hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Joy : Should the topics be separate or should this be turned back into a redirect to Happiness ?  If this article was kept, it would need to basically be remade from the ground up, but I don't know if it needs to be a separate page.  BuySomeApples ( talk ) 04:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, it's a mess.  I won't fight very much, but surfing for "joy versus happiness" indicates that there are two very different concepts, the short-living emotion and the long-term state of mind.  Unfortunately the two meanings are getting mixed up.  Rather than merging them, can't we work on discerning them more clearly?  LucSaffre ( talk ) 11:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I have made improvements to the page, by reworking the lead, adding a citation for "joy vs. happiness", and information and citations about the psychological and health benefits of experiencing joy.  I could find multiple reliable sources (such as one from The Conversation and another from Washington Post as well as scientific journals) on why joy is very good for us, but finding citations for the distinction between joy and happiness turned out to be a lot harder.  I can find several on Psychology Today , but I also tried to find other sources, keeping in mind Wikipedia's policies about sourcing.  When in doubt about a site I was not sure about, I searched on Wikipedia to see if other articles used the site as a source.  I have started a discussion at RSN for Impactus and Learning Mind .  I have citations for "joy vs. happiness" from both sites, and if they turn out to be reliable, I will add them.  Seckends ( talk ) 14:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Clearly a highly notable concept, as human emotional states generally are, and distinguishable enough to have a separate article.  BD2412 T 13:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  There are many similarities between joy and happiness as expression and feelings but there are also many big differences when it comes to the state of the person.  I am just finishing a lengthy study on this very topic of joy and happiness, and hope to contribute to tis article shortly.  And just a note to BD2412 T they are distinguishable enough to have a separate article.  Happy Ship ( talk ) 20:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Reformed Old Apostolic Church : And the only thing this source states about this denomination is: "Reformed Old Apostolic Church Belhar – established 1979: 166 members;", nothing more, nothing less; and this does not match the current information on the WP article that this denomination was created in 1972.  A search with the Afrikaans name has zero matches.  I have not been able to find an official website for the denomination.  This denomination clearly does not meet WP:GNG and therefore it should be deleted .  Veverve ( talk ) 19:59, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Christianity ,  and South Africa .  Veverve ( talk ) 19:59, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I have heard of this group, but will need to see if a couple Irvingite sources actually touch upon them.  If I don't find anything or don't reply further, consider me moderately pro-deletion.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 20:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Searches also need to be done under its former name, the Non-White Old Apostolic Church .  It gets lots of hits in GBooks, but all the top ones are for the 1975 court case, Old Apostolic Church of Africa v Non-white Old Apostolic Church of Africa.  St Anselm ( talk ) 06:21, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The Apostolic History Network says it has 180,000 members.  [12] St Anselm ( talk ) 15:05, 17 May 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!  23:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- We have normally regarded denominations as notable.   If true that it has 180,000 members, I would argue that lifts it into notability.  Peterkingiron ( talk ) 16:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per Peterkingiron, but it is touch and go!  There needs to be an ability to write something about the denomination, and despite the 180,000 members reported, there is a definite paucity of material.  However, part of this is that this denomination gets called by another name.  That is th "Non-White Old Apostolic Church of Africa" (as shown in the link provided by StAnselm).  Under this name there are more sources, such as [13] .  I haven't yet found anything that would make for a useful history or background in the article, but there are sufficient sources like that one to verify it is an active denomination.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 15:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the above.  St Anselm ( talk ) 16:47, 25 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: keep
David Prater (attorney) : Surely.  I mean, come on.  Hi DrNick !  02:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete, not notable, should be about notable ones, wp is not indiscriminate information. -- Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 02:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Oklahoma . Kpg jhp jm 06:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- There's no need to answer nom's Q about district attorneys to argue that this one is notable.  The article is extensively sourced with many statewide papers and three national sources: two from AP and one from WaPo.  It's hard to imagine a good reason or any reason at all why this ought to be deleted.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 08:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , meets GNG due to various coverage beyond the normal scope of job duties, including petitions to have subject investigated by a grand jury.  Sources already linked in article.  — siro χ o 10:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: The nom is right that district attorneys in individual counties of US states aren't inherently notable, but in this case the subject has the coverage to meet GNG.  Sources are already in the article.  User:Let'srun 18:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There is enough WP:RS coverage of Prater to meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL (as a major local politician).  Plus, Prater was the DA of Oklahoma County (the largest county in the state) for over a decade.  The OK County DA handles things like corruption prosecutions and investigations since the capitol is in the county.  It's the most prominent DA position in the state and he held it for a decade.  He investigated Terry O'Donnell (politician) during his corruption scandal and is a major voice in Oklahoma's criminal justice debates.  TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 22:43, 29 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: keep
Ben Tari : Has only had 1 significant role.  LibStar ( talk ) 05:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Current sources are just passing mentions and other Wikipedia page for some reason.  Found no significant coverage of the subject.  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 22:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  While he does only have one significant TV role it is a big, long running one and alternatives such as redirection could have been considered.  He does has significant roles on stage productions with multiple reviews making it more than one role for NACTOR.  I have updated the article with coverage in articles where he is the prime focus (and named in the titles) which is good for GNG.  duffbeerforme ( talk ) 08:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 07:10, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Now meets WP:GNG with above reference additions.  Happily888 ( talk ) 03:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep meets WP:GNG .  The person who loves reading ( talk ) 17:36, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: For further input on the new sources added by duffbeerforme.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  08:15, 14 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: keep
Wendy Aylsworth : Rest seems to be standard business positions in the film industry.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Businesspeople , Women , Film ,  and California .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 03:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:22, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep :First female president of SMPTE.  Lifetime achievement Emmy.  She really was a key player in DCI .  The first two alone should make her notable, IMO.  Hondo77 ( talk ) 14:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:ANYBIO #1.  A Lifetime Achievement Emmy is a "well-known and significant award".  [25] .  pburka ( talk ) 18:43, 29 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: keep
Op:l Bastards : Non-notable band.  SL93 ( talk ) 21:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Finland .  SL93 ( talk ) 21:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep due to Bio in Allmusic .  Album review in NME , review in Allmusic , review in Sonic Seducer , review in Visions (which has a printed magazine).  Small news piece in Billboard magazine .  Single review in NME , another in Music & Media , another in Sonic Seducer .  Review in an outlet I'm not familiar with .  That's a start without even looking into Finnish media Geschichte ( talk ) 08:15, 29 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!  23:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:MUSICBIO .   In addition to sources identified above by Geschichte , the band has had a single and an album in the Finnish national chart - see link , the citation of which has also been added to article.  Resonant Dis tor tion 12:09, 7 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: keep
Rams–Vikings rivalry : PontiacAurora ( talk ) 21:55, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football , California ,  and Minnesota .  Shellwood ( talk ) 11:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Notability is not WP:NOTTEMPORARY .  If the rivalry was notable in the 1970s, then it qualifies for an article.  Alvaldi ( talk ) 11:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - for the reasons Alvaldi gives, and really per nom.   As the nom acknowledges, this was a notable rivalry in the 1970s and regardless of what happened since then notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY .  Rlendog ( talk ) 13:51, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per above.  A major rivalry in its day and received WP:SIGCOV from top authorities on NFL coverage, such as CBS and NBC.   Today's Rams-Vikings series is not to the level it was in the 1970s, but notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY Frank Anchor 14:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Since the article, I believe, was submitted due to the one's not-awareness of WP:NOTTEMPORARY I believe it can be left untouched.  Rodgers V ( talk ) 12:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep per WP:NOTTEMPORARY as Alvaldi and others point out.  Nom admits that the subject was notable in the past.  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 08:20, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per WP:GNG and WP:NTEMP , per all above.  Ejgreen77 ( talk ) 15:49, 20 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: keep
WHPS-CD : Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 02:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Michigan .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 02:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Its complicated : Sammi Brie actually has local WP:SIGCOV material for this station, from newspapers.  At the same time, I don't know how to actually put the sources in.  mer764 KCTV5 / Cospaw (He/Him | Talk • Contributions ) 15:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy close.  This nomination appears to be the result of a content dispute .  (SN: I am not involved in the dispute nor have I ever heard of this TV station; but I read the article and although it could stand a rewrite, the station seems notable, IMO.)  Erpert blah, blah, blah... 05:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This nomination has nothing to do with the content dispute involving Baltimore stations.  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 05:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I will vouch that the content dispute has nothing to do with the slow drip of AfDs of non-notable low-power TV stations.  I will also vouch this one shouldn't be tossed with them.  Substantial local SIGCOV exists for this one.  [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 06:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACE_financing#cite_ref-8 ^ Lords, Erik (November 19, 2002).  "Local station seeks cable spot: WHPR wants Comcast to put channels on free" .  Detroit Free Press .  Detroit, Michigan.  p. 6B .  Retrieved June 11, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.  ^ Schmitt, Ben (July 1, 2009).  "Conyers takes to TV, apologizes to Detroit: She won't discuss case, but takes shot at ex-aide" .  Detroit Free Press .  Detroit, Michigan.  p. 3A .  Retrieved June 11, 2024 – via Newspapers.com.  ^ Singer, Christopher (November 2, 2005).  "Fundraising clicks for black-run stations - With a little help, 11-watt WHPR-FM and cable TV Channel 33 dial up some needed dollars".  The Detroit News .  p. 6S.  ^ "A new television station in Detroit".  Michigan Chronicle .  June 3, 1998.  p. 1-D.  ProQuest 390200523 .  ^ " 'The Box' is major success in Detroit".  Michigan Chronicle .  December 17, 1999.  p.  D12.  ProQuest 390224674 .  Keep per sources.  Danubeball ( talk ) 01:40, 12 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: keep
Covariance operator : Boleyn ( talk ) 17:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It needs work, but there's a solid mathematical topic here that can be written about using sources.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 18:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Besides the sources that have been added to the article, I am seeing additional reliable sources in a Google search.   So this seems to be a valid, notable topic.  Rlendog ( talk ) 15:32, 17 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: keep
Lei Han : He does not appear in a search of the English language website of the Chingqing medical hospital.   I appreciate that his page may need to stay in Wikipedia because of his academic reputation - but I cannot find any sources to justify the statements about his reputation made in the article.  Newhaven lad ( talk ) 19:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Medicine ,  and China .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Notability not found yet.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 23:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC) / [ reply ] Comment: Lei Han was the president of Chongqing Medical University .  Does Lei Han meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria #6, which says, "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society"?  This book published by Springer Nature notes: "The Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (CHCMU), located in the central area of Chongqing, is recognized as one of the top three pediatric hospitals in China (CHCMU 2015). Many professors worked in this hospital hold leading positions in the field of pediatric research in China."  This book published by Frontiers Media notes, "We performed a retrospective cohort study in the Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. The hospital is a 2480-bed tertiary teaching hospital in Chongqing, China and ranks among the top three domestic children's hospitals (rank list: http://top100.imicams.ac.cn/home )." http://top100.imicams.ac.cn/home is the website of China's Institute of Medical Information & Library ( zh:中国医学科学院医学信息研究所 ).  Cunard ( talk ) 09:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria #6 per Qflib.  Cunard ( talk ) 09:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I would agree that #C6 of WP:NPROF is met by having served as the president of Chongqing Medical University, which is a research-grade institution.  Qflib ( talk ) 20:56, 21 March 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!  22:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NACADEMIC criterion 6, as president of Chongqing Medical University .  — Mx.  Granger ( talk · contribs ) 13:25, 25 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: keep
Abhishek Tiwari : Virtually no coverage in external sources that I could find.  (Note: There is a professor at Cal Poly Pomona by this name, it doesn't seem to be the same guy.)  Withdrawn, see below Gnomingstuff ( talk ) 01:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment this article used to be about a cricket player, but was recently hijacked by an IP editor.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 02:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Ah - should have checked history, that explains the weird format.  This can be closed in that case, I have no interest in calling the AfD cricket cops.  Gnomingstuff ( talk ) 03:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : Nominator withdrew, and the non-hijacked article has been restored and appears to be a notable cricket player.  Bsoyka ( t • c • g ) 04:48, 20 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: keep
Mexican Liberal Party (2003) : The article previously existed as Mexican Liberal Party (2002–03) but that was redirected to 2003 Mexican legislative election (this is perhaps the best solution for the present article as well).  There's not a whole lot of significant coverage ( this seems to be the exception) so deletion or redirection seem like the way to go.  Pichpich ( talk ) 19:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Mexico .  Pichpich ( talk ) 19:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 20:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Party received over 100,000 votes in a national election, which IMO makes it notable.  Coverage also to be found in other sources.  [1] [2] [3] Cheers, Number 5 7 11:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Although i agree with you, i think every political party deserves recognition as long as it has notable info!, cheers too you!  52Timer ( talk ) 00:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - That means you would also have too include a few more Mexican political parties into this discussion, why delete this one if it is similar to other lost Political parties like for example: “México Posible 2002-2003” the article has much less than this one so it wouldn’t be fair deleting this one.  Instead this article should be considered a stub or more rework , Furthermore.  This seems like your typical stub of political parties and 90% of this article comes from the Spanish Wikipedia and fully corrected and worked with actual sources!  52Timer ( talk ) 00:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to review sources found.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: This one passes WP:GNG through the sources provided by Number_57, despite the short time the party existed.  User:Let'srun 21:45, 6 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: keep