hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
KAGI: Greatder ( talk ) 06:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I haven't evaluated them, but there are some refs in the section labeled "External links".  You can also tag such articles with {{no footnotes}}.  — siro χ o 10:16, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Jefferson Public Radio .  This station is just a rebroadcaster of that network and originates no programming.  Flip Format ( talk ) 17:54, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Jefferson Public Radio for now.  Granted, I do think this would be an {{ R with possibilities }} ; I'd think that a station that has been around since ~1940 , and (as far as I can find) has only been part of a public radio network since 1991, should potentially have more sourceable content and potential notability (which is not temporary , of course).  As it stands, though, this is another one of those stubs written in 2011 (replacing a preexisting redirect to Jefferson Public Radio) when our (over)presumption of notability in this topic area was still so overly broad that we were creating stubs on seemingly every transmitter of the public radio networks, even if they have never had any separate on-air content (and that was largely curtailed even before GNG enforcement was stepped up in 2021).  If this were created as-is today, it would probably be redirected within days or even hours, without the need for AfD.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Pivoting to at least a weak keep ; if nothing else, the entire rationale for the nomination (which was the lack of references) appears to have been rectified with Sammi Brie's rewrite/expansion.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I just did a full rewrite.  The main problem is newspaper availability.  It may say something that I don't have a radio DYK from the Medford market—though this would qualify.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 00:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Excellent recovery!  I would definitely vote Keep now!  Greatder ( talk ) 18:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Thanks to Sammi Brie

Discussion outcome: speedy keep
List of trains run by Indian Railways: Secondly, many couple of trains have been updated or added officially but lack in this article.  Jagganath01 ( talk ) 04:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) ( WP:SOCKSTRIKE — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c ) 09:24, 17 March 2024 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  Jagganath01 ( talk ) 04:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  Certainly can use some cleanup and reorganizing, but deletion does not seem necessary .  With regards to "many couple of trains have been updated or added officially but lack in this article", WP:OUTDATED applies.  S5A-0043 Talk 07:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Nomination is by a blocked sockpuppet.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No valid reason given for deletion.  Category:Indian Railways exist, plenty of things that could be listed here are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles.  D r e a m Focus 02:25, 17 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: speedy keep
Volusia error: I can't find any unbiased sources (that aren't obviously connected to Harris) to satisfy WP:GNG .  The closest sources I could find are the Washington Post piece and Jeffrey Toobin's Too Close to Call , neither of which provide detailed coverage about the incident, simply mentioning the error as one of several mistakes.  The USA Today piece is opinion.  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 04:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Events , Politics , Technology ,  and Florida .  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 04:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Re-reading Too Close to Call , it might barely contain significant coverage of the Volusia error: it describes how the error led networks to call the election for Bush, and says that a campaign staffer realized the mistake.  But the coverage is somewhat brief, and one source still isn't enough for WP:GNG or WP:EVENTCRIT even if it is significant.  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 05:35, 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: speedy keep
Love Again (film): I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 April 19 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 20:59, 19 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: speedy keep
Bankruptcy of Penn Central: This article only had 3 paragraphs about the bankruptcy.  The rest is about the Penn Central Transportation Company.  Not sure this calls for a standalone page.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw.  Will properly nominate at WP:RfD .  Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:42, 15 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: speedy keep
Itchy: Vitaium ( talk ) 06:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts , Film , Television , Comics and animation , Entertainment , Science , Behavioural science ,  and Biology .  Vitaium ( talk ) 06:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep This page is a perfectly reasonable Disambiguation page, and this AFD has no chance of success.  Exemplo347 ( talk ) 06:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Yes, what Exemplo347 said.  Imaginatorium ( talk ) 07:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC Speedy Keep per WP:DAB .  APK whisper in my ear 07:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as good disambiguation page.  Hogo-2020 ( talk ) 13:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep .  Solid disambig page.  — Carter (Tcr25) ( talk ) 14:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep , getting to WP:SNOW at this point.  BD2412 T 20:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Perfectly good disambiguation page.  SportingFlyer T · C 21:57, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Snow keep @ Vitaium : if you think this word should be made into a redirect you should start a move discussion instead.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 22:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedly Keep : User:Vitaium I don't think that the article is incorrect.The article is the perfect one to be in Wikipedia so i think this might be your mistake please check it on.  MICHAEL 942006 ( talk ) 17:35, 12 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: speedy keep
North of England cricket team: The only sources you provided were CricketArchive and Scores & Biographies, which are not considered reliable or independent for this purpose.  You also did not provide any context or history of the team, or explain why it is notable or relevant.  DarklarkOxs ( talk ) 21:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  DarklarkOxs ( talk ) 21:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per WP:SK#2 as a bad faith revenge nomination.  The deletion rationale also appears to have been written by ChatGPT.  192.76.8.94 ( talk ) 21:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per 192.76.8.94 and above AfD discussion.  WhichUser AmI 21:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cricket and England .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:16, 22 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: speedy keep
Brendan Mahoney: The person does not have WP:SIGCOV and does not meet WP:GNG in my opinion.  Lightburst ( talk ) 00:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Newspapers.com brings up a decent amount of coverage, e.g. Vancouver Sun feature story (further Sun coverage: [100] [101] and [102] ), The Province (further Province coverage: [103] , [104] and [105] ), and Calgary Herald .  The first Sun piece is the best one BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 03:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks @ BeanieFan11 : these can be added to the article: his notability is derived from something other than his position as directorof player personnel.  I will withdraw.  Lightburst ( talk ) 04:20, 21 October 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: speedy keep
Mandelbrot Competition: Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and United States of America .  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 03:16, 18 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: speedy keep
Crazy Gary's Mobile Disco: Possible ATD is redirect or merge/redirect to Gary Owen , but it could unbalance that article.  Boleyn ( talk ) 15:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre and Wales .  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 15:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – I have added more sources, including reviews in several major newspapers.  The play has been published by a major publisher and has had several productions.  Verbcatcher ( talk ) 01:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw nomination per above.  Boleyn ( talk ) 21:37, 24 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: speedy keep
Draft:Evolutionary Tinkering: So requesting to delete this page.  Evolutionary_tinkering iVickyChoudhary ( talk ) 07:27, 11 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: speedy keep
Military history of the Republic of Artsakh: The article's content currently consists of duplicated content from its linked articles and doesn't have any original content from what I can tell.  I'm not familiar with "Military history" articles but to me, I can't see the utility of this article.  All of its current content is already covered in the main Republic of Artsakh article I think as well as its subarticles.  Much of the history of Artsakh deals with "military history" as well so I'm not exactly sure what differentiates this from the main History of Artsakh article.  Would like to others' thoughts on this though.  Cheers, Dan the Animator 22:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military , Armenia ,  and Azerbaijan .  Dan the Animator 22:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article needs improvement, but it fits into SUMMARYSTYLE well, I don't think stubbish really describes the article.  This would fit as the parent article for the military history articles summarized and hatted in the article.  Article lacks sources, but the needed refs are present in the child articles to show this meets GNG and fits into a reasonable SUMMARYSTYLE structure.  I can see how this dups some content from the main Republic of Artsakh article, but this I think is a reason for improvement, not deletion.  // Timothy :: talk 07:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I think this could/should be developed, but it requires a proficiency in Armenian that I do not have, so I cannot really help there.  With regards to the difference with the main article, well, I believe this one could deal with a lot of minutiae that are unsuitable for History of Artsakh (comments on military equipment, individual battles, etc.).  It will need a lot of babysitting, though, as PoV wars are bound to happen.  Ostalgia ( talk ) 08:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment thanks y'all for the replies!  I'll withdraw this nom now given the reasoning above and apologies for starting it in the first place!  Cheers, Dan the Animator 18:25, 30 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: speedy keep
Fey Truscott-Sade: Doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Comics and animation .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:24, 30 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: speedy keep
Zaal Udumashvili: Appears to be a failure of WP:GNG and WP:NPOL .  The original article was a series of unsourced quotes feeling more promotional in nature than anything.  Unsourced quotes have been removed.  IceBergYYC ( talk ) 16:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  IceBergYYC ( talk ) 16:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The article does not represent this, but the subject passes WP:NPOL as a member of the Parliament of Georgia .  Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've rewritten the article, added a couple of sources and removed the uncited bits.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:44, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawing as nominator to Speedy Keep meets NPOL as stated by Curbon7.  source [27] IceBergYYC ( talk ) 21:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Kudos to the nominator for withdrawing the nomination when new information shows up.  This is a collective search for the right answer and I admire people like IceBergYYC that don't see AfD as a zero-sum test of wills.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 22:32, 31 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: speedy keep
Coponius: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 18 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , History , Israel , Palestine ,  and Italy .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - One of a series of notable Romans being nominated for deletion by this edtor.  See my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus .  Undoubtedly notable.  Treated in many books (e.g. [20] ).  Scholar has nearly 2000 articles to sort through, many/most being relevant.  This should be a snow keep.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A lot of articles have been deleted that I might consider 'undoubtably' notable, ( Tristan Tate ).  Yet if they don't pass WP:GNG they should be deleted.  Serrwinner ( talk ) 14:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep , pointless nom, no WP:BEFORE attempt, and regarding the "Almost no sources" rationale, the article is mostly based on the "Coponius" entry in The Jewish Encyclopedia and on A History of the Jewish People , Harvard University Press , two sources that speak volumes about Coponius' notability.  The only excuse for the nominator is that they are a fairly new account with about 300 edits, otherwise I would consider them to be openly disruptive.  -- C avarrone 19:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep Improper nomination. TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 22:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Clearly notable as governor of Judaea, and one about whom at least some detail is known, making it less practical to merge him into an article about other governors. P Aculeius ( talk ) 23:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per User talk:Serrwinner #Roman AfDs , this is a pointy nomination of a clearly notable subject.  FortunateSons ( talk ) 14:06, 19 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: speedy keep
Anna Nicole Smith: You Don't Know Me: Fails WP:NFILM .  QuestFour ( talk ) 21:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator , seems to be a snowball.  QuestFour ( talk ) 15:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  QuestFour ( talk ) 21:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The film has been reviewed by numerous major publications.  The ones currently cited in the article are from Variety , The Atlantic , The New York Times , The Guardian , and Time Magazine .  Clearly the film meets notability guidelines with such coverage.  Thriley ( talk ) 23:14, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This is a well-sourced stub with plenty of room for expansion.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 01:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep multiple sigcov in-depth secondary reviews in WP:RS .  Resonant Dis tor tion 11:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment to nominator : @ QuestFour : Would you consider withdrawing your nomination?  A Snowball Keep seems more than likely. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 13:00, 31 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: speedy keep
Yellow (2006 feature film): I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes .   I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass NFO, NFSOURCES and WP:NEXIST .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 18:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 18:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:56, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Added a few things.  to the page.  Please have a look.  Keep . - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 22:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Variety and TV Guide reviews are enough to pass WP:NFILM Donald D23 talk to me 02:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There is also a review in the Los Angeles Times .  Somebodyidkfkdt ( talk ) 08:11, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and comment .  Since the fall of 2023, The Film Creator has nominated 28 articles for deletion with only 3 closing as delete .  That's pretty remarkable.  Of the articles that were kept, half were kept speedily.  This verges on a situation where The Film Creator should seriously consider if they should refrain from starting more AFDs.  From the many film nominations, it can be widely observed that:  (a) Rotten Tomatoes is useless in many cases.  (b) The Film Creator is unable to find reviews that other users have little problems finding.  Why is that?  (c) The Film Creator should learn from these users, and maybe even contact them directly instead of wasting everyone's time with ill-conceived nominations.  (d) Sure, the articles are improved through this process, but AFD is not cleanup.  Geschichte ( talk ) 12:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per added sources.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 17:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  TROUT for The Film Creator and I suggest closing this as speedy keep.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 00:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I withdraw this nomination.   Apparently, I need to practice WP:BEFORE more carefully.   I vow not to nominate any film articles for the rest of 2024.  The Film Creator ( talk ) 02:07, 28 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: speedy keep
Shayde: As it stands, he doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Comics and animation .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 01:25, 30 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: speedy keep