hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Melbourne International Festival of Brass: If someone can find them, I would be happy to not delete.  MarkiPoli ( talk ) 13:09, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  MarkiPoli ( talk ) 13:09, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nominator comment : Multiple sources were found in the previous AfD , but were never added to the article for some reason even after the decision was to keep the article.  MarkiPoli ( talk ) 13:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Events .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:32, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the sources found in the previous AfD - AFD is not cleanup.  Deus et lex ( talk ) 05:52, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  WP:NEXIST is quite clear on this matter: Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article.  The sources from the previous AfD seem to establish notability, and they don't need to be in the article for that.  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 10:51, 27 September 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!  01:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per WP:NEXIST .  Passes WP:SIGCOV per sources identified in first AFD.  WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP .  Not sure why this was relisted a second time.  This was an inappropriate re-nomination and is an entirely non-controversial close as keep.  4meter4 ( talk ) 18:18, 2 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: keep
Nicholas D'Agostino Sr.: All the sources are obituaries, and are routine or minor/non-significant coverage.  Suggest merging contents into D'Agostino Supermarkets that the subject founded and does have obvious notability.  Macktheknifeau ( talk ) 19:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America .  Macktheknifeau ( talk ) 19:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Italy and New York .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:12, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  A by-lined obituary in the New York Times is a pretty solid indication of notability and far from routine.  So is the entry in the Routledge Italian American encyclopedia.  pburka ( talk ) 19:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Pburka's comments on sourcing.  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 18:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with D'Agostino Supermarkets : The only two IS RS are the Routledge encyclopedia article and the NYT Obit, which depends heavily on the Routledge article, so basically one encyclopedia entry.  I don't think this is enough for a standalone article, especially when the content will fit so well into the target.  This seems like an unneeded CFORK, only makes readers chase links.  I tried to clean up the article and added inline citations.  // Timothy :: talk 10:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - boomers and Gen Xers in the NYC metropolitan area will remember his TV commercials and charity work.  That and the Times obit push him over notability.  Bearian ( talk ) 01:45, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Opinion is divided between those wanting to Keep the article and those pushing for a Merger.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - It looks like there are at least two sources providing SIGCOV of D'Agostino, and although their content is similar, I don't see that one depends on the other as one editor suggests.  Hatman31 ( talk ) 16:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Easily passes WP:GNG Lightburst ( talk ) 19:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Jetfire: [13] So he does not meet GNG.  Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 14:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 15:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Toys .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural Keep due to questionable motives of nominator and flood of similar nominations leaving no time for anyone to do non-Google research.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 19:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : It's a shame there is so much cruft in the existing article, but looking into this briefly, the whole Jetfire / Skyfire naming and the licensing conflicts between franchises and manufacturers make this guy's real-world story pretty interesting.   Some works that cover it: Den of Geek did probably the best job here , Gizmodo touched on it with a re-release , this book has seen some criticism for basic coverage on some characters (only stats), but the entry here provides the good real-world info.  A few more: Anime News Network coverage and a cartoon to film breakdown from ...yes... the dreaded Comic Book Resources (for what it's worth, this one is not a listicle piece, and actually reads with some decent insight).  There have to be some comic reviews to pull from, but there's clearly enough already that WP:NEXISTS to maintain this one.   The article should definitely be trimmed down outside AfD, though.  - 2pou ( talk ) 18:20, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] CBR is a strange site, in that they run a lot of social media listicle fodder but do have both good analysis, interviews and the like if you poke around.  The dismissal of it as a source outright in some AfDs has been somewhat unsettling, as most news websites run plenty of frivolous stuff to stay afloat.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 21:23, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per arguments presented by 2pou.  BOZ ( talk ) 18:37, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I appreciate the discussion must still run its course but it is worth noting that the nominator has been blocked for persistent bad faith actions.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 19:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as yes I agree that the Jetfire/Skyfire naming and the licensing conflicts make him a very interesting character indeed.  Davidgoodheart ( talk ) 02:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Idaho Green Party: Cannot inherit notability from parent organisation.  Lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" required per WP:ORGCRIT .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics , United States of America ,  and Idaho .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep a newspapers.com search comes up with more than 100 hits, multiyear reliable sourcing with SIGCOV easily identifiable, some examples: Green Party finds home in N. Idaho , Green Party to start drive for '92 ballot , Green Party wants higher minimum wage , Greens get petitions ready for signatures .  Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk ) 11:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sourcing cited by Goldsztajn.  Passes WP:GNG and WP:NORG .  Sal2100 ( talk ) 16:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Goldsztajn.  SportingFlyer T · C 17:23, 15 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
Flagship Airlines: I've checked the other language versions of this article and have seen nothing that would count as significant coverage.  Flux55 ( my talk page ) 21:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United States of America .  Flux55 ( my talk page ) 21:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Tennessee .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   At the time, it was one of four regional airlines that operated American Airlines's American Eagle brand with 135 aircraft operating scheduled passenger service from 4 hubs, according to the article even without doing a WP:BEFORE search.    The company employed between 1,100 and 1,200 pilots.   The article can use more and better references but that's not a reason to delete.   A quick Google search turns out enough reliable sources to easily pass WP:GNG .  RecycledPixels ( talk ) 01:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ RecycledPixels , can you find some that meet WP:RS and establish notability?  I suspect you may be right about notability, but without someone producing refs, we have to delete this article.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 20:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I found a good number of sources in ProQuest by searching "Flagship Airlines" Nashville , like this article about the company's history and this news story about the closure of its hub in Nashville.  Sunnya343 ( talk ) 07:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: For further input on the sources that have been presented.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  00:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep looks like there is coverage from what Sunny found.  I also remember a lot of content about this airline in Robert Serling's book Eagle about American Airlines.  Avgeekamfot ( talk ) 16:17, 5 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
Heart de Roommate: Single note posing as a reference.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:NGAMES .  - UtherSRG (talk) 16:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Japan .  UtherSRG (talk) 16:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep : Found contemporary coverage of the game in Russian here.  [17] There also seems to be a non-zero amount of coverage regarding this game's remaster, such as here (Brazilian), [18] , here, [19] and a rather girthy review here.  [20] , which could probably be conglomerated into this article (that doesn't seem to have been updated at all to reflect this remaster's release).  While it's no excuse if these articles don't win you over, I'd also like to mention that this is a relatively obscure 20 year old Japanese game with pornographic content, so finding contemporary sources regarding the game's original release, while possible, will likely require more effort than a casual skim on Google and Archive.org.  FlotillaFlotsam ( talk ) 12:16, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Extra comment : It seems that a subsidiary of Akella , a Russian games publisher, officially published Heart de Roommate in Russia in the mid-2000s, complete with an English-to-Russian TL.  (Russian) [21] This would be another avenue to seek out coverage of this game.  FlotillaFlotsam ( talk ) 15:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 17:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I've added three review citations to the article; one is from the Russian gaming magazine Strana Igr , one is from the J-List blog (appears to only be a blog in name; the website has multiple writers and editorial oversight), and one is from HonestGamers ' Jason Venter (whose contributions to HonestGamers are generally recognized as reliable, see [22] ). I also added information about the remaster, along with a reference from the Brazilian digital magazine GameBlast to substantiate it. This is far from perfect, but I believe it should be enough to meet WP:GNG , and I feel much better about voting Keep . As I found these with only an hour or two of scrounging around the internet, I'm confident I could find more domestic coverage of this game as well. FlotillaFlotsam ( talk ) 11:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Wingo (shooting): DirtyHarry991 ( talk ) 06:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I have found a number of citations which are now in the article, several of them (Daily Colonist, Florida Wildlife) quite substantial.   I'm prepared to change my vote if there are other policy-based objections to this article but it's certainly not uncited anymore.  Oblivy ( talk ) 07:11, 21 December 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!  06:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep And Rename.  My first thought was that this was an article about one more mass shooting, this time in place named Wingo.  Perhaps rename it to Wingo (sport shooting) or something like that.  — Maile ( talk ) 23:23, 30 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
Visit filter: Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 22:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing , Internet ,  and Software .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 22:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Web log analysis software : I don't see anything to merge, but if I'm wrong, go ahead and merge.  Owen× ☎ 01:38, 20 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
Captain Miller (soundtrack): Tame Rhino ( talk ) 13:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , sufficiently sourced.  The claim that "Sources are about the film" is hogwash.  You have not argued to support that it's "not a hit".  Geschichte ( talk ) 18:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The article contains refs to reliable sources about the soundtrack that seem enough to justify a standalone page.  I would not be shocked if that was redirected, though, size and navigability permitting.  But the problem would be that the redirected material would run the risk of being challenged as giving undue weight to the music.... .  (Opposed to deletion)- My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 19:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note : The page has been substantially improved since nomination. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 20:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] keep keep per Mushy Yank rationale-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk ) 21:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article is well sourced and was accepted during AfC.  The nominator has only joined this year, and has made hardly 30 edits, most are AfDs.  Kailash29792 (talk) 21:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Fancade: After that, there is no coverage, since I couldn't find anything else.  Everything is written like a blatant advertisement WP:IBA .  Chiserc ( talk ) 17:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Chiserc ( talk ) 17:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG with a lack of significant coverage.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 17:42, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  The sources there in terms of secondary information about the game are pretty minimal.  But it's got Macworld , Touch Arcade , and Android Central coverage, in addition to the Google Play award, which counts for something.  There's not really a parent article that would be a suitable merge target.  Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 21:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Touch Arcade is very "I haven't played all of it yet but it looks cool" which is pretty unconvincing to me especially since they apparently didn't bother to revisit it.  Getting a few reviews in RS is usually not a massively high bar.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 11:33, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  In addition to the sources David found, I also found this .  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 23:52, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep , per David Fuchs.  It does not look like a whole lot, but there is at least something.  jp × g 17:32, 17 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!  23:19, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep the sources are borderline.  But they convince me there is enough WP:POTENTIAL for an article.  If more references don't appear, I would support a re-nomination or merge discussion at a later time.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 14:46, 18 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
North West Men's League: Can't seem to find any sources for this or relevant information elsewhere on Wikipedia.  Article unreferenced and unvarifyable, WP:TNT may apply.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 19:12, 11 June 2024 (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/2024 June 11 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 19:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rugby league and England .  Owen× ☎ 00:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Update after 1 week : Establish how it fits into the British rugby league system plus found a few sources not yet added - Keep .  Mn1548 ( talk ) 16:30, 18 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
TNT Sports 4: I would opt to delete and merge the contents with either TNT Sports (United Kingdom) or ESPN in the United Kingdom as these articles would be more suitable for this content.  S. Salim ( talk ) 01:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  S. Salim ( talk ) 01:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and United Kingdom .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Still a well-active channel, and its past WP:N is not lost at all despite going from its own entity as ESPN to a suite channel with TNT.  The sourcing is beyond adequate.  Nate • ( chatter ) 00:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Channel has a standalone, GNG-meeting history before being rolled into TNT Sports.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 05:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It is the backstory to this channel that makes this article notable although there is an argument to rename it as ESPN UK (or similar).  Rillington ( talk ) 05:23, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep it was a separate, independently notable channel.  The fact that it's now been rebranded into the TNT Sports family doesn't take away from the historic notability.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 10:06, 17 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