hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Regional Best 2011 : In these anthologies, William Roetzheim , an entrepreneur who took up writing later in life, and who became as novelist, playwright and poet of no great renown, has chosen the best plays from among regional theater premieres.  But since Roetzheim is not particularly well-known as a playwright or theater critic, his selections as to what constitutes the "best" plays is somewhat arbitrary and meaningless.  The book was published by Level 4 Press which, unsurprisingly, is owned by Roetzheim.  No significant notice of this book can be found in any search, although it does appear to be widely available for sale.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  20:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions .  WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  20:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note that the creator of this article ( MaryFrancisK

Discussion outcome: delete
Daren Streblow : Not a single acceptable secondary source proving notability is included and I can't find any--it's all announcements and links to his podcast on Google (including News and Books).  This is the best I can find.  Drmies ( talk ) 21:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  Kablammo ( talk ) 11:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Radio ,  and Minnesota .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per the original nomination, he seems famous to some degree but little notability Wiiformii ( talk ) 02:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails both WP:GNG and WP:ENT .  — Young Forever (talk) 22:58, 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
Single-level : fgnievinski ( talk ) 02:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  This is not a proper disambiguation page because the terms just share the word "single-level" in common, not their respective nouns.  -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:38, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - WP:PARTIAL says everything it needs to BrigadierG ( talk ) 18:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep in some form - could redirect somewhere useful.  JoshuaAuble ( talk ) 21:11, 28 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
Christopher J. Burke : .  "not inherently notable" and per consensus at WP:Articles for deletion/Margaret J. Schneider Snickers2686 ( talk ) 21:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions .  Snickers2686 ( talk ) 21:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delaware , Michigan ,  and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Agree with the nom that this subject is not notable and does not meet either the WP:GNG or WP:JUDGE .  User:Let'srun 01:59, 24 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: delete
AI for Good Specialization : Looks live an attempt to create a walled garden by the creator of DeepLearning.AI TheLongTone ( talk ) 15:41, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Technology ,  and Internet .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non-notable.  Lewcm Talk to me!  20:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , looks promotional and is (currently) not notable.  Artem.G ( talk ) 16:41, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] keep , I have changed the language to make it more neutral.  This is from Andrew Ng (one of the most well known AI educators) and Robert Monarch (author of the book "Human-in-the-Loop Machine Learning").  It is notable for those reasons, as well as for the number of participants.  Caitlyn 191.102.59.2 ( talk ) 191.102.59.2 ( talk ) 17:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If you want to improve the article I suggest looking for reliable independent sources discussing the programme, which is what's required by WP:N .  Ligaturama ( talk ) 17:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  20:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable, written as an advertisement.  Being associated with someone notable as mentioned above isn't enough.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ligaturama ( talk • contribs ) 08:16, 23 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
F-WUAB (Airbus A300B4-203) : All three sources, one of which is unreliable, are just passing mentions and do not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline .  There is no evidence why the 238th aircraft is notable.  CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk) , Huliva 22:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products , Aviation ,  and France .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : It's preserved in a museum so I suppose it could be a notable historical artifact...  But I can't see much even in French about it [41] is a brief description.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I found this source [42] 14.201.100.184 ( talk ) 00:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : this particular airframe does not meet GNG in its own right.  The mention at Airbus A300 § Aircraft on display is sufficient; a standalone article is not justified per WP:NOPAGE .  Rosbif73 ( talk ) 09:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  Even as a preserved example it has been repainted to appear to be something that it isn't.  Fails WP:GNG Velella Velella Talk 00:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and merge - This article is new, and I suggest that someone update the article to have more significant coverage or even merge it with the A300B1 in preservation into one article.  14.201.100.184 ( talk ) 00:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I’ve merged the content 14.201.100.184 ( talk ) 00:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] And I've undone it.  There should be a consensus decision, to my understanding, before things like this are done.  I undid all three.  The page you merged them into just passed AfC as a disambiguation page specifically.  Also, notes about deletion discussions on articles shouldn't just be removed.  Please wait for consensus when there's a discussion about what should happen.  ((Meanwhile, I know nothing about airplanes, so I have no vote on that matter. Now I'm off to fix the ref names b/c those articles "merging" caused a huge problem.)) OIM20 ( talk ) 06:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - per GNG.  Bhivuti45 ( talk ) 10:46, 30 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
MIL-DTL-5541 : The closest I got was an analysis of different materials that may be compliant, but it's less about the standard and more about the materials themselves.  ThadeusOfNazereth (he/him) Talk to Me!  06:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and United States of America .  ThadeusOfNazereth (he/him) Talk to Me!  06:54, 8 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!  06:46, 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
IC 3246 : C messier ( talk ) 12:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 12:49, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : non-notable galaxy.  I didn't see any significant coverage in scholarly studies or observer's guide books.  Praemonitus ( talk ) 14:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : does not appear developable now nor in the near future.  ~ Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf ) 15:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  ‹ hamster717🐉 › ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠 ) 20:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Pink Lady Lemonade ~ You're from Outer Space : Fails the general and album-specific notability criteria.  - UtherSRG (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Japan .  UtherSRG (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I was unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources.  Unfortunate, it's a decent album.  ULPS ( talk • contribs ) 16:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect : Could only find this review from Record Collector from last year.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 16:42, 21 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!  19:34, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No sourcing.  Best I can find is a Prog review, but it's a user contribution, so non-RS.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:38, 28 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
Clare Smales : Roles at Vogue significant, but I don't think enough.  Very few internal links.  Hard to find external references.  Seaweed ( talk ) 20:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Journalism ,  and United Kingdom .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no secondary source coverage.  Non-notable journalist who appears to be a realtor now (married name Clare Coode).  Fred Zepelin ( talk ) 22:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk ) 06:58, 2 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
Rajkumar (2024 film) : Sources cited say that filming was proposed to begin in July 2022, but all that's been announced so far is plans.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 06:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 06:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Quick google search results in no info.  Not notable enough.  Probably made for advertisement.  killer bee 08:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per mention by K6bee9 ( Talk ) – Non-notable.  Kkb091 ( talk ) 10:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment someone connected with the film obviously has their eye on this article, as on the day of proposed deletion, press releases were hurried out claiming that casting had begun, and that principal photography had begun, which would be quite a feat of engineering.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 08:27, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This film is pretty viral in Bangladesh (type রাজকুমার শাকিব খান into google and translate, maybe even use a dhaka proxy server), but I think it should be placed in the Bangla wiki (bn.Wikipedia) Iamawesomedog ( talk ) 23:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per all arguments above.  Toadette ( Happy holiday! ) 08:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment What kind of behavior is it?   I have improved the whole article, why this article was deleted without any communication with me, I want to know?   And those of you who are scholars here, how did you know from outside the country that filming has not started?  নবাব ( talk ) 12:01, 21 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
At-location mapping : Chidgk1 ( talk ) 17:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment seems to be another name for Indoor positioning system -- PaulT2022 ( talk ) 01:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Per the exactly one good source that I can find on this, ISBN 9783540367284 , it's the didn't-really-catch-on name for what nowadays a lot of people think of as simply how maps work: one can be at a location and look up that location's map on a mobile 'phone.   I'm not really convinced that this was ever documented enough, or caught on as a distinct concept, to satisfy our Wikipedia:no original research policy.   It gets 1 sentence in that book.  Uncle G ( talk ) 07:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Good point, Delete as neologism .  PaulT2022 ( talk ) 14:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete I saw the same thing as Unc G: it's a name for how on-line mapping is used in the age of smart phones that someone tried to turn into terminology but which didn't stick because it was too obvious, from the earliest days of the tricorder.  Mangoe ( talk ) 13:29, 24 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
Al-Ishlah Mosque, Bengkalis : Also, the article created by sock known for making non-notable article.  Attempted to PROD earlier but blocked by IP editor (possibly sock/blocked editor).  Ckfasdf ( talk ) 06:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Indonesia .  Owen× ☎ 07:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete No real claim of notability for this relatively recently constructed mosque.  Mangoe ( talk ) 14:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The mosque does not have adequate coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:NBUILDING .  Redtree21 ( talk ) 08:09, 20 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
Teddy Lion : Article has been orphaned for a decade.  Pepper Beast (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Croatia ,  and North Macedonia .  Pepper Beast (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I found a few passing references to Vasilev but even in the Croatian/European sources I can find, absolutely nothing in-depth.  No evidence of notability via WP:GNG or WP:SINGER .  — Ganesha811 ( talk ) 19:01, 5 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
The Beatles Complete On Ukulele : Article has been unsourced since its 2009 creation.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 23:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Found no additional coverage aside from the NY Post article linked in the prior AfD.  Also worth linking the AfD on the lead artist behind this project, David Barratt.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 23:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Though if the Barratt page gets kept, this should be redirected there.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 23:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or redirect to David Barratt per QuietHere .  Darling ☔ ( talk · contribs ) 01:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or merge with David Barratt if that page is not deleted.  In addition to the NY Post article, I found several very brief mentions of the project (usually routine announcements) in a few articles via ProQuest , but none of those amounted to significant coverage.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 20:22, 1 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
Sally Bomer : Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 21:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Dance .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Than you for nominating.  Doesnt go anywhere near to satisfy WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk ) 05:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This one is an easy call.  Does not meet notability guidelines to merit an article.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 18:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I found a handful of other mentions of her in the NY Times, but nothing about her.  Lamona ( talk ) 15:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  First off, there is no allegation of notability.  Secondly, a few brief mentions in reviews is not enough for WP:SIGCOV .  Sorry.  Bearian ( talk ) 23:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and above fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 19:28, 21 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
Francisco Jattin : As a local elected official, they are not considered inherently notable and the coverage that I'm finding all appears to be fairly routine.  Does not appear to meet point 2 of WP:NPOL or WP:GNG .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Colombia .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Mayors are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to show a lot more substance and a lot more sourcing than this before they clear the bar.  Bearcat ( talk ) 21:07, 18 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
Dion Frazer : Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 17:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Belize .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 17:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:19, 1 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:25, 1 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