hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Border Model: A WP:BEFORE search in English and (machine translated) Chinese turned up only this product review from what looks like a RS.  The rest are all adverts from model sellers, and a few blogs.  Article currently has only one primary source from the company, plus two from sellers.  I'm also nominating the following related page because it's simply a list of some of their products, with no indication of how they're notable by WP:GNG.  This article was actually created first, and proposed for deletion on the grounds of notability and about products for which there was no company article.  Border Model was then created by same editor, and proposed deletion contested without comment.  It's sourced by a company link, a blog, and a seller link.  List of Border Model product lines ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Wikishovel ( talk ) 05:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 05:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete both - No evidence of importance shown, let alone notability.  Bensci54 ( talk ) 16:36, 2 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  List of Border Model product lines was PROD'd so it is not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:26, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  We need more opinions here.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as there's absolutely no indication of notability.  DCsansei ( talk ) — Preceding undated comment added 07:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NCORP .  Mooonswimmer 17:43, 22 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
Space Micro Inc: It reads as promotional and there are no cited sources other than the company itself.  Unclear this company is notable; we have no article on the company that bought it.  -- Beland ( talk ) 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Spaceflight .  Beland ( talk ) 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I was able to find a few seemingly independent sources , but the majority are clearly either written by the company or (in in one case ) a closely related company.  I couldn't find anything on Google Books or Scholar.  A closer look at the creator's contributions and talk page shows that this user is clearly only on here to promote the company, and has a conflict on interest .  The page itself seems to fit within the definition of WP:NOTPROMO .  Ships & Space ( Edits ) 18:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: I also can't find any sourcing outside of routine coverage, which can't be used to establish notability per WP: NCOMPANY .  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 21:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm unable to locate any sources that meet GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing ++ 16:50, 23 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
Tanya Heaslip: Lacks independent coverage.  duffbeerforme ( talk ) 12:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Women ,  and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This paywalled article on her 2020 book from NT News ("Tanya Heaslip to debut 'An Alice Girl' at Red Kangaroo Books") seems to be promising, but I'm mostly finding radio/podcast appearances (ABC: [4] [5] [6] and 6PR: [7] ) and passing mentions ( NT News and Books+Publishing ).  Bridget (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Also found Eclectica Magazine ' s reviews of Alice to Prague (2019) and An Alice Girl (2020) . Bridget (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A good part of these articles from The West Australian [8] and The Times [9] talk about her experience at the School of the Air and also discuss her books. There's also a piece on An Alice Girl in a smaller newspaper, the Stock Journal [10] . Bridget (talk) 00:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] 5 appears to be written by "STEPHEN SCOURFIELD and School of the Air alumni", so it's not independent . 6 is also a primary source that lacks independence because it's based on an interview with Heaslip in which she is liberally quoted. I don't have access to 7, but if it's a book review, that could contribute to meeting NAUTHOR , but I don't think NT News , Eclectica , and Stock Journal are enough. I also don't have access to the NT News source, but from its title, it appears to be a routine announcement. voorts ( talk / contributions ) 01:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GSS 💬 13:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails NAUTHOR and I haven't found enough significant coverage to meet GNG either. voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:15, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . Thin covg and unconvincing notability claim. 128.252.172.14 ( talk ) 21:26, 26 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
James Hogan (guitarist): Fails WP:NMUSIC and no WP:SIGCOV appears to exist.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 18:45, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 18:45, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - A journeyman who seems to have made a living as a music instructor and occasional sideman for notable people, but he is always several degrees of separation from notability.  Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:NOTRESUME .  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 19:43, 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: delete
Yahya ibn Ummi Taweel: jlwoodwa ( talk ) 19:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , History ,  and Islam .  jlwoodwa ( talk ) 19:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete a search in Arabic does not show reliable independent sources.  Mccapra ( talk ) 22:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete in support of the above reasoning.  I did a light search and only found pages linking back to the Wikipedia article.  MtBotany ( talk ) 17:08, 25 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
Rodolfo Carter: This article says nothing other than the subject is a mayor which fails NPOL.  The sources are obvious WP:ROUTINE coverages and do not count towards GNG either.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 08:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Chile .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Mccapra ( talk ) 18:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, C avarrone 11:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete : I don't agree with lacking WP:GNG rather particular about WP:NPOL which the article slightly meets.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  07:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It's either a subject meets a notability guideline, or it doesn't, there's nothing like "slightly meets" or "almost meets" or whatever.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 08:08, 30 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
Berwick-upon-Tweed television relay station: No sources cited.  WP:NOTDIR of minor TV/radio relay stations and their frequencies.  Flip Format ( talk ) 15:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Television , United Kingdom ,  and England .  Flip Format ( talk ) 15:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  RobinCarmody ( talk ) 18:22, 11 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
USCIS processing times: Proposed to be deleted .  If there's disagreement, it can also be merged into United States Citizenship and Immigration Services or Immigration to the United States or something.  NM 19:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  NM 19:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:47, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  Additionally, parts of this read like a guide .  - AquilaFasciata ( talk | contribs ) 16:21, 26 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
Cities and metropolitan areas of the United States: All of the sources all come from one source which is the Census.  It's probably a content fork of Statistical area (United States) which covers similar territory.  Interstellarity ( talk ) 23:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , Lists ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Duplicates several other articles such as List of United States cities by population .  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 03:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This a redundant article that does not offer anything new or useful that can't be found elsewhere in Wikipedia Paul H. ( talk ) 14:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : This table provides data from the United States Census Bureau in a structure that is more readily understood.  I feel that this article is very useful.  Yours aye, Buaidh talk e-mail 02:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A useless combination of List of United States cities by population and Statistical area (United States) § List of primary statistical areas .  The table in § Rank table is notably difficult to parse and can only lead to confusion.  However, I will note that the comment all of the sources all come from one source which is the Census is not a reason for deletion or even for the article being bad: the Census is the sole source for most of this data, and the data in Statistical area (United States) also comes only from the Census and the OMB.  Dan • ✉ 21:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I can't make an argument other than "it's useful" but it's useful considering it formats information in a different way than the other articles - I think there was another similar article which is or was colour coded and would delete if it's duplicative of that.  SportingFlyer T · C 17:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Redundant list.  Abhishek0831996 ( talk ) 09:37, 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
WQDD-LP: WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A quick search of records show this station was off the air more than it was on.   It's original license to cover is listed as 11/28/2006, it went silent a day later.   I can't say for certain if it ever launched.   It supposedly resumed operations on 05/31/2007 only to fall silent again on 03/17/2008.   This pattern of silent for months, on for a few days, then silent again would repeat over and over and over until 07/09/2015 when when it's final license to cover was requested to be cancelled, that took place on 07/13/2015.   There is a Special Temporary Authority filed in 2016, but it was never acted upon by the FCC.   The callsign and license were officially cancelled on 07/13/2015, not in 2016 or 2018 as the article states.  Beyond this, I can find nothing regarding the station outside of Wikipedia mirrors and FCC documents.   Nothing on Golden Age Communications either.   The addresses for the station, in FCC documents, all track back to residental homes.   In short, I don't think this station ever existed outside of paper.   Delete per GNG and former NMEDIA rules, while didn't allow for this kind of page in the first place.  - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The apparent July 2015 dating for the license cancellation that might appear in certain FCC searches appears to be little more than a quirk in FCC's CDBS database with regard to reflecting these cancellations; that was actually when a frequency change from 93.5 to 107.9 was licensed.  The station itself has its "license cancelled" status dated June 28, 2018 .  The owners (theoretically) pulled the plug for financial reasons in September 2016 (this is the aforementioned STA request), the FCC informed the station in May 2018 it was on the verge of losing its license for not resuming broadcasts within a year, and a lack of response led to the license being canceled that June . ) WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Wcquidditch : Thanks for the corrections.   When the FCC switched from CDBS (the old filing system) to LMS (the new one), things got lost, messed up, etc.   Since that's probably what happened there.   Again, thanks for the correction.  :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is definitely a leftover article from the days when we were so lax on notability for broadcast stations that we were creating stubs on pretty much any licensed facility, regardless of whether there was anything else we could even verifiably say.  The GNG requires much more significant coverage than could possibly be provided by FCC records, of course, and even the NMEDIA essay's old overpresumption of notability

Discussion outcome: delete
England at the Four Nations: Mn1548 ( talk ) 20:01, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rugby league and England .  – dudhhr talk contribs she her 05:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  No need for a separate article.  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 09:09, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 17:04, 31 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
Seta Baker: JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:28, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and New Zealand .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:28, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Can this page please not be deleted as I have been working hard to create pages for provincial players to grow the provincial game, this player has a lot of potential and will likely make Super Rugby next year so page is not worth being deleted.  Delete Likely a case of WP:TOOSOON .  There's not enough coverage yet for a WP:GNG pass.  Coverage may exist in the future, but I'm not sure whether or not their would be enough in the next 6 months to justify draftifying.  No suitable redirect.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:07, 21 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
Verna Gaston: Fails WP:ENTERTAINER .  Cannot find good sources in GNews and GNews Archives.  GBooks have mentions about her having some parts in films and a gossip article about her status as a sexy star but that's it.  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 06:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Bands and musicians ,  and Philippines . Lenticel ( talk ) 06:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment this article was also subjected to a failed prod . -- Lenticel ( talk ) 06:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:SEXYSTAR . - KH-1 ( talk ) 12:16, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above vote should not be considered legitimate by Admins, because it points to the "Ignore All Rules" tradition, and even that requires a little more justification .  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 17:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relax, it was a joke.  I couldn't really find any coverage in WP:RS, though the time frame and location makes it difficult.  Lean delete. - KH-1 ( talk ) 00:27, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nice joke.  Although I think I owe you both an explanation about its context.  The Philippines is a highly conservative Catholic country back then so someone showing a bit too much skin raised too many eyebrows.  What deem as a modest summer getup might is considered too sexy back then (Here's one of her "daring" pics (SFW by the way)).  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - She had a long career and probably gained some notice as a sex symbol.  But at least in English, all I can find are various lists of films that she was in and it does not appear that she was high in the credits or received reliable coverage for her acting.  Even less can be found for her music.  I don't think she reaches WP:SIGCOV , which requires more than lists and directory entries.  I would be willing to change my vote if anyone can find anything in different languages.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 18:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NACTOR and WP:ENT per above arguments.  SBKSPP ( talk ) 03:42, 28 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
Donald Sawyer: Searching for the film produces exactly seven Ghits, all of which trace back to here.  The supposed ref does not refer to a specific page on the website, which is another red flag.  Since the film is his claim to notability, there's nothing to support this.  Created by an SPI who also made User:Baxter27/Donald sawyer .  Mangoe ( talk ) 03:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Hoax.  No results for "site:dailycamera.com "Donald Sawyer"" either.  Jfire ( talk ) 04:10, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and New Jersey .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:35, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per nom.  This appears to be a hoax.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 08:05, 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
George Metzler: Not sure if this is worth a redirect/merge to 1949 Indianapolis 500 .  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 01:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Military , Motorsport ,  and Indiana .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .  Mztourist ( talk ) 05:52, 10 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