hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
El Piñal, Táchira, Venezuela : Nerd1a4i (they/them) ( talk ) 01:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator - misunderstood time of creation of article.  Article has already been expanded to resolve concerns.  Error on my part, and I apologize.  -- Nerd1a4i (they/them) ( talk ) 18:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions .  Nerd1a4i (they/them) ( talk ) 01:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep passes GEOLAND.  Mccapra ( talk ) 04:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Of course it's not a complete article, you tagged it for deletion about 15 minutes after it was created.  15 minutes is not enough time to create a well-referenced article.  Please don't jump the gun here and tag "just created" articles for deletion unless there are major problems, especially when looking at articles created by prolific content creators.  L iz Read!  Talk!  04:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep passes WP:GEOLAND .  Please don't tag articles just after they were created, usually just tag them for notability and wait a day or so for any improvement before deletion.  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I apologize; I missed the time of creation - I thought I had set the new page feed to sort oldest at the top and it seems I did the reverse.  I retract the nomination.  I will certainly be more careful in the future.  -- Nerd1a4i (they/them) ( talk ) 18:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:SNOW , and now that the nomination has been withdrawn.  -- NoonIcarus ( talk ) 22:29, 29 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
To Touch the Soul : No sources beyond WP:PRIMARY and IMDB.  Article orphaned for a decade.  Pepper Beast (talk) 16:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Cambodia ,  and California .  Pepper Beast (talk) 16:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] you have this , and this , at least; and this PR piece for information.  Keep .  I would have suggested a redirect but no target seems appropriate.  If one is found, consider I agree with the redirect, please. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 23:30, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep based on the reliable sources identified by Mushy Yank above that show significant coverage of the film, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 23:36, 19 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: keep
Engines and energy conversion laboratory : Only source is their website, and I found no coverage online that meets WP:SIRS ARandomName123 ( talk ) 06:57, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Colorado .  ARandomName123 ( talk ) 06:57, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Surprisingly enough I can't find anything truly independent despite reams of coverage, probably doesn't meet WP:ORG .  Merge into a subsection of Colorado State University .  That article already mentions it a few times.  — siro χ o 07:22, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Notable: I found 3 journal refs - they were the first 3 Google Scholar hits using the link above.  I've added them to the article.  One of them is about the director but then it goes on to describe all that are happening at the lab.  The other two are about the lab.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 20:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The NY Times, again via the link above: Witkin, Jim (16 December 2011).  "Aspirations in Colorado to Be a New Motor City" .  The New York Times .  Retrieved 27 July 2023 .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 20:16, 27 July 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!  07:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : As far as I can tell, the sources found by A. B. are good enough for WP:NCOPR (also re. strict independence) and WP:GNG , so I don't see a lack of notability as a good reason for deletion.  Given the impact of their research, I think it's fair to assume that there's also going to be some [[WP:NEXIST|sources we don't have access to].  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 11:12, 6 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: keep
List of tallest buildings in Haaglanden : I can't find any fault with this argument, nor any sourcing indicating this list meets WP:NLIST/WP:GNG.  De-PROD'd with edit summary: could be recast as List of tallest buildings in The Hague Not a finger has been lifted to actually attempt to do so, of course, and that's notwithstanding the GNG/NLIST issue requiring SIGCOV of the topic as a whole.  ♠ PMC ♠ (talk) 05:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Lists ,  and Netherlands .  ♠ PMC ♠ (talk) 05:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Checking the one English source on the article reveals that it is already a list of tallest buildings in the Hauge, which are, unsurprisingly, all in Haaglanden.  It would literally take a few seconds to click "move" and write the new title, but I'm not sure we can do that now while it's on AfD.  Since AfD contributors will now inevitably start complaining about notability, they should look at the sources on the Dutch article.  small jars t c 09:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  List can easily be reworked to The Hague, Netherlands proper.  I'm happy to do this after the AfD is over.  All 4 larger cities of the Netherlands should have such a list.  gidonb ( talk ) 12:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   For reasons I state in my opposition to deletion of the Syracuse New York tallest building list.   Other similar ongoing AFDs (which should be opposed IMHO) include: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Syracuse, New York Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Columbia, Missouri (2nd nomination) List of tallest buildings in Sunny Isles Beach whose name hides the fact that the AFD proposes to delete tallest buildings lists of areas of more renown: List of tallest buildings in North Hudson List of tallest buildings in Rochester, Minnesota List of tallest buildings in Camden List of tallest buildings in Albany, New York List of tallest buildings in Arlington, Virginia Doncram ( talk , contribs ) 15:41, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Meets CLN/AOAL.  // Timothy :: talk 06:14, 18 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
What Happened in Skinner : There's a bit of student news, local news, and a nomination for an award, but not much else.  The best source by far is this source in THR .  I did a WP:BEFORE with "a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search" as well as a Google Scholar search.  I was unable to find anything else.  TipsyElephant ( talk ) 01:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Entertainment , Games ,  and Oregon .  TipsyElephant ( talk ) 01:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Other than the first source (the Hollywood Reporter), the rest used in the article are non-RS.  I've found [35] and [36] , should be just enough for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Agreed that those three sources alone qualify this article for notability (and thanks for finding, Oaktree!).  Per Wikipedia's guidelines on notability: "A local source is a source of information that is marketed to a limited geographical audience. These include [...] local television and radio stations [...] They are valid in establishing notability if they provide in-depth, non-routine, non-trivial coverage of the subject," which the cited articles do.  Keep : The Hollywood Reporter source already in the article, combined with the additional sources found by Oaktree b, each contains multiple paragraphs of significant, independent coverage that is needed to meet the WP:GNG , despite some of the souring having a local flavor.  This article needs some work but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP .  Let'srun ( talk ) 02:10, 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: keep
2023 Women's Asian Hockey5s World Cup Qualifier : Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSEVENT .  Sources do not provide independent WP:SIGCOV .  Unable to locate sources.  Bgv.  ( talk ) 01:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Sports , Asia ,  and Oman .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:27, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep international competition to qualify for worldwide tournament.  Would it be more acceptable if it was labeled a "cup" or "championship", which is what it is?  2022 Men's EuroHockey5s Championship also has the governing body ( International Hockey Federation ) as the only reference, which can be typical on lesser known sports.  Tbennert ( talk ) 00:33, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 01:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Why is only this tournament nominated?  That makes no sense with other regional qualifying tournaments being notable.  And men's tournaments also being notable.  Yes, it can do with more independent sources but qualifying tournaments are part of the international cycle for global tournaments.  The Banner talk 16:09, 27 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
Jarowar Jhumko : Previous AfD ended in no consensus.  Donald D23 talk to me 13:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India .  Donald D23 talk to me 13:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - It is a very popular series.  Sources that are currently linked are clearly WP:NTV and WP:GNG pass sufficient WP:RS on this page.  Nilpriyo ( talk ) 15:20, 6 March 2024‎ (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - These sources on this page have enough coverage and It is a popular TV series.  103.121.36.12 ( talk ) 01:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - apparently this is a real, and popular, TV show, in a nation of 100+ million people.  We are not arbiters of taste .  It needs extensive editing, but not so bad as to rate starting from scratch .  Bearian ( talk ) 21:16, 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
Ravi Abeysuriya : I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 November 24 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 02:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Businesspeople , Sri Lanka ,  and Australia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Is this supposed to be a resume?  What is this?  This fails WP:BIO .  TarnishedPath talk 12:56, 24 November 2023 (UTC) Keep per sources shown below.  TarnishedPath talk 10:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Many in-depth news stories about him in national-level newspapers.  Appears to be a clear pass of WP:GNG .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:50, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  based on number of present references it should be kept.  See 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 , and 8 .  Royal88888 ( talk ) 22:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -  meets WP:GNG .  ~~ αvírαm | (tαlk) 11:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  I have seen credible sources about the subject and hence it should be complying with WP:GNG .  Abishe ( talk ) 00:02, 30 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: keep
The Oxford Belles : UtherSRG (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Women , United Kingdom ,  and England .  UtherSRG (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as the article now has some reviews and coverage in independent secondary sources, which help to satisfy WP:BAND , including the 2001 review in The Scotsman and the 2010 review in ScotsGay Magazine at the Edinburgh Fringe , plus the 2018 article in Mashable .  That said, more work could be done to improve the article, including adding more secondary sources about the organisation, and replacing the deadlinks.  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 11:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as there's enough turning up on a news search [33] to pass WP:GNG .  Jonathan A Jones ( talk ) 10:48, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:17, 16 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
Hitlist (2009 film) : Lack of reviews from RS.  ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️ Let's Talk !  17:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  CptViraj ( talk ) 17:10, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] at the very least redirect to Sandip Ray#Filmography . - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 18:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] --->changing to full Keep in the light of the at least 2 existing reviews presented by Eluchil404.  Thank you! - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 00:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   I found reviews in The Times of India [77] and the The Telegraph (India) [78] which look usable to me.   A search in Bengali should probably turn up some more.   If the sources are judged insufficient for some reason a redirect as suggested by User:Mushy Yank would still be appropriate.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 23:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] They both are not independent sources per Wikipedia:NFSOURCES .  ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️ Let's Talk !  16:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ? ??? - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 23:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: For further input on whether the sources meet the standards required.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 00:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per provided reviews.  Not particularly moved by the claim that they are "not independent".  Geschichte ( talk ) 08:11, 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: keep
The Right in Latin America: Elite Power, Hegemony and the Struggle for the State : NoonIcarus ( talk ) 11:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature , Politics , Ireland ,  and Latin America .  NoonIcarus ( talk ) 11:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The article was only created two days ago.  Have you considered adding appropriate tags to the article to give editors time to fix any problems that you have identified?  The notability criteria for books states that a book is notable if it "has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself".  The wikipage for the book includes two peer-reviewed articles about the book and an article published by Barcelona Centre for International Affairs , so it appears to meet the notability criteria.  Burrobert ( talk ) 13:42, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The problem is that these are not specific issues, but generalized ones.  Even if I ask, there is no way that more sources will be generated.  I've already tried looking for some per WP:BEFORE .  -- NoonIcarus ( talk ) 02:44, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : There do appear to be a few reviews cited in the receptions section. Checking if more on JSTOR. Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Five minute search shows reviews in: Latin American Politics and Society , Revista CIDOB d'Afers Internacionals Bulletin of Latin American Research , Journal of Latin American Studies . Satisfies WP:NBOOK + WP:NEXIST . Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk ) 02:45, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Goldsztajn.  Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!  12:36, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Pimalga : Boleyn ( talk ) 11:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Africa .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : this government report suggests that the place is a populated, legally recognized settlement, which is enough to meet WP:GEOLAND.  Owen× ☎ 16:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : "Even abandoned places can be notable", clearly passes WP:NPLACE .  AfD isn't cleanup .  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 21:18, 29 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: keep
KMAQ-FM : Radio stations need to meet the standards of WP:NCORP .  I found one source that appears good here , but nothing else.  Both WP:GNG and WP:NCORP require coverage from multiple sources, and that just isn't fulfilled here.  Additionally nominated per WP:BUNDLE : KMAQ (AM) .  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 13:11, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Iowa .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:15, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep both Both stations easily meet WP:NBROADCAST and not only did you not seek out any new sources outside one as required by WP:BEFORE , you didn't bring up any article concerns to anyone or use any talk pages, just straight to AfD.  Nate • ( chatter ) 15:34, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As an essay, NBROADCAST doesn‘t have the level of consensus behind it to establish notability on its own.  Even if it did, this is what it says: A licensed broadcast radio station must meet the general notability guideline.  In other words, what do you mean by „meets NBROADCAST“?  The fact that I mentioned a currently-unused source in the nomination quite clearly shows that I did in fact carry out a WP:BEFORE search; if I missed any relevant sources, please do link to them here for others to take a look.  It‘s a bit weird to me that you accuse me of being sloppy with the BEFORE search in direct contradiction with the nomination statement.  I‘m not aware of any requirement to „use talk pages“ before opening an AfD.  If you have a specific procedural concern, what is it?  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 16:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per MrSchimpf as well as past precedent for U.S. radio stations.  JPG-GR ( talk ) 16:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For my understanding, where is this precedent documented?  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 17:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per MrSchimpf & JPG-GR.  Stereorock ( talk ) 16:47, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I have added several substantial news clippings (which also should be ported to the AM article).  KMAQ-AM-FM got a few long profiles in the Quad Cities newspapers.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 21:53, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The best opinion I can offer with regard to the nomination itself is a weak keep per Sammi Brie, but I mainly wanted to point out two things: first, that these articles were split (itself contentiously; the split was reverted, and the reversion itself reverted) from a combined KMAQ article (that is now a disambiguation page), which is how they got onto the new page patrol 's radar and subsequently landed here; and second, that arguments based solely on NBROADCAST and BCASTOUTCOMES (which I think is the "past precedent" that JPG-GR was referring to) apparently are continuing to rely on pre-July 2021 versions (and again, NMEDIA in general is an essay ) that over-presumed notability for licensed broadcast stations.  A 2021 RfC established that this over-presumption was and is incorrect and GNG must be met (

Discussion outcome: keep