hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Radix malorum est cupiditas: I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 12 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 04:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Merge back into Love of money and keep the Latin phrase as a redirect to it.  Mccapra ( talk ) 04:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I considered merging initially but aside from the Greek the information is original research, also the Latin given in the article is incorrect: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/? search=1+Timothy+6%3A10&version=VULGATE Traumnovelle ( talk ) 07:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the points made by Tramnovelle.  Mccapra ( talk ) 12:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language , Finance ,  and Christianity .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , no merge.  The omission of enim is inconsequential but the omission of omnium is not.  We don't have evidence that the Latin version of this line is independently notable from the line in all its translations (and if it were notable it would be notable under the Vulgate wording).  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , per WP:SIGCOV , or if needed, redirect to Love of money .  It is basically a WP:FORK .  Bearian ( talk ) 17:23, 15 April 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
Jonas Vollmer: It reads like a CV and sources are all primary or links to minor awards won by the subject, I could not identify any non-primary sources.  Gnisacc ( talk ) 00:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete tagged since 2015?!  Delete for not meeting NBIO, zero sources found.  What's given in the article is primary sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:56, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Oaktree b.  It's surprising the article lasted so long.  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Germany .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Oaktree b.  Yasal Shahid ( talk ) 16:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE .  ✗ plicit 00:30, 7 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
No Guidnce: Lack of WP:SIGCOV , fails WP:NBAND , although that's not to say that we can't re-create in the future.  -- wooden superman 12:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  -- wooden superman 12:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Very PROMO.  There is some traction [13] , it's way TOOSOON for this group.  If they hit it big, we can revisit.  Just not notable at this point in time.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete (for now) - This one is closer than it looks, because they have introductory stories in some reliable music magazines, such as [14] (already cited in the article), [15] , [16] .  This indicates a massive record company/management effort if anything.  For now it is WP:TOOSOON but I agree with the folks above that the article could be revisited later, IF that promotional push leads to real world results.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:30, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  Definitely TOOSOON.  If the article is correct about that Capitol Records signing then they'll probably get more attention later just from the amount of promo that label can afford putting it in front of critics' eyes.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 05:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete References are standard new-release hype, not indicative of any kind of accomplishment other than existence with a promotional budget.  TOOSOON at best.  ShelbyMarion ( talk ) 21:27, 15 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
KIMG-LD: Let'srun ( talk ) 18:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California .  Let'srun ( talk ) 18:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No local SIGCOV.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 20:55, 15 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
EGM Green: This company has somehow survived two AfDs despite failing the notability guidelines for companies .  The available sources are thinly-veiled press releases, not providing genuinely independent coverage.  – Tera tix ₵ 13:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games , Companies , Environment ,  and New Jersey .  – Tera tix ₵ 13:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree with you that the sources are not very reliable and they (including the article itself) all seem like a big advetisement.  Have you found any good sources anywhere that are reliable?  Because I don't believe this exactly needs to be deleted, but it might be able to be improved.  Coulomb1 ( talk ) 14:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I've had a thorough look in all the usual places you'd expect to find sources on this sort of company and found no decent sources.  They're all either associated with the company or regurgitating its press releases.  – Tera tix ₵ 14:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah, I think a delete is a viable option.  Everything about this corporation is a big ad.  Coulomb1 ( talk ) 14:23, 11 July 2024 (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 13:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Press releases pop up about once every 5-6 years in the card gaming press.  Not enough business traction for notability.  MNewnham ( talk ) 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
Heightened Senses: Looks like as self-promo SPA - Altenmann >talk 22:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy , Literature ,  and Internet .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources .  I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the subject in my searches for sources.  The subject does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (books)#Criteria .  Cunard ( talk ) 05:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : article seems to basically be one long plot summary without any external input.  If anyone wanted to read all that, then they could just read the story itself.  -- D'n'B - t -- 07:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete it lacks verifiable sources and reliable references, making it difficult to confirm the accuracy of the information. Additionally, the topic is too broad and speculative, leading to vague and unsubstantiated claims that do not meet Wikipedia's notability and verifiability standards. -- Assirian cat ( talk ) 08:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks of significant coverage in reliable sources .  Dowrylauds ( talk ) 18:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
IC 3686: C messier ( talk ) 14:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  ‹ hamster717🐉 › ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠 ) 16:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : yet another galaxy that is in a bunch of catalog papers but not notable itself.  - Parejkoj ( talk ) 17:53, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : it shows up in a couple of studies, but without substantial coverage.  Praemonitus ( talk ) 13:39, 25 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
Nissar Ahmed: Fails WP:GNG Jupitus Smart 12:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Businesspeople , India ,  and Karnataka .  Jupitus Smart 12:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There was a poet with the same name that died recently; this individual isn't notable.  No sourcing found.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  WP is not a "Who's Who" book for business-directory listings.   Restore the original disambiguation page [13] (we have one notable bio already, and another is a redlink but needs to be an article).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 12:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non-notable person, fails WP:GNG .  DreamRimmer ( talk ) 13:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  -- SM7 --talk-- 18:46, 3 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
Practical Help Achieving Self Empowerment: A search in google news and books yields very little, and not enough to meet WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 02:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education , Nepal ,  and Austria .  LibStar ( talk ) 02:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The org has one (1) hit in the Austrian joint library system, a 2012 article in the British Journal of General Practice about improving primary care services in rural Nepal, doi:10.3399/bjgp12X656892, written by a PHASE employee.  I don't think the Austrian connection is going to be able to contribute much in terms of establishing notability.  GR Kraml ( talk ) 04:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:38, 14 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!  04:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 04:12, 28 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: delete
Mansour Al-Baloushi: Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 15:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and Oman .  Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 15:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 19:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Support per nom.  Not notable enough according to WP:NATH and WP:GNG .  -- WellThisIs TheReaper Grim 00:32, 23 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
Saint Thomas Christian names: UtherSRG (talk) 21:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity , India ,  and Kerala .  UtherSRG (talk) 21:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete in its current form .  Agree with the nominator and the views expressed at the previous AFD, that this is unadulterated WP:OR .  I cannot even stub the article to a 1-2 sentence sourced summary, because (afaict) nothing pertaining to its supposed subject is currently sourced.  And the article has existed for so long that it is hard to find non-circular references on the web, and a quick google-books and jstor search turned up nothing.  @ അദ്വൈതൻ : please ping me if you, or anyone else, rewrites the article to make it verifiable and reliable sourced, and I'll be happy to re-evaluate my ! vote.  Abecedare ( talk ) 21:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as nom of the prior AfD resulting in a "soft delete".  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 22:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Several comments seem confused, believing the reason this article is at AfD is because it might be a hoax.  The reason for this and the last AfD were both regarding the exclusively original research nature of this article.  While there are certainly St. Thomas Christian naming customs, we don't seem to have any reliable sources for this topic.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 18:11, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per preceeding comments.  GoldenBootWizard276 ( talk ) 23:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge or simply redirect to Saint Thomas Christians .  These naming conventions are something I've seen personally in an immigrant Indian family.  Obviously the article is a mess and could be cited better, but it's not a hoax.  Jclemens ( talk ) 23:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If kept, rename -- Suggest Naming conventions among St Thomas Christians .   I would suggest that this is a legitimate article.   The previous AFD had little discussion, so that its outcome tells us little.   The AFD should probably have been relisted, rather than closed.  Peterkingiron ( talk ) 17:40, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as suggested.  It's a bit of a mess right now , but the material is clearly not a hoax.  It's more of an essay about a barely notable topic .  Bearian ( talk ) 17:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails GNG, we should not be merging unsourced WP:OR into another article, but no objection to a redirect.  // Timothy :: talk 04:12, 19 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
Ottley Laborde: Laborde's claims to fame appear to be his appearance in The Other Final and an award he received for his service in the RMPS.  He is also the VP of the Montserrat Football Association , but all of the coverage of that role is incredibly superficial.  There is simply no in-depth coverage in secondary, reliable sources.  Jogurney ( talk ) 14:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Might be notable per WP:ANYBIO /1, but I agree that the lack of meaningful coverage is a problem.  I don't know what the exact significance of the award is within the context of his service, so I will not express a judgement.  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 14:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] My read on that award was that it was for his years of service, not for some particular achievement.  If that kind of award is enough for ANYBIO, then yikes hundreds of thousands of long-serving municipal workers will be eligible for articles.  Jogurney ( talk ) 15:16, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Caribbean .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No sign of notability.  -- Random person no 362478479 ( talk ) 16:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:41, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per ANYBIO.-- Ortizesp ( talk ) 18:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , obviously generic service awards given to hundreds of thousands of people do not qualify for ANYBIO. GNG is not met either. JoelleJay ( talk ) 20:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, fails BIO and GNG. Sources in article are brief mentions, BEFORE showed stats, mentions, but nothing that meets IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' ; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk 01:51, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Charles Bahr: Ungeruehrt ( talk ) 22:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Germany .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:06, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete professional profile ( WP:NOTLINKEDIN ) with a twist of BLP WP:CRIME issues.  — siro χ o 04:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just to follow up, I've removed the portion that ran afoul of WP:CRIME .  — siro χ o 07:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article is meant for promotional activities (professional life); should be deleted since it defies the purpose of Wikipedia.  Ekdalian ( talk ) 07:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NOTLINKEDIN .  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 21:41, 4 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
Sumeja Bektaš: The closest thing to WP:SIGCOV I found in my searches was this transactional announcement.  Everything else that came up was passing mentions ( 1 , 2 , 3 , etc.) JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:07, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Bosnia and Herzegovina .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:07, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:40, 13 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: delete
James Fishback: Fails WP:GNG , only secondary source is a few quotes in Fox News, all of the others are blogs/podcasts/primary sources Reflord ( talk ) 19:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Florida .  Shellwood ( talk ) 20:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agree.  Not notable and does not merit an article.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 01:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete footnotes one, five, and fifteen mention him in passing in one sentence.  which WP:BIO says doesn't qualify.  Footnote two is the New York Post and very biased, literally using the phrase "lefty censors" [2] which violates WP:NPOV .  I'll also echo failing WP:GNG .  Footnotes five, ten, eleven, and twelve are all Fox News.  While footnotes six, seven, and eight provide detail about a lawsuit he's involved in, this isn't "worthy of notice," "remarkable," or "significant" per WP:BIO .  These are the sources that another commenter added.  I would respond directly to that but I don't see the reply button on their comment.  KickAffs TakeNegs ( talk ) 09:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I added a few more WP:RS to boost notability.  Hence WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV are met.  All the sources used prove the subject met the demands of WP:BIO , WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV Here are the 3 new sources added as extra: [1] [2] [3] References ^ Jack Raines, "Schrödinger's head of macro" .  sherwood.news .  Retrieved 21 May 2024 .  ^ "SGreenlight Capital's clash with an ex-employee has captivated the hedge-fund world" .  fnlondon.com .  Retrieved 21 May 2024 .  ^ Bradley Saacks, "David Einhorn was once the young thorn in the side of executives. Now he's dealing with his own" .  businessinsider.com.  17 May 2024 .  Retrieved 21 May 2024 .  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