hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Jane Langley : It is also difficult to find sources as it is easily confused with Jane Pickens Langley .  Streetlampguy301 ( talk ) 20:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Artists .  Streetlampguy301 ( talk ) 20:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:GNG .  I cannot find any information online to improve this article.  Looks like she has been involved with an organization named "Blue Patch", but the name of the company + Jane Langley in the search doesn't produce significant coverage.  Nor does Jane Langley + 1959 WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 00:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I have added a source which confirms her as founder of Blue Planet.  Pam D 08:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] But alas,it is the Blue Planet site.  WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 01:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I did not find sources to back up the info in the article.  The non-profit she founded appears to still be going, but I found only non-independent sources for that.  Lamona ( talk ) 20:49, 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: delete
Dedrick D. Gobert : The Film Creator ( talk ) 13:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 13:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:56, 9 April 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!  04:17, 16 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
Cheam Wei Yeng : Powerviki ( talk ) 13:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 March 1 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Beauty pageants ,  and Malaysia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sir I have added more details and links please check.  She was crowned Miss Universe Malaysia 2022 and represented her country in the Miss Universe 2022.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:40F2:1D:BA8D:F993:DA94:FA4C:259E ( talk ) 16:28, 2 March 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!  08:05, 8 March 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!  06:41, 15 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
Raza Development Fund : Non-notable CFORK.  Source eval: Comments Source Subject homepage, fails WP:IS  1.  "Homepage".  Raza Development Fund.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  Database profile, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS  2. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc. - GuideStar Profile".  www.guidestar.org.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  Service provider page, appears to be self sourced, fails WP:SIRS  3. ^ "Raza Development Fund, Inc".  Housing Partnership Network.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  Primary, fails WP:IS  4. ^ "Annie Donovan".  Raza Development Fund.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  From prnewswire, promotional routine news, fails WP:SIRS  5. ^ UnidosUS.  "Raza Development Fund (RDF) names Annie Donovan as its new President and CEO".  www.prnewswire.com.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  Linkedin profile, fails WP:SIRS LinkedIn".  www.linkedin.com.  2023-05-10.  Retrieved 2024-05-13.  BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:SIRS.  No objection to a consensus redirect/merge of properly sourced content to UnidosUS (I would have boldly done so but it would have been reverted).  // Timothy :: talk 22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Arizona .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't have a lot of knowledge about english wikipedia guidelines.  If it can't stay it can be deleted ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .  אקסינו ( talk ) 08:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 20 May 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!  23:21, 27 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
Christopher Stringini : No notability outside band.   Fails WP:GNG .  Onel 5969 TT me 09:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Illinois .  Shellwood ( talk ) 11:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom; all sources currently in use are unreliable for various reasons.  Jalen Folf (talk) 19:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If there's a consensus for delete/redirect, this article and related titles Christopher Richard Stringini , Christopher Richard "Richie" Stringini and predictably Christopher Richie Stringini should be salted due to persistent disruptive editing by Cambridge Guys socks .  signed, Rosguill talk 20:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I’d like to point out that I too “had a Justin Bieber look-alike hairstyle although Bieber wasn't out at that time.”  Mccapra ( talk ) 21:03, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete unreliable sources and no other significant sources can be found.  Pershkoviski ( talk ) 02:53, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Notability has not been established and there is no evidence of news coverage worthy of establishing the individual as having achieved notoriety or extensive coverage in WP:RS publications.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 08:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not notable in Wikipedia's meaning of the word - as per the last AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Richard Stringini (why are we having another one in the same month?) and repeated refusals of Draft:Christopher Richard Stringini .  Fans have also tried adding the same page under several different titles - Christopher Richard "Richie" Stringini , Christopher Richard Stringini and Richie Stringini - suspect all versions will need salting - as per User:Rosguill above - Arjayay ( talk ) 10:56, 18 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
Allstate Crossbar Classic : What coverage does exist simply quotes the press release announcing the inaugural game.  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:33, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and American football .  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:33, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep If early season kickoff games such as the Aflac Kickoff Game , Duke's Mayo Classic , Camping World Kickoff , Vegas Kickoff Classic , Cowboys Classic , and Texas Kickoff get their own article, then the Allstate Crossbar Classic should also get its own article Michiganwolverines2014 ( talk ) 21:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Pointing out other articles is not a valid argument.   The article on this particular game must stand or fall on its own merits.  Frank Anchor 21:37, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .   The only coverage in the article or on a Google search were WP:ROUTINE announcements that this particular, already scheduled game was going to become the first in a series of games under this nickname.  Frank Anchor 22:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Outside ESPN and Learfield arranging a branding for it, this is a bog standard Tide home game and it'll be the same next year for whichever two teams they find to paste a logo on the field for.  Nate • ( chatter ) 00:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Unlike most kickoff games, it appears this isn't even a neutral site event — just a sponsorship deal applying this name to what otherwise would simply be a run-of-the-mill home game.  Neutral site games, while not necessarily notable in and of themselves, at least have the potential of garnering the requisite significant coverage — there's almost no way that will ever happen with this one.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:52, 17 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: delete
Wireless Internet Protocol : There are multiple protocols that enable wireless access to the internet, but no single entity that can logically be called the Wireless Internet Protocol.  Google searches for this term do not show any meaningful results that could be used to provide citations and verification for this article.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  13:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  13:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Judging by the article text and the context of other edits of the IP who created this page, likely refers to WAP 2.0 .  Might be a vendor-specific term, but I couldn't find a source to corroborate this.  PaulT2022 ( talk ) 06:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom as noted above.  Pumpkinspyce ( talk • contribs ) 00:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  -- Zac67 ( talk ) 20:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and above.   Also, the recent rewrite likely runs afoul of WP:LLM .  DefaultFree ( talk ) 00:50, 1 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
Jean Robert Yelou : Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 15:54, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Oceania .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 15:54, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:43, 22 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
Jacques Tioye : PROD was declined without making any effort to demonstrate that either guideline is satisfied.  My English-, French- and Thai-language searches yielded nearly no coverage of this player.  I did find a messageboard post that confirms he played for Muangthong United and that he wore the #9 shirt for the club, but it's not a reliable source and the coverage is far from being significant.  Jogurney ( talk ) 20:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football , Cameroon , Ivory Coast ,  and Thailand .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 21:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , completely unsourced BLP article that fails SPORTBASIC and GNG as noted above.  Zero hits in GNews.  Tails Wx 03:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: per all forementioned reasons above.  Lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG . -- 12:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC) Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 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
Battle for Belgrade : Unable to find any sources supporting independent notability of the ground fighting, as opposed to Operation Retribution (1941) .  As far as I can tell, no fighting took place in the city itself and the Waffen SS peacefully occupied the town hall.  Fermiboson ( talk ) 14:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Serbia ,  and Yugoslavia .  Fermiboson ( talk ) 14:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] But that is article is only talking about the bombing raids of the city.  This article is about the actual capturing of the city itself.  Operation Retribution was only 2 days long, while the battle was 6 days long.  Antny08 ( talk ) 16:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Correct.  However, I still can't find any sources mentioning specifically the ground battle, as opposed to the air bombing and a wider campaign aroud the entirety of Yugoslavia.  I would be very grateful if you could provide any sources you have that do that (aside from wiki matters, I'm interested in the topic personally).  However, otherwise the ground battle is a notability fail, if there are no sources that give it specifically significant coverage.  Fermiboson ( talk ) 03:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Germany .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - All the information in the article is covered in Operation Retribution (1941) , specifically in the Aftermath and Legacy section.  Any useful information from this article can be placed there.  Sgubaldo ( talk ) 20:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Siege of Belgrade (disambiguation page), mirroring the Battle of Belgrade redirect.  – Vipz ( talk ) 10:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Alternative: Battle for Belgrade redirects to Siege of Belgrade , Battle for Belgrade (1941) redirects to Operation Retribution (1941) ?  Fermiboson ( talk ) 15:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete this has no information that isn't already in the comprehensive Operation Retribution (1941) (which I developed through GA to FA).  There was no Battle for Belgrade, it was an air operation then an effectively unopposed capture of the city by German ground forces.  Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me ) 08:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not even worth a redirect to Operation Retribution (1941)#Bombing because of the number of other Battle of Belgrades .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 19:47, 2 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: delete
WJYL-CD : Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 22:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Kentucky .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 22:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Delete There seems to be another WJYL in Tennessee?  Does not meet notability standards right now.  However, I believe it is possible that an expert on the subject could theoretically bring the article up to standards.  Royal Autumn Crest ( talk ) 18:18, 31 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
Eric Stubbe : (The wording is ambiguous: it is Klaus Ranner who became Consul General in Dubai.)  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 01:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Germany ,  and Puerto Rico .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 03:06, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.   No substantial coverage (the only Google Search results are accusations against a person of this name that I am unwilling to link here), and "honorary consul" is not a position that is inherently notable.  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 17:36, 18 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
Hanna Jonasson : Remsense 诉 19:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Law ,  and Internet .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : What does Assange's cat do for this person's notability?  She's quoted in the article. .  I don't see anything about this person that we'd use for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC) * [ reply ] Keep Article was made because of red link by @BilledMammal [13] It doesnt matter if articles are about Assange, Manning, or Assange's cat because Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material .  and If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability Softlem ( talk ) 11:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I disagree in this case, I don't think the sources amount to Jonasson's notability.  Remsense 诉 17:05, 15 March 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!  20:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: We really need an uptick in participation at AFDLand.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete She doesn’t satisfy WP:SIGCOV .  She only receives trivial mentions in texts about Assange’s cat.  Contributor892z ( talk ) 06:39, 4 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
Andreas Berthelsen : A Danish source search yielded nothing decent.  Badminton Europe is only a trivial mention.  Please note that there is an unrelated Danish football coach of the same name.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:52, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Badminton ,  and Denmark .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:53, 16 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!  22:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as it fails WP:NBAD as well as WP:GNG per nomination.  zoglophie 14:56, 26 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
David Ward (diplomat) : Routine coverage here fails WP:GNG .  Uhooep ( talk ) 21:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Bilateral relations , Africa , United Kingdom ,  and Oceania .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:BIO for lack of significant coverage.  Article looks like a resume.  LibStar ( talk ) 13:13, 29 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: delete
Talimuddin Inter College : LibStar ( talk ) 10:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools , India ,  and Uttar Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 07:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL and WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 08:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:School .  Maliner ( talk ) 15:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails NSCHOOL.  AmusingWeasel ( talk ) 08:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NSCHOOL .  𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 12:52, 22 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