hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Góra, Kętrzyn County : The location given in the article is empty terrain without evidence of ever having been inhabited .  Briefly, there is no evidence that an inhabited settlement by the name Góra (literally just hill/mountain) ever existed at the site.  Whilst German-era military maps show a place called Annahöhe near that location, this is obviously a different name and also not evidence of legal recognition of Annahöhe.  The Polish GUS/BDL database, which includes census data, does not hold any data for a place called Góra in Kętrzyn County so this is not a place where the Polish government has collected census data in decades if ever.  Whilst the TERYT database describes a "settlement" at this location, this classification was given to many different types of location include forestry offices, state farms, railway facilities etc. and is not evidence of an actual community by this name at this location.  It appears entirely possible that this place was abandoned at the end of WW2 and has never been inhabited under Polish rule, and so there never was any kind of legally-recognised settlement by this name at this location.  Happy to accept a redirect to Glitajny, which this is listed as being a locality within according to the PL wiki article.  FOARP ( talk ) 11:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland .  FOARP ( talk ) 11:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Annahöhe" was at the same location, but the name on the map is "Vro. Annahöhe" which means it was a folwark .  Peter James ( talk ) 14:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep or merge and redirect .  Former, no claim of historical significance, very generic name.  I don't feel like browsking through 10+ pages at TERYT to see if it is indexed there as a hamlet (osada) or whatever, but I am willing to AGF it is there per footnote given.  I am fine with redirecting this to Glitajny, where we should add a sentence about former settlments in the region.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:17, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:11, 22 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!  22:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To reiterate, I am OK with redirecting to Glitajny, which also appears acceptable to Piotrus.  FOARP ( talk ) 11:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The only Glitajny with an English Wikipedia article is Glitajny, Bartoszyce County which looks like a different place.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 22:27, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Ebrahimabad-e Bala Joveyn : Hongsy ( talk ) 14:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions .  Hongsy ( talk ) 14:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Reference #2 is the official Census of Iran .  If a town is listed on their spreadsheet for this region (#09), then it's officially recognized per WP:GEOLAND and therefore notable.  @ Hongsy , is Ebrahimabad-e Bala Joveyn listed?  Checking references is part of WP:BEFORE .  Thanks, -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 17:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ A. B. - this is an abadi (similar to a census tract), and therefore does not get a GEOLAND pass indeed it is explicitly excluded from GEOLAND.  FOARP ( talk ) 11:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weakest possible keep - The location given in the article points to what appears to be a village called simply Ebrahim Abad (or Ibrahimabad I suppose in another romanisation).  FOARP ( talk ) 11:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 20:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:30, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Saadiya Kochar : Notability issues not addressed since October 2020.  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 15:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Photography , India ,  and Jammu and Kashmir .  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 15:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom Worldiswide ( talk ) 03:48, 5 October 2023 (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 ) 15:51, 6 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning keep .  Subject likely meets WP:ARTIST #4.  There are a ton of snippets of coverage about her work, and about her work being featured in various galleries.  Here are some examples of coverage for ARTIST#4 Multiple occasions of coverage of work in Hindustan Times [9] [10] Multiple occasions of coverage in The Hindu.  We only have abstracts through ProQuest [11] [12] A mention of work in NYT [13] India Today has a profile of work [14] Featured in a museum in Belgium [15] — siro χ o 17:46, 6 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!  18:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning Keep per Wikipedia:PHOTOGRAPHER#4 .  signed, 511KeV (talk) 11:29, 23 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: no consensus
Jana Mlakar : According to Sports Reference results , Mlakar was not in the top three winners of 1984 Winter Olympics .  She also never received any medal record.  Corresponding article on Slovene Wikipedia is likewise an unsourced stub.  Clara A. Djalim ( talk ) 10:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Olympics ,  and Yugoslavia .  Clara A. Djalim ( talk ) 10:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Yugoslavia at the Olympics per no medal, no GNG coverage, WP:NOLYMPICS BrigadierG ( talk ) 11:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  There are Mlakar Slovenian news hits for Jana Mlakar .  The news pieces are about a museum director/cultural heritage worker.  Judging from pictures she doesn't resemble Jana Mlakar Adamič, a seemingly notable ethnologist (and museum employee) who was born in 1962 as well, but on 12 January [6] [7] .  I would hope that someone can shed light on who these people are, and whether there is a relation to the skier.  Geschichte ( talk ) 12:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  She seems to be notable (given the presentation in the podcast mentioned below) but in-depth sources are missing at the moment.  The German Wikipedia contains some more information in de:Jana Mlakar and there may be offline newspaper articles that reported on her in more detail.  The museum director/cultural heritage worker was born in 1955 (per Cobiss ) and Jana Adamič Mlakar seems to be a completely unrelated person as she is from a different region.  -- TadejM my talk 02:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Apparently she was the 'best cross-country skier' in Sarajevo ?  Hungarian newspaper archive Arcanum brings up a dozen-or-so matches, mainly in the Serbian newspaper Magyar Szó .  There's mention of her in this tabloid-y article about the "divorces of the best Slovenian athletes".  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 16:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep If what the user above says turns out to be accurate, then this article deserves a place here.  Wolverine XI ( talk to me ) 15:14, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above, in my honest opinion GNG should be covered with these sources.  Will also take a look at some sl/sh sources.  A09 | (talk) 15:59, 31 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!  18:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Malinaccier ( talk ) 18:12, 13 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: no consensus
Aida Vee : little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion ( talk ) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Music , Africa ,  and Uganda .  Minmarion ( talk ) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Seems to have enough sources to satisfy the WP:GNG criteria.  ( [36] [37] [38] ).  GMH Melbourne ( talk ) 02:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 04:01, 13 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!  05:07, 20 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: no consensus
Dakrya : Fails WP:NBAND and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 16:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Music , Theatre ,  and Greece .  UtherSRG (talk) 16:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  This is why bands shouldn't choose a single dictionary word as a name.  Dakrya (Δάκρυα) is the Greek for tears, which means that hits for the band are drowned out by hits for the bodily secretion.  Here's a reference: https://progrocks.gr/en/dakrya/ https://www.more.com/music/kyttaro/voices-of-the-mist-festival-vol-2/ https://rockoverdose.gr/dakrya-interview-rockoverdose-gr/ Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 17:31, 28 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!  18:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as well as the Greek sources identified above there are also some English sources AllMusic bio , AllMusic album review , and Metal Storm staff album review so that together there is a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 20:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 22:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Atlantic306 presents three sources, but the first thing to note is that two of these are from allmusic.com, so these count as one, not two sources.  WP:ALLMUSIC shows no consensus on reliability of this source, but in general these appear to be independent secondary and reliable to me.  So that is one source.  Looking at MetalStorm, it is a 2011 review of this webzine, that does meet the threshhold described here [3] (i.e. staff reviews after 2009).  However we are still short of multiple reviews per WP:BAND .  I had not ! voted on this, as I don't know the subject and I can believe there may well be more information out there, but it has not been presented to date.  Per Eastmain, it is a frustrating one to research.  But we are not over the line yet.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 07:53, 12 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: no consensus
1794 in Ukraine : I link to anything notable enough to have its own article, so its a valid navigational list.   There are also two references there, one for the Encyclopedia of Ukraine, and the other from Harvard University Press for the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute.  D r e a m Focus 22:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  D r e a m Focus 22:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Has encyclopedic value and sources exist that meet GNG.  Question to nominator, Martinc021 did you do a BEFORE prior to nominated this?  Netherzone ( talk ) 23:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I withdraw my nomination -- Martin talk 02:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  While " GNG " is not a valid nomination by any stretch, Ukraine was not a country at the time.  See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2000 in Kosovo .  Also, a category would do a fine job of containing what little information there is here.  Geschichte ( talk ) 03:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: per the outcome of Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2024_June_27#1794_in_Ukraine_(closed) .  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to History of Ukraine#18th century per Geschichte‘s vote and per WP:NOPAGE .   The three cities/ports established during this year can be included as a single-sentence mention at the proposed target.   Absent a redirect and/or selective merge, my second preference would be to keep the article as is.  Frank Anchor 10:36, 8 July 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!  23:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 1794 in Russia , in analogy to the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2000 in Kosovo .  Procyon117 ( talk ) 09:48, 12 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: no consensus
DYFM-FM : Perhaps a redirect to TV5 Network Inc. might be an WP:ATD ?  MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:43, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions .  MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:43, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions .  ThisIsSeanJ ( talk ) 08:10, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network#Radio stations (Radyo5) ThisIsSeanJ ( talk ) 09:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:GNG .  Sources in the article are reliable enough, with some in-depth IMV.  SBKSPP ( talk ) 00:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 10:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment DYFM-FM (or DYNC-FM) is Cebu's first stereo FM station, so this is a notability; however due to the lack of information being given on the history of the station and the station currently being a satellite station (save for some local programs), it could be worthy to let the others decide.  If there would be additional information on the early days of DYFM as DYNC-FM and on their other parts, I would keep that article personally.  Jhenny38 ( Starters talk , My contributions ) 12:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  10:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The sources in the article are reliable.  Sources 2 and 5 talk about the station's current iteration.  I found a few more reliable sources which talk about the station's first iteration as DYNC, albeit brief: [27] , [28] and [29] ; as well as one about the station's iteration as Charlie: [30] .  That said, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG .  ASTIG 😎 🙃 01:30, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] — Note : An editor has expressed a concern that Superastig ( talk • contribs ) has been canvassed to this discussion.  ( diff )  JoelleJay ( talk ) 01:54, 17 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: no consensus
Olaf Storaasli : Links currently on page appear to all point to personal webpages, are dead links, and/or are his published papers.  Conducted WP:BEFORE and could not find any coverage of significance.  Rehsarb ( talk ) 00:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Science ,  and Computing .  Rehsarb ( talk ) 00:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 01:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  GS record perhaps not spectacular in this highly cited field, but he has worked in areas of the private sector.where he may not have published much.  Passes Prof and GNG.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 03:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete - It does indeed read like a resume.  Author Olaftn is possibly Olaf Storaasli himself.  He once worked at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tenneesse= Olaf tn.  — Maile ( talk ) 03:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:09, 11 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!  00:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions ) 02:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete I'm not seeing WP:PROF or the GNG met.  Hobit ( talk ) 06:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] After the cleanup I'm much less sure.   I don't think the GNG is met (at least I'm not seeing independent, reliable coverage) but I do think might meet WP:ACADEMIC #1.  Hobit ( talk ) 19:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Now that I've cleaned up this article a bit and removed some of the fluff, I do see WP:PROF in the citation rate and GNG in the impact of the subject's work in high-performance computing, same as Xxanthippe.  Qflib ( talk ) 02:59, 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: no consensus
CityStudio Vancouver : Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:50, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:51, 6 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:55, 13 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: no consensus