hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
List of cult music artists: Surely, The Beatles belong to the list.  But in many cases " notable sources" may use this term as a promotional hype.  Surely, there can be better, more objective descriptiors, such as "influential music artists", for those who left a lasting well-references influence, like the mentioned Beatles.  - Altenmann >talk 19:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Lists of people , Music ,  and Lists .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Poorly defined and vague inclusion criteria.  Not an intrinsic or distinguishing characteristic.  A certain term having been used once to describe someone isn't necessarily a relevant commonality.  Assuming this refers to Cult_following#Music , this is simply too broad of a concept to justify us maintaining such a large context-free list.  Reywas92 Talk 21:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - There is some merit to discussing a particular band's cult following when that is a matter of knowledgeable coverage, but this list article is just an unencyclopedic mess that doesn't even bother to define the term.  Gigantic acts like the Beatles or Beastie Boys or Radiohead are possibly here because someone noted their passionate fanbases, but so many millions of people do not automatically fall within the meaning of "cult following".  Also note bands like the Cure or R.E.M., who started with small local followings but then became humungous and never looked back.  I recommend a similar analysis of the even vaguer List of cult television shows .  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 13:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep All entries have a reliable source calling them this.  We go based on what reliable sources say, not personal opinions. D r e a m Focus 01:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Those sources might be reliable in their reporting on other things, but for this discussion many of them have no definition of what "cult" means, and those that attempt a definition do it hundreds of different ways. --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 12:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The category for music being described as cult is too broad and doesn't have a clear criteria other than "someone called it cult once."  At least for films there's "flopped at the box office but obtained a dedicated following later on," but here it's not defined clearly and just seems to be bands with a dedicated fanbase.  That's, well, pretty much every noteworthy band.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 02:20, 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
Daniel Paasch: Skynxnex ( talk ) 02:07, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:18, 30 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
Marissa Livingston: Let'srun ( talk ) 13:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and New Mexico .  Let'srun ( talk ) 13:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:39, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
315Work Avenue: Although the presented sources are reliable, coverage is nothing more than WP:ROUTINE .  Hitro talk 07:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India .  Hitro talk 07:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I found this title notable as it has enough good references on trusted websites.  I respect the editors' tag of advertisement, I'll improv it by removing information which looks like an advertisement .  Lazzy Crazzy ( talk ) 06:23, 29 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!  06:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – too much ROUTINE news coverage, as the nominator stated.  Articles starting with "(subject) leashes/takes/signs" feels more than routine coverage.  No other GNG passable source so fails notability guidelines.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 18:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Feels this page should stay, notable entity and news sources.  Awards on this profile's name too Wikieditorhans1 ( talk ) 07:02, 7 March 2024 (UTC) —

Discussion outcome: delete
Robustness (morphology): It may also constitute original research , and violates our policy at WP:What Wikipedia is not , as the article looks like WP:DICT .  Wolverine XI ( talk to me ) 04:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions .  Wolverine XI ( talk to me ) 04:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Seems to be just a definition.  Can't find any relevant articles about robustness as a concept.  Mgp28 ( talk ) 20:47, 22 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
Kevin Foxx: SportingFlyer T · C 21:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Entertainment ,  and Canada .  SportingFlyer T · C 21:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is about all I can find [48] .  A brief mention here [49] , I don't think we're at GNG.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Television .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Unable to find any coverage via a Google search, also seems not notable InDimensional ( talk ) 00:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Doesn't meet notability requirements and I also couldn't see evidence of better sources out there.  Editing84 ( talk ) 16:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass WP:GNG on the basis of a lot more reliable source coverage about him than the article is showing.  Bearcat ( talk ) 17:53, 31 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
Ansbach Middle High School: No evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources as required.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 17:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools , Germany ,  and United States of America .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 17:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 08:54, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 18:02, 11 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
Oneal Sandidge: The writing is also strange.  For instance: "Sandidge developed strong writing skills under the guidance of Dr. James Campbell."  Sorry but, huh?  If he wrote that, which he probably did, his writing skills are not strong.  Other stuff about completely indeterminate "inspiration" also fails to rise to the level of encyclopedic relevance; it reads, instead, like a prose resume.  Patrick J. Welsh ( talk ) 03:52, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Authors , Christianity , Arkansas , New York ,  and Virginia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Seems to have no chance of meeting WP:Prof .  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 05:13, 23 October 2023 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete .  Not seeing any significant citations in GS.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 20:48, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails to meet WP:BIO , no significant coverage.  Mooonswimmer 14:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , doesn't meet GNG nor NPROF.  -- Mvqr ( talk ) 14:08, 26 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
WBII-CD: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 16:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Mississippi .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 16:07, 7 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!  08:10, 14 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
Raydell Kewal: A web search finds a very short article in [1] but no WP:SIGCOV .  There may be offline sources but it seems doubtful to me.  The article fails WP:GNG .  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 23:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 23:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Netherlands .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 01:22, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 09:05, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Agree with the above reasoning.  I found one other short article linked on the Dutch wikipedia.  Given the age of the page there is not enough interest on the part of the community to find English sources or to translate the page about him from Dutch Kewal Raydell it fails notability for English language users.  MtBotany ( talk ) 15:36, 25 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
Alexandra Töpfner: The third source in the article, from TEOL , is a tournament recap with four sentences of coverage of the subject.  Everything else that came up in my searches were passing mentions in squad lists and match reports.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women ,  and Handball .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:04, 18 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
K35OY-D: Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.  ?  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Missouri .  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No proof the station is even on-air or serving Jefferson City to boot (as Innovate is famous for hopping licenses to larger markets) and two of its channels have since switch to all-paid programming going by the last report.  This has no N to stand on.  Nate • ( chatter ) 17:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : It's a run-of-the-mill DTV America/HC2/Innovate station with no local content, no significant coverage , and thus no notability.  For what it's worth, this article nominally survived that bulk nomination from the start of the year , but that was more because of that nomination's bulkiness than anything relating to this specific article and station.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:33, 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: delete
Andreas Petroulakis: Article has been in a poor state since 2009; all but the bare bones are uncited.  Gnews is giving me four hits but three are just a list of names; GBooks also just seems to have passing references to some works.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 22:36, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The cited source never mentioned the subject and found no significant coverage to pass WP:GNG and WP:BIO .  -- Loewstisch ( talk ) 18:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - THIS would seem to count towards fulfillment of GNG.  Carrite ( talk ) 09:53, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:08, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I can't find anything for this person.  The link above is ok, but we need more than that to keep the article.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are some mentions of the person in footnotes in Gbooks and mentions in a few peer-reviewed articles, so they are very likely notable.  I can't find anything in English sources, perhaps in a Greek search we might find some.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:59, 29 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
Jonathan Restrepo: Geschichte ( talk ) 12:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Colombia .  Owen× ☎ 12:59, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 16:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 12:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:11, 22 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
Bangla Desh – A Voice of a New Nation: Some may argue that this meets the letter of WP:NBOOK criterion #1, but it doesn't meet the spirit.  The first review, after stripping away the bibliographic information, the direct quotation, and the reviewer's opinion of what was going on in Bangladesh at the time, boils down to two sentences: Physical reality, as in the cover picture as well as in the poems inside, can be so accusing!  ...  There are a few [of the poets in the 48 page collection] who try desperately to try to sing of love and passion, but their words also turn to mourning.  [39] The second review is not as tissue thin, but is still only a single paragraph (150 words).  [40] Wikipedia aims to treat creative works in an encyclopedic manner , discussing the development, design, reception, significance, and influence of works.  It does not aim to be so indiscriminate as to include books about which so little has been written.  Worldbruce ( talk ) 01:37, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry , Bangladesh ,  and India .  Worldbruce ( talk ) 01:37, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , those reviews are not substantially substantive imo to establish notability and build a proper encyclopedic article.  Eddie891 Talk Work 18:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Northcliff, Indiana: Searching was inhibited by a neighborhood in Bloomington and by Google's Artificially Unintelligent decision to treat "north" as a synonym of "Northcliff", but even so I found nothing.  Mangoe ( talk ) 19:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Definately subdivision, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-republic-northcliff-subdivision/143311945/ , I checked back through time and found no evidence of a real place prior to the housing development.  GNIS doesn't provide a citation for their entry.  First mention is mid 20th century, Prior mentions are of a Lord northcliff that seemed to have some local interest for some reason.  James.folsom ( talk ) 23:24, 13 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
Posti SA: TLA (talk) 02:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Companies ,  and Poland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No pl interwiki, weak references, fails WP:NCOMPANY .  Spam.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 11:00, 15 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
Rhys Lenarduzzi: JTtheOG ( talk ) 02:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby league , Rugby union , Italy ,  and Australia .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 02:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Coverage of his rugby union career seems to be limited, and I can't see anything obvious on his rugby league career.  I can't see a suitable redirect per WP:ATD either.  I'm at delete now, but if our rugby league editors find some sourcing I'll reconsider.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep on the grounds that his career seems to be more that is written, but more sourcing and prose need to retain the article.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 17:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT .  LibStar ( talk ) 02:36, 14 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
Svatantra Microfin: User4edits ( talk ) 13:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:42, 31 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