hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Jessica Betts: Notability is not inherited and having a famous wife simply doesn't make her notable.  JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done ) 15:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bands and musicians .  JDDJS ( talk to me • see what I've done ) 15:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Niecy Nash Even if Jessica Betts is not notable, Niecy Nash is and I think a redirect would be better than deletion.  When I search Jessica Betts on Google News, all results talk about how she's Niecy Nash's wife.  Jannaultheal ( talk ) 18:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Niecy Nash : Agree that Betts does not appear independently notable; even the sources used in the article mainly refer to the couple together.  I think a simple redirect to Nash is sufficient as Nash is definitely notable.  While page views do not confer notability , I believe we should at least leave a redirect behind for the hundreds of daily visitors to this page .  Bsoyka ( talk ) 18:51, 27 Redirect : Redirects are cheap and as an aid to navigation a redirect makes sense.  -- Otr500 ( talk ) 04:34, 31 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: redirect
Majlis al-Shura: Longhornsg ( talk ) 02:40, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect but to Majlis-ash-Shura which is the correct PTOPIC for this term and this is simply a poor transliteration of the Arabic (see Sun and moon letters ).  nableezy - 02:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Disambiguate as simply the fact that there is this disagreement indicates that there is ambiguity that should be disambiguated.  AriTheHorse 03:30, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Palestine .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Majlis-ash-Shura - this is simply a generic name for a leadership council, non-specific to any polity, and should redirect, as noted above, to the over-arching page for the generic term.  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 10:03, 20 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: redirect
Main Gunehgar Nahi: — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 15:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 15:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:24, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_ARY_Digital#Drama_series - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 13:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Nominator appears to have copied and pasted the nominating rationale for another rush of AfD nominations, despite the numerous times others have cautioned the nominator about making a lot of nominations in a rush, so I am copying and pasting this relist remark.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  09:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Same rationale for almost every nomination i guess.  I am doubting whether WP:Before is done or not.  It was broadcasted in 2013 and many Pakistani newspapers remove old coverage from their websites.  Why a series broadcasted in 2013 need nomination discussion now and if its the case then all the old films/television related articles should be removed from wikipidea.  It received some coverage as one can see here [20] Libraa2019 ( talk ) 09:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Libraa2019 ,  This is a WP:ATA.  Unless the source is unreliable or dubious, old archives can always be found.  And if you doubt that I haven't done WP:BEFORE, why don't you provide some solid coverage (not some Google searches or even ROTM coverage) from RS that help establish WP:GNG, instead of doubting my intentions?  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 09:15, 28 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: redirect
2023–24 Ranji Trophy Group B: Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and India .  Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Per the nom.  No need for a separate article.  Newshunter12 ( talk ) 22:09, 23 January 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: redirect
Jennifer Klemetsrud Puhl: Being a assistant United States attorney does not correlate to someone meeting the notability requirements.  A redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies would be fine.  Let'srun ( talk ) 15:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Law ,  and North Dakota .  Let'srun ( talk ) 15:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies as WP:ATD-R .  Aside from failed nomination, coverage all seems to be trivial mentions: "Subject said something about case".  — siro χ o 18:48, 27 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: redirect
Angourie Point: Boleyn ( talk ) 14:10, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Australia .  Shaws username .  talk .  14:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] comment As a surfing spot this is likely notable.  That said, the tone of the article is hugely unencyclopedic.  Mangoe ( talk ) 16:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] An encyclopaedia article on the Angourie National Surfing Reserve could definitely be written.   I can find sources for that , which however encompasses more than the point.   Also note that it would be a break-out subtopic of Angourie, New South Wales#Attractions , which is fairly bad compared to what a brief search for sources on the NSR turned up, and not even at the point that a sub-article is needed.  This article reads like a tourist guide, personal opinions in Wikipedia's voice and all.  Uncle G ( talk ) 05:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Angourie, New South Wales – this article covers that which Wikipedia is not.  Anything relevant about the point can be included in the village article, the village actually administratively covers the knob/point and there is no notable reason why a seperate article is warranted.  Idiosincrático ( talk ) 14:10, 4 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: redirect
Convent of Jesus and Mary, Ambala: Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  The sources that I could find are either primary, or school/college databases.  One of its alumni is a well-known actress, which lead to some bare-mention hits about the school.  A previous PROD was contested . - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 09:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools , India ,  and Haryana .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 09:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 09:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NEXIST the school was established in 1909 which is over 110 years, there are bound to be offline sources.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 14:16, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment on the sources currently in the article in relation to notability: . cjmambala.org not independent; Datta, M.M. mentions the school their daughter attended; Khattar merely names the school as location of a solar farm; Joshi, S. mention in connection with actress who attended the school; The Tribune interesting that the marathon has been given coverage, not SIGCOV per se but may hint the school is notable.  Puniyani, R. no access.  This [13] reports on one pupil's achievement.  IMO currently identified sourcing doesn't quite meet the notability guideline.  If no additional sources are identified, redirect to either Ambala Cantonment#Education or Convent of Jesus and Mary as an AtD.  Rupples ( talk ) 22:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Convent of Jesus and Mary until better sources can be found.   Most of the sources in the article are not useable to show notability, so the article should be redirected until sufficient sources are found to source it.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 22:19, 27 January 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: redirect
John Doe (whistleblower): The subject has no independent notability outside of their role in the release of the panama papers.  I'm not sure if this quite fits into WP:BLP1E given that the subject is anonymous and we don't know if they are still on this planet or not, however it certainly fits into the spirit of that policy given that the subject's notability is only understood insofar as they leaked the panama papers.  Material about the subject is already covered in Panama Papers so there is no need for a merge and I am seeking community consensus that the redirect be restored.  Tar nis hed Path talk 02:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Businesspeople , Companies ,  and Economics .  Tar nis hed Path talk 02:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , Crime , Finance , Law , Politics ,  and Panama .  Tar nis hed Path talk 03:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Basically what TarnishedPath said, but Subject is not WP:NOTABILITY enough, and the stuff in this article is already stated in both the opening paragraphs and the Newsroom logistics of the Panama Papers article, so I believe this is a fair redirect.  Sharrdx ( talk ) 03:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per nom.  Mccapra ( talk ) 04:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per nom.  We don't know enough about John Doe to fill him out independently of Panama Papers Bluethricecreamman ( talk ) 16:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect but also consider this as a merger as the information is already in the target article.  I think this meets not only WP:BLP1E , but also WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE .  This person seeks to be a low profile individual and remain anonymous so there is little prospect of any biographical information.  It makes sense to have all the information in one article.  - Cameron Dewe ( talk ) 20:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per nom.  and others.  A case of WP:BLP1E .  Sal2100 ( talk ) 16:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect I agree with the logic above and a merge/redirect is the best option considering BLP1E HighKing ++ 17:16, 16 July 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: redirect
Daniel Falconer: The sole notability claim stated here is that he and his work exist, and the sole source is a book about a film series that he worked on, which likely mentions his name in passing but isn't strongly enough about him to carry him over GNG all by itself if it's the only reference on offer.  And while there is an inbound from another article about an award presented by a science fiction convention which this article has failed to note, "notability because award" does not automatically attach to just any award that exists: it requires the award to be one that media cover as news for the purposes of establishing that award's cultural significance, and does not attach to awards that require you to depend on the award's own self-published content about itself for sourcing (but even that award's article is depending 9/10 on self-published primary sourcing rather than third party media coverage).  So the award still isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt this person from having to have more and better sourcing than just a brief mention in one book about something else.  Bearcat ( talk ) 15:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions .  Bearcat ( talk ) 15:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Film ,  and New Zealand .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No coverage outside of TheOneRing.net, which is not a RS.  "Being known" for something without sourcing to back up that statement is not helpful for notability in Wikipedia.  I can't find anything about him.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and merge into Wētā Workshop - people WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 00:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Wētā Workshop – no indication of standalone notability.  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 11:26, 27 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: redirect
Arcangel: Bzrp Music Sessions, Vol. 54: Fails GNG and NSONG.  Sources in article are a single promo and 3 primary (youtube, lyrics).  BEFORE showed nothing that meets IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and in-depth.  There is no material that can be properly sourced (all promo) and merged.  No objection if a consensus forms for a redirect after delete.  // Timothy :: talk 18:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Argentina .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions ) 23:15, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Bizarrap discography#2022–2023 and see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Himmer Ariel .  ItsMario97 ( talk ) 02:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Bizarrap discography#2022–2023 , where the song is mentioned.  CycloneYoris talk!  23:38, 25 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: redirect
What Do I Have to Do? (album): I at least wanted to have the discussion about this rejected PROD.  Jax 0677 ( talk ) 00:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Why not boldy redirect the article to Stabbing Westward , and only go to AfD if that is reversed?  Mach61 ( talk ) 00:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reply - "I at least wanted to have the discussion".  -- Jax 0677 ( talk ) 00:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Jax 0677 I'm confused: the only reason you prod an article is to avoid discussion, yet instead of taking a second no-discussion option after I de-prod you open an AfD.  Why?  Mach61 ( talk ) 01:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reply - Redirect is not blatantly visible.   PROD and AFD are plainly visible.  -- Jax 0677 ( talk ) 13:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As you've told me numerous times be bold .  Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 23:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reply - "PROD and AFD are plainly visible".  -- Jax 0677 ( talk ) 23:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also curious about what has happened to Jax0677's relentless bloodlust for never ever ever ever deleting anything because it is earth-shatteringly crucial to preserve attribution for former editors who said something uninformative about someone non-notable, as seen here or here among many others.  But now Jax is suddenly proposing albums for deletion without considering the standard procedure of redirecting to the band, which happens to satisfy that same unceasing tooth-and-nail fight-to-the-death obsession with never ever ever ever deleting anything, not even redirects created because of previous deletions as seen here .  What gives?  At least be consistent in your obsessions.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 21:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reply - WP:RM has a section for controversial moves.   Since this is likely controversial, I want to have buy in from the Wikipedia community before removing such an article.   Redirecting and merging are possible outcomes for articles in AFD.   There is no WP:Articles for discussion forum.  -- Jax 0677 ( talk ) 23:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Completely missed the point. --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to the Discography section at Stabbing Westward , as is standard procedure for a non-notable album by a notable band, to preserve attributions and histories.  This album is a quickie low-budget compilation that received no notice from reliable media.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 21:23, 16 January 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: redirect
Lee Jong-hee: Onel 5969 TT me 21:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Bands and musicians ,  and South Korea .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : only properlly sourced material to group article.  BLP, fails GNG and BIO.  Lacks independent notability.  Sources in article and BEFORE showed promo, nothing from IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' ; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk 20:15, 1 May 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: redirect
Ricardo Strauss (cricketer): JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Namibian first-class cricketers Sourcing for non-international international cricketers is commonly difficult to find.  Suitable redirect per WP:ATD , and I'd have no issue to these non-internationals being BOLDly redirected going forward.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCRIC .  Robo Cric Let's chat 07:24, 15 June 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: redirect