hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Chit San Maung (footballer) : The match reports provided do not address Chit San Maung in any significant detail and my own WP:BEFORE searches in both Burmese (ချစ်စမ်းမောင်) and English are not finding anything about the footballer of this name but plenty about Chit San Maung (guitarist) instead.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Myanmar .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 14:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article fails WP:GNG per my BEFORE search.  Jogurney ( talk ) 20:49, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - per WP:NOTTEMPORARY .  Subject of article has played in a fully professional league and in the continental competition.  Arbetrairly deciding that this article doesn't meet notablility guidlines anymore goes against Wikipedia's own standards.  Inter&anthro ( talk ) 15:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It is not an arbitrary decision.  Please see WP:NSPORTS2022 where the community decided to deprecate WP:NFOOTBALL back in March 2022.  Playing competitive football at any level is insufficient to satisfy our notability guidelines.  Jogurney ( talk ) 15:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Jogurney is correct.  If anyone wishes for this to be kept, please provide sources showing significant coverage of this footballer.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:38, 18 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!  19:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - I've just read WP:NOTTEMPORARY and the relevant part is Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.  How does this support the keeping of this article?  There is no evidence of any significant coverage and nobody is suggesting that it meets the general notability guideline ( WP:GNG ).  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:31, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Actualcpscm ( talk ) 20:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , searching in the subject's native language did not reveal GNG coverage, so an article is not warranted.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 20:30, 30 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
Hanul Science Museum : Idk what the Korean name for it is, but I've tried a number of alt spellings and have nothing toobigtokale ( talk ) 03:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries and South Korea .  toobigtokale ( talk ) 03:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Unverifiable.  The "Official site" is an archive link that redirects to a blog.  The blog suggests that the Korean name is "한얼테마박물관" (machine translation says "Haneol Theme Museum"), which appears to be in Yeoju , not Seoul as the article claims.  [16] .  So who knows if "한얼테마박물관" is even the actual subject of this article; in any case it does not appear to be notable.  Jfire ( talk ) 03:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:37, 25 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
Gary Epesso : The best sources that I could find in Philippine media were Dugout , a passing mention, and a Wordpress blog , which is neither reliable nor significant.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Democratic Republic of the Congo .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 10:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : not enough reliable sources EncyclopediaEditorXIV ( talk ) 13:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Unable to find any WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I am unable to find enough coverage to meet WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 02:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per above.  Svartner ( talk ) 06:35, 17 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
AIR News : Uncited , orphan article.  A before search only brings up primary cites.  Moronterei ( talk ) 03:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Radio ,  and Australia .  Kpg jhp jm 06:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , radioinfo , influencing .  But Artie Stevens might be primary topic.  Feels like low effort nom?  IgelRM ( talk ) 15:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:41, 23 June 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!  05:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Half the article is an unsourced station list of what is an on-hire news service merely there for AU stations to carry to fulfill basic license guidelines and with no real designs to do more than rip and read the wire and provide a couple of standard music countdowns.  Nate • ( chatter ) 00:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete cannot find sources to meet GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 16:47, 7 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
List of Formula 4 champions : Unnecessary WP:FANCRUFT list that is only good for the most obsessive motorsport fans, also WP:LC and WP:NOTDIRECTORY applies.  Also, not notable enough to pass WP:LISTN , in fact fails all requirements.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 11:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Lists of people , Sports , Motorsport ,  and Lists .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 11:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – As I said on the first nomination in this set of articles, this is a very straightforward delete.  Procedure wise, this could definitely have been handled as a batch nomination as the reasoning is identical for all articles of this type.  5225 C ( talk • contributions ) 09:39, 23 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
Old Hill, Indiana : Searching finds a cemetery that's in Brazil (IN), an old hill, and various juxtapositions, and lots of real estate hits, but nothing whatsoever that says anything I can clearly attribute to this place.  Mangoe ( talk ) 23:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment :  I did some editing and adding of sources.   I would conclude based on what I've seen so far that "Old Hill" is really just a place name, though at times rural residents may be credited as living in the "Old Hill" area.   It is a known local topographic feature/location.   Since it appears as a place name on USGS maps, it creeped into GNIS and later wikipedia. -- Milowent • has spoken 19:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Milowent is correct, geo feature.  James.folsom ( talk ) 00:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - this is a farmstead or neighborhood.  There are a few sources, but nothing significant .  See also my standards .  Bearian ( talk ) 15:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:NGEO .  Contributor892z ( talk ) 17:05, 3 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
Romanian exonyms : Say, why wikipedia must teach that Jordan is called Iordania in Romanian?  - Altenmann >talk 01:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language , Lists ,  and Romania .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Surely Wikipedia is even right place for this subject.  Orientls ( talk ) 16:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE .  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 17:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - This is basically a dictionary // Replayful ( talk | contribs ) 19:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as unsourced WP:OR .  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 15:20, 4 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This AfD was moved to the correct title without creating a redirect.  I am correcting incoming links.  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 13:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Done – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 13:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Split rock of Horeb : There are a lot of sources, but they are either fringe or seem to be about something else.  I've left one source in the article as an example - the Fox News article is really a publicity piece about a travel tour run by someone who claims to have found the real location of Mt. Sinai.  His book cites people like Ron Wyatt [24] Doug Weller talk 18:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Archaeology .  Doug Weller talk 18:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism , Religion , Geography ,  and Saudi Arabia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Split rock of Horeb is just one of many natural split rocks that can be found in many arid environments.  Lacks reliable sources, as noted above, that demonstrate that this specific split rock has either any cultural, historical, archaeological, geological, or geomorphic significance.  Paul H. ( talk ) 00:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  This is unlikely to be the real Split Rock of Horeb, but it has been the topic of some coverage, and may well pass GNG as an interesting-looking rock that is the topic of a local legend.  If this claimant to the title of Split Rock of Horeb has a different official name, move the article to that title.  There is no corresponding article in Arabic for the title انشقاق صخرة حوريب I see several Google hits for انشقاق صخرة حوريب  , but I cannot evaluate them.

Discussion outcome: delete
Fafe shooting : A shooting with no fatalities (and many on WP not me believe number dead is an indicator of notability).  LibStar ( talk ) 05:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime , Events ,  and Portugal .  LibStar ( talk ) 05:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I couldn't find anything WP:INDEPTH or WP:LASTING coverage for it, including for legal processes.  Everything seems to have been from the days or a few days after.  Shaws username .  talk .  16:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No lasting coverage, which I would argue (alongside national/international coverage) is the important thing to establish notability for mass shootings.  Lettlre ( talk ) 17:09, 28 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
John Type : Also unable to find significant, if any, secondary sources outside of the current one.  SmittenGalaxy ( talk ) 01:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV .  ADifferentMan ( talk ) 04:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Zimbabwe .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I cannot find any RS online to bring this to notable.  Fails WP:ARTIST . -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 01:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per the above.  No reliable sources support encyclopedic notability.  BD2412 T 01:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Lincoln City Police Department (Oregon) : Small police department in a small town.  Coverage is only run of the mill .  The content is poor enough that it's been turned into a redirect to Lincoln City, Oregon in the past, which doesn't even mention the police department once.  See also Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_17#Lincoln_City_Police_Department_(Oregon) .  tedder ( talk ) 16:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Oregon .  tedder ( talk ) 16:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete due to notability issues.  LegalSmeagolian ( talk ) 18:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominator.  I cannot find coverage that isn't routine in nature, or otherwise expected of a police department of any size.  I do not believe merging or redirecting to Lincoln City, Oregon is a viable alternative due to lack of worthwhile material and lack of mention of the police station in said article.  Open to changing my mind per WP:THREE .  — Sirdog ( talk ) 03:58, 26 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
NetLingo : Does not meet the multiple (and/or) sustained in-depth coverage bar for GNG .  Sohom ( talk ) 09:16, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language , Companies , Internet ,  and Websites .  Sohom ( talk ) 09:19, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Even the reference from The New York Times fails WP:ORGCRIT .  I cannot locate anything in a search to show how this would meet notability guidelines.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 06:22, 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
Northern England supercity : The article now seems to be about two things, one a proposed Northern England Supercity from 2004 which went nowhere (a topic which I think fails the General Notablity Guidelines) and the Manchester-Liverpool Megalopolis (Manpool) and uses original research to combine the two ideas into one article.  Eopsid ( talk ) 15:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete agree that it doesn't meet WP:GNG and while the article has been changed since, I pointed out in the talk concerning the move that the references aren't great and point to WP:SYNTH .  Orange sticker ( talk ) 17:30, 15 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
Pieter Louw : JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A few match reports, but coverage does seem to be limited to them.  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:55, 29 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
Ariel Giles : Article does not meet WP:SPORTSBASIC or WP:GNG and there does not appear to be WP:SIGCOV on the subject.  Highest level of play was the second level of the Chilean system and third level of the Argentina system.  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 15:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Argentina .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 15:43, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:38, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  However saying it is unreferenced is incorrect.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:34, 22 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
Rudy Poat : Terrible references.  No coverage at all apart from single interview.  UPE scope_creep Talk 09:25, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Technology , Netherlands ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Available coverage consists of passing mentions regarding his involvement in The Matrix and an interview in Game Developer.  No awards or other major contributions that would fulfill notability for creative professionals.  Mooonswimmer 13:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am sure we could find more references, but he led the special effects team on the first The Matrix movie which I thought was amazing and notable.  Stravensky ( talk ) 22:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Unless there is WP:SECONDARY coverage, people talking to other people about the subject but who don't know the subject.  That is gold standard.  So in this case, no.  The subject fails WP:BIO .  There is zero coverage, not even enought to reach WP:THREE which by consensus is considered best practice, to prove the person notable.  scope_creep Talk 09:17, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I can find mentions confirming credits, but nothing that amounts to significant coverage.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 23:04, 25 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
Biraj Bhattarai : NO RELIABLE SOURCES Worldiswide ( talk ) 02:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 May 23 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 02:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Nepal .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions .  nirmal ( talk ) 13:24, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete Fails WP:GNG with no reliable sources.  I have tagged it for speedy deletion due to unambiguous promotion.  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 06:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete clearly fails WP:PROMOTION and WP:GNG Alexcs114 ( talk ) 08:20, 30 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