hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Michael Lodahl: WorldCat is not useful for establishing notability , yet it is the only source for the entire article.  Just Step Sideways from this world .... .  today 18:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Christianity .  Just Step Sideways from this world .... .  today 18:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California , Idaho ,  and Missouri .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No secondary, independent coverage in either news outlets or the literature .  Fails both WP:ANYBIO and WP:NPROF through a dearth of third-party coverage and lack of overall recognition within their field (no honours, chair, or nat. biog entry, significant contribution,  etc).  ——Serial Number 54129 19:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] comment I see that his book Shekhinah/Spirit attracted some attention though I couldn't say how influential it eventually proved.  Mangoe ( talk ) 19:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Being held in a library isn't notable, but could point towards notability.  Unfortunately, I've tried and been unable to find "Shekhinah/spirit : divine presence in Jewish and Christian religion" book reviews.  A zillion hits on where to buy the book, no proof of scholarly notice.  I don't see AUTHOR being met.  Gscholar and Jstor came up blank.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nomination.  Noorullah ( talk ) 00:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Again, I have to stress that having a single source is tantamount to being original research , which everyone knows we just don't do.  Call it a day here .  Bearian ( talk ) 18:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 12:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nomination Waqar 💬 19:18, 2 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
Veronika Maksimenko: No evidence of WP:GNG or WP:SPORTBASIC and never appeared to have been a key footballer for Kazakhstan, playing only 155 mins in 5 matches in one campaign before disappearing.  The only coverage that I could find was Olympic , which is a squad list mention and confirmation of receiving a yellow card.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Kazakhstan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:16, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:12, 10 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
Veronica Cintron: In my BEFORE, I could only find mentions related to her work at the airport.  The Emmy awards might be notable but they were regional and I wasn't prepared to watch a video to see if this claim was verified.  L iz Read!  Talk!  02:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Florida .  L iz Read!  Talk!  02:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete .  This article as it stands is a collection of trivia and needs to be completely rewritten.  (I removed a link to a Wordpress blog among the references.)  Two sources might be said to clear the WP:GNG bar: the Tampa Bay Times piece and the Tampa Bay Business Journal article covering her hiring at the airport are both significant coverage of her in secondary, independent, reliable sources.  The rest of the sources are trivial mentions (and the "Guide to Tampa Bay" profile is basically a marketing promo ).  I could probably be persuaded to keep based on the TBT/TBBJ references, but looking at all the sources in context as required, the subject appears to be a WP:RUNOFTHEMILL local broadcast journalist/corporate PR professional whose career does not warrant an article.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 02:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Television ,  and Puerto Rico .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I thought there would be more coverage of her time as a news anchor, but apparently not.  BrigadierG ( talk ) 13:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  I agree there are two sources that satisfy GNG, per Dclemens1971.  A lot of the trivia, specifically any cited by an unreliable source, should be removed.  It might make the result a stub but there’s plenty of room for stubs , if they are notable (which, admittedly is determined by consensus).  Zsinj Talk 02:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Malinaccier ( talk ) 19:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I'm not impressed with the local Emmy win.  The position held at the airport is non-notable, otherwise, she's simply a local reporter.  Seems to be good at her job, I'm just not sure it rises to the level of notability for a wikipedia article.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:22, 13 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
Charles Purdy: Fails WP:AUTHOR .  Schierbecker ( talk ) 04:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:11, 17 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
Kai-man Kwan: 日期20220626 ( talk ) 22:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  日期20220626 ( talk ) 22:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Christianity ,  and Hong Kong .  Shellwood ( talk ) 00:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The nomination statement is faulty in several ways: it is about sources in the article, but WP:GNG -based notability is about sources that can be found elsewhere, not just the ones that have already been used, and WP:PROF -based notability is largely not about independence of sources.  That said, we don't seem to have evidence of WP:PROF: ignoring the business theorist with the same name, he isn't well cited enough for #C1, and his administrative position is not high enough for #C6.  Not counting his dissertation, he appears to have one book, The Rainbow of Experiences , and I only found one review of it, doi : 10.5840/faithphil201229448 , not enough for WP:AUTHOR .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 08:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If I could find another good source I wouldn't make a request to delete the article.  日期20220626 ( talk ) 00:09, 29 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
List of statues in Kollam: WP:NOTGALLERY applies.  Most of the statues do not appear to be individually notable and I don’t see anything to indicate that they are discussed anywhere as a set.  Mccapra ( talk ) 22:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and India .  Mccapra ( talk ) 22:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Nothing more to add really, pretty self explanitory.  CoconutOctopus talk 12:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep ; this is really a list of public art – with several reliefs – rather than of statues, and should be renamed.  There are several other such lists at Category:Lists of public art .  Ham II ( talk ) 16:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment None of these link to an article about them, just either an article about the person they are based on, or a location a relief is found at.   If coverage can be found about these places, rename the article for public artwork in Kollam or Statues and reliefs in Kollam .  D r e a m Focus 19:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The list has murals, too; I would argue for List of public art in Kollam , like all the examples here .  Ham II ( talk ) 20:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Ham II.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 23:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is reading like a travel guide and all listed statues are non notable.  killer bee 15:05, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom WP:NOTGALLERY applies.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 00:43, 18 January 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!  22:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non notable pictures this is not commons and NOTGALLERY applies.  27.4.112.164 ( talk ) 07:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
AviaAM Leasing: Not a single ref passes WP:SIRS .  Before is a similar message.  scope_creep Talk 23:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Transportation ,  and Lithuania .  Owen× ☎ 00:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:08, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non notable.  Llajwa ( talk ) 16:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Weak Delete is notable as an aviation company; while the sourcing is not the best here, a random Google search, especially in local newspapers or languages, shows pretty much coverage in reliable national media.  -- BoraVoro ( talk ) 13:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What coverage would that be exactly?  I've already a pretty comprehensive WP:BEFORE and I didn't see much at all.  Have you got three per WP:THREE that can prove its notable.  scope_creep Talk 19:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP THREE is an essay, not a rule/guideline.  BoraVoro ( talk ) 08:08, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:THREE was cofirmed as best practice per consensus last summer.  If you have evidence post it up.  I don't think you do.  I do think your a UPE though.  scope_creep Talk 09:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Can you please send me that discussion, I would be glad to see it.  I recently found out, that essays are not good way to discuss, that's why I do not rely on them.  Also, don't blame in UPE me, it's not nice :) but I do see why you think so, as I am not for Deletion.  You wanna change my mind?  :) I may change the vote, but don't want to mess around with Keep Delete.  However, I do agree with the decision to delete the page - I did research more to prove my claim and found very little (regarding reliable sources).  BoraVoro ( talk ) 10:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Changed to Weak Delete - agree with @ Scope creep and don't object WP:THREE rule to be applied here.  BoraVoro ( talk ) 10:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Rather astonishingly, for a company that apparently operates 10 A320s, it is surprisingly bereft of RS, though the article is heavily WP:REFBOMBed in a way that creates an initial appearance to the contrary.  Chetsford ( talk ) 05:35, 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: delete
Duran Çetin: Kadı Message 15:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Literature ,  and Turkey .  Kadı Message 15:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Professional profile, WP:NOTLINKEDIN .  Even if sources are found, requires TNT.  — siro χ o 06:12, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  fyi, Turkish Wikipedia has deleted this article once already, and is discussing it again: [26] .  -- asilvering ( talk ) 22:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  Cross-wiki spam left over from 2011.  No sources or anything to pass the GNG or NAUTHOR.  Styyx ( talk ) 09:54, 24 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
Edward Parker (police officer): Welcome to Pandora ( talk ) 09:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Seem to be police officers all over the world with this name...  I get hits from the US, Australia and elsewhere, but nothing for this person.  I'm not seeing more than a one or two line biography here, unsure of the notability.  Lack of sourcing isn't helpful.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify Coverage here in the Sydney Morning Herald from 1930 including biographical information [45] .   A google books search focused on "Edward Parker" and "Special Branch" does identify a number of hits ( [46] ).   There is potential for meeting notability guidelines therefore as an WP:ATD I suggest moving to draftspace for incubation.  Resonant Dis tor tion 10:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Leaning toward delete based on discussion so far, but at least a little more discussion would help.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  22:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not sure of any notability here.  Vorann Gencov ( talk ) 07:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Procedural relist to rescue lost AfD Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 02:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : didn't find coverage either.  — Alien333 ( what I did & why I did it wrong ) 17:08, 13 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
Peter Armit: A search on Google newspaper archive found several mentions in the Evening Times but nothing approaching sigcov.  A search on www-newspapers-com.  found more mentions but it was just routine coverage such as transfers/injuries/match reports.  Dougal18 ( talk ) 12:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Scotland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:58, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:09, 31 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
Shashankan Mayyanad: Has done small roles in multiple movies, but nothing of note.  The references also do not indicate notability is met.  Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG Jupitus Smart 14:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , India ,  and Kerala .  Jupitus Smart 14:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete IMDb cannot be cited as a reference.  The other given sources lack SIGCOV.  Interviews are primary unreliable source.  𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 15:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 18:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG .  Maliner ( talk ) 06:53, 28 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: delete
List of fictional brewers: I've done some searches, and I can find no evidence that the topic of fictional brewers or breweries have been discussed in reliable sources as an actual topic or as a group or set.  (Though I did learn that there is a real-life brewery named the "Fiction Beer Company").  The sources included in this article are only on a couple of the specific entries, not on the topic as a whole, and most of them are either non-reliable, or barely mention the actual beer brewing.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 18:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Food and drink .  Rorshacma ( talk ) 18:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Articles don't point to actual fictional brewer articles, they just point to the programme it featured on.  Fails WP:LISTN .  Ajf773 ( talk ) 09:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No sign of meeting LISTN.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 17:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Only Duff Beer has its own article.  D r e a m Focus 18:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete just isn't a topic with WP:SIGCOV .  WP:NOTDATABASE applies to lists of examples like this, and it doesn't help that most of them are unsourced.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 21:25, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Dubious importance.  Abhishek0831996 ( talk ) 06:44, 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
Presidency English School: No significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL .  2 provided sources are non reliable: its own website and Facebook.  LibStar ( talk ) 04:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Question : has the nominator WP:BEFORE?  Jack4576 ( talk ) 05:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would read the sentence No significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL.  as a BEFORE finding.  AllyD ( talk ) 05:29, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Schools ,  and Maharashtra .  AllyD ( talk ) 05:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Fails WP:NSCHOOL , and no reliable sources can be found in the article.  CycloneYoris talk!  10:38, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NSCHOOL NortonAngo ( talk ) 15:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete with fire.  Promotional with primary sources.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 17:08, 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: delete
Genus (comics): BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 21:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Comics and animation .  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 21:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - not seeing any reliable coverage in independent sources - does not appear to meet WP:GNG .  — Ganesha811 ( talk ) 13:19, 22 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