hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Riaan Esterhuizen: JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Few bits here and there, but not enough to suggest a WP:GNG pass.  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:53, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Vyacheslav Maksakov: -- Анатолий Росдашин ( talk ) 05:31, 23 December 2023 (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/2023 December 23 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 03:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Russia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete - the obituaries (TASS + one other I can find) do give some indication of notability, but as best I can tell there is almost no other significant coverage in either Russian or English I can see.  Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST .  — Ganesha811 ( talk ) 15:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete .  He was a dubbing director.  His work didn't get any significant media coverage.  -- Khinkali ( talk ) 23:10, 28 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
RDB Consulting: Several sources in the present instance date from 2011-12 and may have been in the previously considered instance.  These and more recent sources are predominantly announcement-based: funding, award sponsorship, corporate partnership, etc., all of which fall under trivial coverage at WP:CORPDEPTH .  If anything, WP:NCORP has become more stringent since the previous iteration, and I am seeing nothing to suggest the previous decision on non-notability should be set aside.  AllyD ( talk ) 19:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Technology ,  and South Africa .  AllyD ( talk ) 19:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Plenty of passing mentions in PR-based sources or newswires, but no in-depth coverage indicating genuine notability that I can find in reliable sources.  — Ganesha811 ( talk ) 17:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:02, 7 October 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!  00:03, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Fails WP:NCORP .  Mooonswimmer 13:41, 20 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
Southampton Operatic Society: 2009 AfD resulted in no consensus but standards were significantly lower then.  It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this.  Boleyn ( talk ) 20:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Reluctant delete - I can find lots of passing mentions in third party reliable sources but nothing that can said to be significant coverage .  As people remarked in the first AfD, that's somewhat surprising for an organisation of this age, but it is what it is.  W a g ge r s TALK 12:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete 4 gnews hits despite existing for 100 years.  Fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 01:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Ruth Adler (diplomat): Fails WP:GNG .  Uhooep ( talk ) 07:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Bilateral relations , Ireland ,  and Australia .  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Brunei-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:BIO .  Ambassadors are not inherently notable.  LibStar ( talk ) 03:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Agree.  Fails WP:GNG .  Great that these pages are created but first dig further to see if they are notable enough.  MaskedSinger ( talk ) 07:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A search in Ebsco shows that there are sources in the Irish Times and the Borneo Bulletin but I can't see the actual articles.  They do appear to be the usual "X shows up at event" or "X is the new/outgoing Y" so those wouldn't provide GNG proof.  As she has a doctorate I hoped to find articles in scholar but if they are there I missed them.  Part of the problem is the usual "common name" search.  At this moment I don't see a way to save this one.  Lamona ( talk ) 16:18, 26 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
Government Junior College: Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  The sources that i could find are either primary, or school/college databases.  PROD was contested .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 02:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools , India ,  and Telangana .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 02:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Poor sources and per nom, page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations.  Fails WP:NSCHOOL RangersRus ( talk ) 13:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No WP:3P , non DB sources found.  The Government degree college opposite to it might have marginally more coverage.  Sohom ( talk ) 14:23, 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: delete
All Saints Anglican Church (Raleigh, North Carolina): Possible WP:ATDs are merge/redirect to Raleigh, North Carolina or Anglican Church in North America , but I am not sure if either would be in balance with the target articles.  Boleyn ( talk ) 16:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:12, 11 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
Chestnut Hill Realty: In addition, the article was initially created by a user whose name corresponded to the address of Chestnut Hill Realty (see talk page).  Overall, this page seems like blatant self-promotion, which has no place on Wikipedia DuckWrangler97 ( talk ) 18:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Massachusetts .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 19:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Plenty of hits for them donating to charity and about properties they've acquired, very much routine business dealings found in the press.  Nothing we can use for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Promotional article where just about every significant assertion comes from the websites/publications of, or out of interviews with, the principals.   I'd ask the article creator (an SPA whose sole Wikipedia contribution this was) to disclose a COI, if they weren't long gone.  Ravenswing 06:45, 31 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
2025 in Spanish television: The only thing currently listed here right now is the presumed debut of a television series whose actual premiere date is listed as "TBA" — but stuff can change as production of a television series unfolds, such that it's ready to air earlier than originally predicted, or later than originally predicted, or even never , so just because a television series has been announced as entering production for a predicted premiere in 2025 isn't definitive in and of itself.  But no definite premiere date has been confirmed at all here yet, so it remains entirely possible that it could really debut in late 2024 , or not until 2026 , and thus it's a WP:CRYSTAL violation to already carve it in stone as a 2025 event now .  As always, pages like this do not need to exist this far in advance of adequate content for them -- absolutely no other country (not even the United States) already has its "2025 in [Country] television" in place yet as of today, and the presumed but unconfirmed premiere date of one series is not sufficient to earn Spain special treatment over and above other countries. So no prejudice against recreation in the fall of 2024 when we start seeing confirmed premiere dates of several Spanish television series, but this isn't already necessary in February 2024 for just one TBA. Bearcat ( talk ) 14:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Spain . Bearcat ( talk ) 14:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Obvious delete . Quite obviously too soon, the nomination rationale sums it all up wonderfully. -- Ouro ( blah blah ) 16:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete WP:TOOSOON for sure, and one vague premiere should not be rationale to create this article, especially for a service known to announce, make, then never air projects based on one reality and tax credit-obsessed CEO 's whim.  Nate • ( chatter ) 17:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , Wikipedia users sometimes have a tendency to want to be the first to create something, often too long in advance such as in this case.  Geschichte ( talk ) 20:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – TOOSOON, one entry is not enough.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 08:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Koh-e-qaim: It doesn't appear to be any notable mosque AmateurHi$torian ( talk ) 10:29, 23 July 2023 (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/2023 July 23 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 10:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Islam ,  and Telangana .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:48, 23 July 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!  07:22, 30 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
Annie McNamara: Spinixster (chat!) 11:55, 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 Television .  Spinixster (chat!) 11:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Couldn't find any sources for this character, either.  Given the lack of sources to begin with, definitely doesn't pass GNG or SIGCOV.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 18:30, 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
Kartikay Saini: Creation by likely sockmaster.  Valereee ( talk ) 16:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: Multiple previous attempts to create this article by one of the likely socks User talk:Rftaar759 .  Valereee ( talk ) 17:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Valereee ( talk ) 16:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete per G5 .  Created by an obvious WP:SOCK -- Wesoree ( T · C ) 16:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: fails WP:GNG and might be G5able -- Wesoree ( T · C ) 16:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above comments.  Lacks notability.  Callmemirela 🍁 talk 19:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Maharashtra ,  and Punjab .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Refer to User:Jéské Couriano/Decode : https://www.specialolympics.org/about/board-of-directors/cdr-kartikay-saini is useless for notability ( connexion to subject ).  Bio from the Special Olympics' website, which he sits on the BoD of.  https://www.forbesindia.com/article/global-indian-business-leaders/an-audacious-ambition/53255/1 is useless for notability ( connexion to subject ).  Explicitly labeled as "Brand Connect", i.e. written on his behalf/commissioned by him.  https://educationtoday.co/blogs/? p=17523 is useless for notability ( connexion to subject ).  Clearly written by the subject, as it's in first-person.  https://www.forbesindia.com/education-evangelists-of-india/humanitarian-with-a-vision/19 is useless for notability ( connexion to subject ).  Interview.  Nothing here is any good, and a Google search turns up nothing better (string: "kartikay saini").  — Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 22:48, 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: delete
Anna Cope: Likewise, being a candidate for national office doesn't normally meet WP:NPOL, absent substantial coverage in secondary sources, and I can find only routine local press coverage.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 14:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and England .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 14:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom. --Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES , county-level legislators, including borough councilors in this context, are not presumed to be notable.  However, exceptions may apply if they receive significant coverage as outlined in WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG , which is not the case for this individual.  Ckfasdf ( talk ) 16:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NPOL .  Bhivuti45 ( talk ) 19:38, 29 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
DealsDirect: Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it.  I have got a lot of false positives when looking at this.  Boleyn ( talk ) 15:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non notable company that expired 13 years ago.  Most references have expired and gone to archive, plus final one is dead link.  Teraplane ( talk ) 23:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : This article indicates that the brand was purchased by Ozsale in November 2015, and the current website indicates it is still owned by Ozsale, but there is no article on that firm which could provide an ATD target .  AllyD ( talk ) 09:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - There are some book mentions but nothing that could be considered significant coverage.  Everything else fails WP:ORGCRIT .  I checked on Ozsale and do not believe it would qualify under WP:NCORP either.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 06:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Considering the original operating company, there was market-share coverage, such as the paragraph in the 2005 Hitwise blog item, but I don't see that or other available coverage regarding the related DealMe, etc. as the substantial coverage needed to demonstrate WP:NCORP .  Considering the later operation as an Ozsale brand, coverage such as the ACCC decision linked above is insufficient to demonstrate attained notability for this brand.  AllyD ( talk ) 09:54, 15 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
Nilan Fernando: This stub does not satisfy WP:NCRICKET as it currently is written, or general notability .   The two references are both database entries.  Reference Number Reference Comments Independent Significant Reliable Secondary 1 espncricinfo.com Career stats on player Yes No.   Database entry Yes No 2 espncricinfo.com Account of a match Yes No.   Passing mention Yes No Draftify as proposer.   Unilateral draftification would be inappropriate after three years in article space.   If significant coverage is not found in six months, we know where the bit bucket is.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 18:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and Sri Lanka .  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 18:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Does not meet WP:GNG and WP:NCRIC .  3 List A appearances were in Premier Trophy, which is not notable enough to presume coverage for a player per WP:OFFCRIC .  RoboCric ( talk ) 08:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete in absence of suitable redirect My preference would be here to redirect, however List of Kalutara Physical Culture Club cricketers doesn't exist.  The subject fails WP:GNG , and so without the redirect, delete.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom assessment.  // Timothy :: talk 02:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to the list which has been suggested to be created.  StickyWicket ( talk ) 11:06, 24 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