hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Oona Garthwaite: The only claim of notability being attempted here is television soundtrack placements, which is the one criterion in NMUSIC that explicitly undermines itself with a "not enough if it's all they have" override -- but there's nothing else of note being stated here at all, and the only footnotes are primary or unreliable verification of the soundtrack placements and one Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person, none of which are support for notability in the absence of any WP:GNG -worthy third party coverage in real media.  Bearcat ( talk ) 15:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America .  Bearcat ( talk ) 15:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Found two sources [15] and [16] , but more about the band then this person.  I'm not seeing GNG either for the band or this singer.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:44, 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
Kapilakshi Malhotra: US-Verified ( talk ) 13:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Women ,  and India .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 13:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions .  𝘚𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘮𝘈𝘺𝘩𝘢𝘯07 16:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, Fails GNG and BIO.  Lots of promo refs but nothing from IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk 08:25, 16 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
KCIB-LD: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 12:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Christianity ,  and Arkansas .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 12:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Lacking significant in-depth coverage to satisfy notability requirements.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 13:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Can't find significant references.  It won't pass WP:GNG Hkkingg ( talk ) 11:09, 18 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
Portland and Western 1853: There are three unique references.  Two are simply lists that mention the locomotive without any SIGCOV.  The third source is a SELFPUB blog that also lacks SIGCOV (part of what the source is used to verify is actually referencing a reply to the linked blog post).  This is a non-notable train article by an IP who has used multiple GAMING and socking tactics across multiple drafts and AfDs.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 23:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Oregon .  Pbritti ( talk ) 23:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Not independently notable.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 00:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Much as I like trains, this engine is not notable enough for a Wikipedia entry.  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  SIGCOV is clearly lacking.  Pi.1415926535 ( talk ) 01:45, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge (a summary of)( the parts that can be verified to Portland and Western Railroad#Locomotive fleet .  There is no evidence of independent notability, but equally there is no reason this cannot be included as part of the broader article per WP:PRESERVE .  Thryduulf ( talk ) 13:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete' Individual Locomotive that didn't really have a notable life.  This article isn't worth keeping around at all.  BigSneeze444 ( talk ) 20:07, 21 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
Gol Gazabad: From WP:GEOLAND : Census tracts, Abadi, and other areas not commonly recognized as a place (such as the area in an irrigation district) are not presumed to be notable.  Hongsy ( talk ) 08:42, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iran .  Hongsy ( talk ) 08:42, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:13, 24 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
Nike Campbell: BoraVoro ( talk ) 10:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Women ,  and Finance .  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Nigeria , Ukraine ,  and United States of America .  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 13:10, 11 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
Westfield, Edinburgh: As such, it does not fulfil the criteria outlined in WP:GNG.  1keyhole ( talk ) 21:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Scotland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Sourced only to Google Maps, and my searches returned no evidence of SIGCOV.  In any case the current article is useless as a standalone stub.  – dlthewave ☎ 15:35, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete its not an OS settlement, not on the Gazetteer for Scotland or VOB and I can't fine anything significant.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 18:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , this does not appear to be an actual settlement and so does not fall under the criteria set out at WP:GEOLAND .  I see no benefit to redirect anywhere either.  Bungle ( talk • contribs ) 17:03, 5 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
Audel Laville: I found one good piece of coverage here , which I added, but unfortunately this may be a case of WP:TOOSOON .  Other sources like this and this are not independent.  It might be a good idea to Draftify .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Caribbean .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 09:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: See if there is more support for draftification.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:56, 6 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment , there are also these sources [36] [37] [38] .  Perhaps not perfect, but with a healthy dose of WP:WORLDVIEW ?  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 22:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per SailingInABathTub.  Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk ) 14:32, 13 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!  23:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify - Article doesn't pass WP:GNG yet as the only thing approaching SIGCOV is the eMAGE DM article linked by the nominator.  This appears to be a case of WP:TOOSOON .  Jogurney ( talk ) 14:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, NYC Guru ( talk ) 09:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per GiantSnowman no evidence of notability.  D u s t i *Let's talk! * 20:31, 21 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
Reactions to the 2023 Turkish presidential election: We've never created entire pages of reactions for elections as far as I can tell, even for larger nations such as the USA , France , or Brazil , or similarly regional powers such as Argentina .  The only remotely similar article I can find deals with that of Belarus in 2020 , which was deemed notable due to the divided claims of victory and massive protests following.  With most of this article being simple congratulations, it can be far more appropriately addressed on the election page.  The Kip ( talk ) 05:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Entirely unnecessary article.  Alexcs114 ( talk ) 08:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unnecessary, no demonstration that the reaction are notable enough for their own article.  — Czello ( music ) 08:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Turkey .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - 2023 Turkish presidential election#Reactions covers the topic sufficiently enough.  A separate page is unnecessary and contains too much commonplace material.  Godtres ( talk ) 11:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Seems to have been draftified already?  -- GGT ( talk ) 14:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] GGT , it was draftified by the creator and subsequently submitted again through AfC with just a minor change to a few sources. Since users here right now aren't in favour of draftification but rather deletion on the basis that this is outright not notable on its own, I've reverted the move to allow for this discussion to continue, as this may be an attempt to evade the AfD. ~Styyx Talk ? 14:31, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – utterly pointless article, made all the more pointless by not actually stating what most of the reactors actually said or how they reacted. Salient points, if there are any, can be included in the main article on the election. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 14:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per all the points above.  Aintabli ( talk ) 19:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete If a reaction is meaningful, it should be described in context.  This is not the place to catalogue without context entirely routine statements made after pretty much every election.  Reywas92 Talk 20:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete this seems to not be anything of value, does not detail what reactions actually were.  Masohpotato ( talk ) 17:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete nothing worth merging, and this article is just a pointless list of countries that posted about the election.  Would just be a WP:QUOTEFARM if the quotes were in the article, but it's even less useful than that.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 09:21, 5 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
Nikos Loverdos: Only sources referenced in the article are databases and do not address the subject in-depth.  BEFORE search shows no American nor Greek-language sources found.  Tails Wx 00:55, 5 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cycling , Olympics ,  and Greece .  Tails Wx 00:55, 5 November 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!  00:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Someone who just competed once in the Olympic Games; there is nothing more on him.  ǁ ǁǁ ǁ Chalk19 ( talk ) 14:36, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No indication of notability.  Llajwa ( talk ) 21:56, 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: delete
Michael McLintock: Kingsmasher678 ( talk ) 04:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 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
James Lafazanos: As always, the notability test for actors is not satisfied just because the article lists roles, and requires external validation of the significance of his roles through reliable source coverage about him and/or noteworthy acting awards.  But the only "reference" cited here at all is a Q&A interview in which he's answering questions about himself in the first person on a non-notable blog, which is not a reliable source or a carrier of notability at all.  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:04, 22 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
Johanna Bennett (producer): Lacking in-depth coverage and pretty much all of it is just because she's Tony Bennett 's daughter.  This People article is the best source I could find and it's an "All About Tony Bennett's Kids" article with a short section on her.  Notability is not inherited .  C F A 💬 22:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and New York .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Entertainment .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Leaving aside "Tony Bennett's daughter" (because notability is not inherited ) what's left doesn't amount to WP:SIGCOV . -- AntientNestor ( talk ) 10:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as noted above.  Very little of what she has done amounts to being notable as we define it .  Her only claims to notability are her father and being on the board of an organization.  Bearian ( talk ) 14:34, 5 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
List of Shout! Studios releases: All lists of this nature have previously been deleted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Criterion Collection releases (2nd nomination) ; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Powerhouse Films releases ; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Film Institute releases ; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Twilight Time releases ; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of BBC home video releases , the list goes on... -- wooden superman 16:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Lists . -- wooden superman 16:05, 11 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!  07:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominator.  hinnk ( talk ) 19:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Shout!  Studios . - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 22:42, 22 January 2024 (UTC) (Note: I DeproDed the page and mentioned then that a redirect should be considered) [ reply ] That would imply that there would be a list of releases at the target though, which there shouldn't be.  -- wooden superman 09:33, 23 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!  07:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominator SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 23:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  // Timothy :: talk 14:43, 30 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
14 No Chingrakhali Government Primary School: None of the sources provide any independent significant coverage on this school.  McMatter ( talk ) / ( contrib ) 21:47, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Bangladesh .  McMatter ( talk ) / ( contrib ) 21:47, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The Bengali source looks independent.  It appears to be a series featuring a number of schools.  What criteria was involved in leading to this school's inclusion isn't readily apparent, nonetheless, it hints the school has some degree of notability now or in the past.  Rupples ( talk ) 22:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Rupples are you speaking of the first reference?  It doesn't really say much except some basic facts I wouldn't consider that significant.  McMatter ( talk ) / ( contrib ) 22:21, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, the first ref.  And having had a break and come back to this it looks like I've misread; the "No. 14" is just part of the school's name.  The Bengali article is dated 8 December 2023 and has the same picture as was posted to Commons that same day and included here.  Rupples ( talk ) 22:54, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Sourcing does not satisfy GNG/NORG and it's unlikely this primary school is notable.  Rupples ( talk ) 23:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Otherwise, this is now G5'able, for a speedier resolution.  -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 10:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment . should not be deleted. Because the said school is Govt. WikiShakib ( talk ) 20:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] (Blocked sock.) -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 06:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom, Fails GNG, nothing found with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk 19:42, 27 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
RevPro Uprising 2016: I can't find any significant journalistic news coverage about the event Sionk ( talk ) 22:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions .  Sionk ( talk ) 22:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:01, 24 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!  23:50, 30 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