hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Bogo Blay: The reality show he won wasn't notable as it would have been redirected there.  After accessing the sources, I can say this article's context, and sourcing is not enough for our general notability guidelines.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  16:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Artists , Bands and musicians , Africa ,  and Ghana .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  16:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: fails MUSICIAN and GNG .  Tkaras1 ( talk ) 19:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - In agreement with the nominator, as the musician is only visible in his own social media and self-uploading sites, and the reality show victory is insignificant.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 13:35, 22 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
Georg Weissacher: PROD declined.  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Fashion , Austria ,  and United Kingdom .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete — reeks of self-promotion; prod declined, like on Renzo Vitale , by a single-purpose sockpuppet, hopefully only delaying the inevitable deletion.  — Biruitorul Talk 19:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : PROMO tional article.  Drowssap SMM 02:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Delete – Agree 100% with what's already been stated MaskedSinger ( talk ) 06:33, 24 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
Germany–Spain football rivalry: They just seem to have played each other a few times.  Over 90 years, a game every 3-4 years isn't all that common.  Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs ) 13:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football , Germany ,  and Spain .  Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs ) 13:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .  No clear rivalry beyond "two major countries regularly playing each other" (and even saying "regularly" is suspect).  Sources include a reference to the very first meeting, a primary source to the Spanish Football Federation, a head-to-head record, and an article that doesn't even mention the word "rivalry".  Jay eyem ( talk ) 13:57, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete sources show these teams have played each other many times, but not that there is an actual notable rivalry between the two teams.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 14:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To elaborate on this, there is only 1 source in the article that uses the term rivalry, and that's a primary source from the Royal Spanish Football Federation .  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 16:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:08, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not notable.  The source in the article only mentions the history between the two countries and nothing is said about rivalry.  I've also searched the web, but found almost nothing about this.  🛧 Layah50♪ 🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！ ) 19:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment As always with a lot of these articles, this is just head to head with some prose.  WP:NOSTATS applies, and that is the delete argument to most past articles of this nature.  Govvy ( talk ) 20:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not very notable.  Sources do not prove that there is a rivalry.  Shadow 345110 (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - doesnt seem to be an actual thing Muur ( talk ) 22:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  Kante4 ( talk ) 13:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - yet another article on a "rivalry" which is really just about the head-to-head record between two teams, with no evidence that any actual rivalry exists.   We don't need articles detailing that for every possible combination of national teams -- ChrisTheDude ( talk ) 17:33, 20 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
SAHDUOO Saxophone: Fails WP:CORP .  SL93 ( talk ) 19:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Companies ,  and Taiwan .  SL93 ( talk ) 19:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources .  I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the subject in my searches for sources.  Sahduoo ( traditional Chinese : 薩得爾企業有限公司 ; simplified Chinese : 萨得尔企业有限公司 ) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria .  Cunard ( talk ) 10:01, 24 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
Flaunt: Fails WP:GNG .  Mercenf ( talk ) 14:59, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:02, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 15:00, 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
EICASLAB: No reference seems to pass WP:SIGCOV , so fails WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics , Computing ,  and Software .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I could not find any secondary coverage, with the sourcing entirely passing mentions or primary.  ThadeusOfNazereth (he/him) Talk to Me!  16:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I could find only a few low-citation works on this in Google Scholar, which seem to be associated with the project developers rather than independent.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 20:48, 2 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
Peatfold Burn: Given this, and the fact this is merely a geographic formation, this fails WP:NPLACE by a long shot.  Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 22:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions .  Owen× ☎ 23:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment A look at the reference given shows that the correct name of this feature is Burn of Peatfold .  Using that produces a few hits, though I would tend to doubt its notability nonetheless, as for comparison we have deleted articles on German bachs of which we could only determine that they existed.  Mangoe ( talk ) 03:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete searches for either term get few Google hits and many of the results seems to be for things around the burn rather than the burn its self.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 17:38, 28 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
Solagran: Broc ( talk ) 12:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Biology ,  and Australia .  Broc ( talk ) 12:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The article title is out of date, as the company has been known as Prenolica Limited since 2016: [46] , [47] .   I don't have time to dig through all the stuff that comes up for both of these names, but I'm leaning delete since all of it is routine listings or passing mentions.   If we do keep, the article needs a complete teardown.   It's disgustingly promotional.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 20:32, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete article primarily based on primary sources and not much in a google news search.  Fails WP:CORP .  LibStar ( talk ) 22:43, 1 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
Gordon E. Hines: The only materials of interest seems to be a self-published book on the company his cousin founded and an obit in semi-read local newspaper.   – I s o chrone ( T ) 21:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .   – I s o chrone ( T ) 21:05, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Illinois .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - per nom and I could also find no significant coverage.  Sgubaldo ( talk ) 06:46, 1 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
Philip Wilkinson (entrepreneur): There are reliable sources that mention him such as Forbes (staff written), TechCrunh, and The Guardian, but these are mainly mentions of him founding the companies.  A lot of quotes and directly listings as well but nothing that adds up to notability.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Businesspeople .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm not finding sources to support notability, although the "serial entrepreneur" title does seem to be apt.  The article is out of date and he has added a few more enterprises, like this , but that is as much of a source as I can find, and that's just a name check.  Lamona ( talk ) 04:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:06, 19 September 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!  22:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No sources beyond PR items found for this individual Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:33, 27 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
Elene Kakhniashvili: All I found were passing mentions ( 2020 , 2021 , 2022 , 2023 , etc.) JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Georgia (country) .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 21:45, 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
Swap Magic: QuietCicada - Talk 02:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Computing .  QuietCicada - Talk 02:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 11:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unreferenced article about a niche disc to enable PS2 homebrewing.  If there were sources, would suggest a merge with Homebrew (video games) , but there isn't coverage to evidence its significance.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 00:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I was able to find some short coverage in Diànzǐ Yóuxì Ruǎnjiàn and PSX Extreme ( 1 , 2 , 3 ), but not enough to show notability.  I was unable to find any suitable coverage on Google or Google books.  Waxworker ( talk ) 00:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable software, fails GNG.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 07:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - article just doesn't pass WP:GNG Videogameplayer99 ( talk ) 11:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Regional lockout#Sony .  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 11:03, 27 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
Baris Tasci: Contested PROD.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Philippines .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 17:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 17:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 20:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - the sources provided do not amount to significant coverage.  C 679 07:11, 23 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
Kill Bill: But there are only two Kill Bill movies, Kill Bill Volume 1 and Kill Bill Volume 2 , so an overview page is unnecessary.  This article merely duplicates information from both articles.  Popcornfud ( talk ) 09:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  Popcornfud ( talk ) 09:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:45, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per MOS:FILMSERIES .  If the article contained a substantial amount of unique content that would have been difficult to house in either of the other two articles then an exception may be justified, but that isn't the case here.  Betty Logan ( talk ) 22:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – I'm not seeing anything that isn't already covered in one of the two existing film articles.  This standalone article is unnecessary.  -- GoneIn60 ( talk ) 22:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Kill Bill's article .  It even states in the first sentence that the two parts are just one movie.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 00:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Kill Bill Vol.  1 .  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 02:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per nom.  also the two parts are just one movie.  Lethweimaster ( talk ) 06:18, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete the article and make a new disambiguation page that provides links to the two films.  Fred Zepelin ( talk ) 03:24, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:FILM SERIES .  InfiniteNexus ( talk ) 15:25, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete planning a sequel doesn't count.  DareshMohan ( talk ) 17:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And the sequel is canceled anyway!  Popcornfud ( talk ) 18:21, 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
Ubaidullah Shamsul: BEFORE search shows only passing coverage in [8] , [9] , and [10] .  Doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV .  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 15:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Football ,  and Malaysia .  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 15:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Polite reminder to nominator that NFOOTBALL no longer exists.  Giant Snowman 15:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I concur; this does not meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTBASIC or any other relevant notability policy. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Rashad Richey: I suspect this guy created his own Wikipedia page.  Perfecnot ( talk ) 21:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators ,  and United States of America .  Perfecnot ( talk ) 21:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Audacity and various streaming links, his own website and PR items.  Sourcing now in the article is a blog, a PR item and his college.  Very non-notable, very PROMO.  Delete for lack of reliable sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .   Absolutely no sign of WP:NPROF , though I saw this on the Academics and Educators delsorting.   I do see an NBC piece [22] and an Atlanta Voice piece [23] , mostly aimed towards his radio show.   Agree that there is a lot of promotionalism.   A sensible alternative to deletion might be to redirect to a stub on the radio show.  Russ Woodroofe ( talk ) 00:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Politics ,  and Georgia (U.S. state) .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 18 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
Jay A. Tilden: Not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources to meet WP:GNG .  Onel 5969 TT me 16:27, 5 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 18:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 22:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Civil servant in the nuclear field.  No extensive sourcing found.  Trivial mentions.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:21, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete While this person seems to have an interesting and important mid-level government job, that does not by itself signify notability.  The sources cited are written by the subject or his organization, and few relevant WP:RS mentions or noteworthy news coverage.  Despite the prior lengthy discussion, this one looks like an easy call to delete.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 08:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Go4thProsper.  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 13:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 07:54, 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