe Aguirre : Most of the secondary sources are all fairly WP:ROTM for any local politician and not enough to establish WP:NOTABILITY or significant coverage per WP:POLITICIAN .  The alledged criminal activity also seems to fail WP:CRIME and not notable either.  Shaws username .  talk .  23:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians ,  and California .  Shaws username .  talk .  23:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:26, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment He appears to have some sources beyond the early 2010s.  He was interviewed by NPR in 2006 .  There's also mention of him in 2021, but I'm pretty sure it isn't the same Felipe Aguirre.  Lettler hello • contribs 00:34, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Interesting comment above but I don't believe that suffices in terms of notability.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 01:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 20:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom, and the npr is an interview Password (talk) (contribs) 05:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Karish Rivera : I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Puerto Rico .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is a holdover of the "int'l cap = automatic notability" era (such as it was).  My creating it was premature at best.  Danish Ranger ( talk ) 14:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  In light of recent discussions elsewhere I don't feel qualified to judge WP:RS, WP:IS, or WP:GNG.  There's some coverage of the Rivera sisters' combined exit from the Sol in 2019 ( 1 , 2 , 3 ) but not enough on Karish specifically to warrant an article.  If the Sol article had a more fleshed-out history section, the exit might have enough coverage to warrant a line there.  Karish Rivera also appears to have started university and is no longer on the Stars' roster for the current Liga PR season, and there are no signs she's been active as a player for the Stars or PR since at least 2022.  - Socccc ( talk ) 17:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.-- Ortizesp ( talk ) 06:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
The Final Four (Survivor: Borneo) : I tried to find reliable sources covering production notes and critical reactions without avail.  Even with such sources, I couldn't see how the season finale is independently notable from Survivor: Borneo other than attempt to extend long details of the season finale itself.  Furthermore, I don't see how initial (first-run) reactions would help other than to overemphasize the episode's importance, which is already covered in the season article.  Well, WP:PAGEDECIDE is subjective but should apply to this topic.  Furthermore, this is the recording and production of the event itself, so WP:SBST and/or WP:EVENT , including WP:EVENTCRIT and WP:COVERAGE , should apply as well.  Diversity of sources are expected, yet I've not seen such regarding the whole episode itself.  Should be either redirected to Survivor: Borneo or deleted as a whole.  George Ho ( talk ) 04:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Entertainment ,  and United States of America .  George Ho ( talk ) 04:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just to clarify, I don't mind what the default decision shall be if there are neither objections nor comments from others.  If the default decision shall be delete, then the page shall be soft-deleted right away.  If the default decision shall be redirect, then the page shall be redirected to the TV season article.  George Ho ( talk ) 16:00, 9 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] DELETE.  Almost nothing but an extremely bloated episode summary.  Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete