hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Dan Chen: Perhaps something can be salvaged in a merge?  But to where?  UtherSRG (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Canada ,  and New York .  UtherSRG (talk) 13:03, 16 June 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!  06:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Could feasibly meet WP:PRODUCER but the sourcing is very weak in this article.  Maybe sources like [40] [41] help a bit?  Might also meet WP:MUSICBIO .10 if the TV show features can be verified in sources.  — siro χ o 10:25, 23 June 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!  06:01, 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: delete
N8 Identity: Orphaned for a decade.  Pepper Beast (talk) 04:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Canada .  Pepper Beast (talk) 04:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  Not notable, few sources available.  The user who wrote this article, @ Brianna.galloway seems to have been a promotional editor who wrote 2 other such articles and nothing else.  Matarisvan ( talk ) 06:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Unable to find notable coverage.  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 01:46, 1 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
Lindsay Phillips: Fails WP:GNG .  SergioM32 ( talk ) 23:23, 12 January 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 January 12 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 23:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women ,  and Florida .  Shellwood ( talk ) 02:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Article has a lack of WP:INDEPENDENT sources, but I've found some good stuff I'm about to add that I believe meet WP:GNG .  TLA (talk) 04:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The sources added are a Q&A interview so primary and not independent and the Inc. article which is ok but still much of it is dependent of what she says.   The only other source I found is this Business Insider bit but not enough to meet notability.  S0091 ( talk ) 18:42, 17 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!  23:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist unless we get additional participation.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:09, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per S0091.  The Business Insider piece is maybe an RS source, but at the bottom of the article there is an email to send in your own business/fashion tips to be written about so this could also just be a work of churnalism.  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 15:28, 29 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
Wekiva Presbyterian Church: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 21:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Christianity ,  and Florida .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 21:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete If it were verifiable (as stated in article) that this church's webcast truly was the first ever/longest running, that would be notable, but the only source for this claim is a former pastor's personal blog .  No other evidence of notability for this church.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 01:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : there doesn't seem to be any independent coverage at all online.  -- D'n'B - t -- 18:46, 15 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
Jynxzi: Cassiopeia talk 21:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Cassiopeia talk 21:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games , Internet ,  and Florida .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - per the Kotaku , Dot Esports and IGN Brazil sources.  They each contain adequate significant coverage about his web content and aspects of his life, proving he meets WP:WEB , WP:BASIC and WP:GNG .  Also per WP:BASIC's "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" guideline, the BBC , VentureBeat and PCGamesN sources can also work for extra verifiability.  PantheonRadiance ( talk ) 08:30, 29 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!  20:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Kotaku is fine, it's a RS, but it's not long.  Otherwise there's coverage in Game Rant, but nothing extensive.  The BBC coverage mentioned a comment above this is a trivial mention.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:GNG , with WP:THREE already presented above by PantheonRadiance.  Skyshifter talk 03:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I do not think the sources go into enough depth to fulfill notability criteria.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 12:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The sources doesn't look fine for GNG.  Greenish Pickle!  ( 🔔 ) 22:12, 11 December 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!  18:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Sources above don't quite meet the threshold to pass WP:GNG .  Videogameplayer99 ( talk ) 09:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Dot Esports and IGN Brazil sources are entirely about the streamer, so there's at least 2 very clear SIGCOV sources.  Skyshifter talk 14:19, 17 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
Angola–Peru relations: The relations lack elements that typically make notable relations such as embassies,  state visits,  significant trade or migration.  The one bilateral agreement is extremely minor.  LibStar ( talk ) 12:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Angola ,  and Peru .  LibStar ( talk ) 12:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , no embassies and the rest is a collection of info from here and there, failing WP:SYNTH .  Geschichte ( talk ) 19:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 13:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not seeing anything that makes this relationship notable.  Yilloslime ( talk ) 16:32, 26 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
Kyle Ravin: SergioM32 ( talk ) 23:25, 12 January 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 January 12 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 23:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Magic , Radio , Television ,  and Singapore .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete BLP, fails GNG and NBIO.  Sources found are all promos, interviews, nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth .  BLPs require strong sourcing.  If I missed something, post the best WP:THREE IS RS with SIGCOV and ping me.  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
Pipoca: Even on the Meu Timão website, which provides extensive coverage of the club's players, nothing appears.  Fails in WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV .  Svartner ( talk ) 21:00, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Brazil .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:15, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 16:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 16:39, 19 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
Cafu Engine: Two potential sources are listed in the article text from a German tech/software magazine, but both are inaccessible (see Gleich and Nebelo et al ).  Gleich appears to be a very brief (2-paragraph) review, evidently of the product under a previous name.  Nebelo et al. appears to be a list of 125 pieces of software with very brief descriptions of each as part of an article celebrating the publication, based on the preview, which would not constitute significant coverage.  WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 15:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Software .  WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 15:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Article is a glorified advertisement for the engine; no currently notable games use this engine and it isn’t notable enough to have its own article in the first place; it should be deleted as soon as possible.  NanaOn-Sha ( talk ) 07:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC) sock puppet NinjaRobotPirate ( talk ) 03:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The article is not notable, and its secondary sources reflect niche technical applications that do not establish general notability.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 23:05, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Lack of significant coverage in reliable sources; fails WP:GNG , and I don't think there's any SNGs that would apply.  Maybe WP:WEBCRIT ?  But it also fails that.  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 17:45, 5 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
Ground Zero (2000 film): I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes .   I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass WP:NEXIST .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 15:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 15:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I did find some reviews on other websites, but none of them satisfy WP:SIGCOV or WP:NFILM .  ARandomName123 ( talk ) 17:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I was unable to find any significant coverage of this low budget film in any reliable independent sources.  Cullen328 ( talk ) 18:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The film has been internationally distributed (with different titles in English, in French (Séisme imminent) (very very short review here ), Canadian French (Alerte au point zéro), Spanish (very short review here ), Italian, 2 titles in German, etc . ), various paragraphs of this article deal with the film, so I'd say Keep ; worst case scenario, Redirect to Janet Gunn who plays the lead role. - MY, OH MY!  (mushy yank) 17:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The Spanish review is a database entry while the French review is a one-liner.  Only a passing mention in the earthquake article.  No significant coverage.  DareshMohan ( talk ) 18:04, 21 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
King of Gozo: Ther's no mention of a kingdom of Gozo in any of the citations listed in the article.  They just say the King of Sicily ruled the island.  Celia Homeford ( talk ) 09:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Malta .  Celia Homeford ( talk ) 09:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - WP:OR and also is just a copy paste of the Gozitan Nation article LegalSmeagolian ( talk ) 18:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SYNTH .  If any verifiable information does exist, it should fit in Gozitan Nation anyway. -- estar8806 ( talk ) ★ 19:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete it's simply WP:OR which is not acceptable. Keivan.f Talk 04:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Gozitan Nation . You could say that the King of Sicily ( Ferdinand I ) was also the "King of Gozo" for 3 years. Alternately, you could say there was no "Kingdom of Gozo" and that Gozo was just part of the Kingdom of Sicily. Either way, Ferdinand was a disengaged ruler preoccupied with the French and only became King because the 16,000 people on this little Mediterranean island asked him to be their King after throwing out the French. They weren't Sicilians. A local priest actually ran the island. It's as if the people of Mayberry, North Carolina decided they'd better have a king. That's about how big an operation the Gozitan Nation nation was. If someone looks for the "King of Gozo", a redirect will get them to the right place. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 04:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: I wasn't aware of this article or discussion before.  The creator just created King of the Gozitan Nation , a duplicate of this one, which I redirected to the Gozitan Nation article.  If the conclusion of this AfD is "delete", that one should be deleted as well.  Fram ( talk ) 13:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] DElete -- There is little or nothing that is not in Gozitan Nation article.   See further my remarks under Queen Consort of Gozo 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
Woody Outlaw: [11] is about him ... and contradicts the one fact in the article.   I didn't find any other substantial coverage.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 16:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions .  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 16:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:06, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Clearly fails WP:NBIO , no additional coverage found.  Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 18:50, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I'm not sure catching 13 lb fish is what we're looking at for notability.  There are some interviews about this person, but those don't help notability, [12] , this is typical.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : There don't appear to be any major news sources covering this person beyond a few interviews, and those likely wouldn't be enough to keep the article around.  Waqar 💬 09:23, 2 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: delete
Charli Evans: No reliable sources in the article or online.  GMH Melbourne ( talk ) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Martial arts , Wrestling ,  and Australia .  GMH Melbourne ( talk ) 13:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Nothing found about this person, sourcing is largely match reports in non-RS.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: ( Keep ) She is one of the most popular active female Australian wrestlers and a pioneer of Pro-Wrestling: EVE .  Has worked for companies from three different continents and is accomplished.  As for the sourcing, the article includes links to trustworthy sites such as fightful.com , voicesofwrestling.com , Squared Circle Sirens , Diva Dirt or Last Word on Pro Wrestling .  They might not point her name out, but they clearly demonstrate her work.  There also exist several interviews with her from YahooSports and WrestleSports.  Unfortunately I didn't include them since they are only audio work.  I think the article meets the notability criterias and also has a WikiData correspondent (item Q126186302), therefore I strongly believe that it should remain on the mainspace.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeyReydar97 ( talk • contribs ) 21:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] keep Charli Evans is a major figure in the UK indie wrestling scene.  Bigkhrisdogg ( talk ) 22:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Are there any sources that contribute towards establishing notability?  - GMH Melbourne ( talk ) 23:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:GNG .  Most of the sources are results only and the others are trivia mentions only.  One source is unreliable and I'll be removing it.  Clearly not notable and not a major figure in UK wrestling by default for said lack of notability.  Addicted4517 ( talk ) 02:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fight promotions and results, interviews, and wrestling databases do not constitute significant independent coverage.   Being "popular" is also not a WP notability criteria.   According to WP:NSPORT , pro wrestling is not classified as a sport here, but rather as entertainment, so wrestling records and titles are immaterial.  WP:ENTERTAINER says notability is achieved if "The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment."  There is no evidence that she meets this criteria.  Papaursa ( talk ) 23:48, 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
Soundhog: This piece in North Wales Live is the only piece of non-SPS coverage I can find and does not demonstrate notability.  An AfD in 2004 demonstrated a consensus to delete (IMO) but was never closed.  Vladimir.copic ( talk ) 03:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Music ,  and Wales .  Vladimir.copic ( talk ) 03:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I found this piece also, but it doesn't look altogether independent and notability doesn't appear established Jack4576 ( talk ) 06:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails BLP, GNG and BIO.  Sources in article and BEFORE are promotional.  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 23:55, 16 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
XVidCap: I also can't find any secondary sources that are reliable enough to establish notability.  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 01:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 5 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!  00:24, 12 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!  00:35, 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: delete