hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Álvaro Seijas: Lacks significant coverage to pass WP:GNG .  Only two notable sources are from the Journal Star (Peoria) Yankees10 01:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Baseball , Venezuela ,  and Illinois .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 02:27, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  References seem adequate.  Journal Star (Peoria) is a perfectly reliable newspaper.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 02:29, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not disputing the reliability of the Journal Star.  I am saying those are the only two sources of coverage and they come from the exact same newspaper.  That is not "significant coverage". -- Yankees10 02:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - First of all, archive links to the Journal Star pieces: [19] [20] .  These do meet the definition of significant coverage (addressing the topic directly & in detail), but since multiple sources are required, they're not enough on their own.  That said, I also found this article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, meaning there is significant coverage from two regional newspapers, so GNG is met.  Hatman31 ( talk ) 04:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Hatman31's findings above.  Article clearly meets GNG, and has enough reliable sources to support its existence.  CycloneYoris talk!  01:55, 1 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
Peter Yurdansky: UtherSRG (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Russia .  UtherSRG (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 21:21, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This is a misspelled name from Russian.  A correct spelling would be "Iordansky", not "Yurdansky".  He appears in the The Oxford Companion to Chess , i.e. [43] .  See page about him on ruwiki, ru:Иорданский, Петр Константинович .  My very best wishes ( talk ) 02:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Besides the references listed in the Russian article, probably the best English-language source for him is Anthony Gillam's Mannheim 1914 and the Interned Russians , pp. 210–211.  Cobblet ( talk ) 18:29, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 16:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, —⁠Scotty Wong ⁠— 05:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  The article should be renamed to Peter Iordansky.  Jaguarnik ( talk ) 03:25, 2 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: keep
WEEE-LP: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Tennessee .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep The station was Knoxville's UPN affiliate in the early 2000s and got some significant coverage in that era.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 06:36, 2 June 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!  07:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  06:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The sources added by Sammi give the subject WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:49, 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
Rickwood Field Game: O.N.R. (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Baseball and Alabama .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and move it is notable, as mentioned below, but I agree the title need some work.  I'd suggest "MLB Alabama Game", but I  don't really care El Wikipedian ( talk ) 10:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep An already scheduled event and there's that handy little 'move' button that'll let us retitle it when it has an official name, and 'first pro baseball game in Alabama' and MLB's first definitive celebration of Juneteenth with a special event game definitely clinches WP:NSPORTS without a doubt.  At the very least I've removed the team managers because that can easily change at least before April (or even in-season).  Nate • ( chatter ) 00:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, C LYDE TALK TO ME / STUFF DONE (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 06:13, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Meets WP:GNG , meets WP:SPORTSEVENT .  Due to its historical significance, it's almost certain that it would meet WP:PERSISTENCE even if canceled.  It's already had coverage over a month.  Until a better title is found, I would be ok with moving it to a descriptive title like Major League Baseball game at Rickwood Field or something.  — siro χ o 08:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: This one meets WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSEVENT .  User:Let'srun 13:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Not even WP:TOOSOON .  SportingFlyer T · C 14:10, 23 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: keep
2–0 lead is the worst lead: Primary argument is INDISCRIMINATE, however.  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 07:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , Football ,  and Ice hockey .  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 07:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Reluctant keep : Sources cited appear to be non-trivial and reliable (some of them, anyway).   I concur that WP doesn't need an article about every idea anyone has ever had but that isn't the standard around here.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 14:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Some of the sources are now dead links or were self published, but the remainder include reliable outlets and show this meets GNG.  Sure it's a cliché and we don't need articles about every phrase (e.g. if it could be a glossary entry), but this one cuts across multiple sports, has sources in multiple languages, and includes refutations of its premise.  That seems worth having a short article about.  The nomination seems to be more WP:IDONTLIKEIT than anything that falls under INDISCRIMINATE.  Modest Genius talk 10:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - sourcing seems to be sufficient to show notability.  I might instead suggest a rename to e.g. 2–0 lead in sports or similar?  Giant Snowman 20:17, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - per above.  Clear topic of imterest with sourc.es Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk ) 05:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  Article clearly demonstrates notability.  The Kip 00:28, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep passes GNG. -- Ortizesp ( talk ) 19:37, 26 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
Chandan Madan: There is nothing in this stub that describes significant coverage in a reliable source .   The only reference is to a database source, and does not provide secondary coverage.   The Heymann criterion is to find two reliable sources that provide secondary coverage within seven days.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 04:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and Punjab .  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 04:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The external links immediately leads me to this article and this one which would seem to fulfil the Heymann criteria immediately, yes?  Perhaps the nom may wish to review these and consider whether they're sufficient or whether we have to drag this out for a week?  Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 05:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep on the basis of the links provided by Blue Square Thing .  Appears to be a notable cricketer, evidence shows that they have played at the highest domestic levels.  Playing for U19 indian team particularly persuasive as to notability.  Jack4576 ( talk ) 08:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per BST.  Him playing for India Under-19s actually doesn't make him notable, had he solely played for them he would fail WP:NCRIC .  Having played for senior domestic teams in India, and with the sources BST has found, he meets the inclusion criteria and GNG.  StickyWicket ( talk ) 17:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep From what we've got here, and the career he's had, I believe it likely that there would be enough in offline/non-English language sources for the article to be kept, albeit only just.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:00, 15 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: keep
Judikay: Nothing found that we'd use for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Nigeria .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Judikay is one of Nigeria and Africa's top gospel artistes.  Her second album received a Boomplay plaque after hitting over 50 million streams on Global Music Network.  According to Wikipedia notability requirements namely: significant coverage, reliable, secondary sources etc, the individual is highly notable with lots of media coverage, works and even awards.  If I may ask, what exact metric is your cause for concern as regards her notability?  Also, what do you mean by "nothing to show" as regards her notability?  I'll really love to know.  I have also added more reliable sources and references to show notability.  I hope this would suffice.  Cheers!!  Mevoelo ( talk ) 20:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Streams are not notable here and we have no reliable sources discussing this person.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 21:19, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I presume references can be made to streams to further show notability and if it is significant or a major achievement especially internationally.  Top Wikipedia articles for musicians have made references in this light.   I can give dozens of example if need be.  The article has both primary and secondary sources as per Wiki guidelines.  You can refer to WP:BAND .  Also, I have added a few more reliable sources.  I hope you check it out.  Cheers!  Mevoelo ( talk ) 21:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per creator and basic .  Okoslavia ( talk ) 06:17, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Adequately sourced for notability. -- Ipigott ( talk ) 06:30, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article has multiple cites to Nigerian newspapers, demonstrating she is a popular artist in Nigeria.  Looks notable to me.  Also, WP:BIAS is a relevant concern in cases like this.  SomethingForDeletion ( talk ) 09:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The subject has enough coverage to meet WP:BASIC .  In addition, she is possibly meeting WP:MUSICBIO for Top 10 Gospel song and having been nominated and winning multiple awards.  Hkkingg ( talk ) 08:18, 16 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: keep
Gan Kofim: No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG Falls a mile short on references much less GNG references.   Of the 7 references, 5 are the IMDB pages of participants, one  is a facebook page, and one is about the person that the film was inspired by with nothing about the film.   So zero references about the film.  Accordingly 98% of the article is a wiki-editor-created plot summary .  North8000 ( talk ) 00:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : It seems to have been nominated for awards [62] , so there is a strong possibility it's a notable film, but I agree with the nom; sources used now in the article aren't valid.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Israel .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 01:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per WP:NFILM , a film meets notability if "The film is widely distributed and has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics."  The film received full-length reviews in a number of national publications in Israel, including Calcalist , Ynet , Haaretz , Walla , and Mako .  These should be added to the article, but for now are enough to establish GNG.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 01:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Longhornsg, but the article does need work.  FortunateSons ( talk ) 10:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Film meets notability requirements for films, article should be improved.  Marokwitz ( talk ) 07:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Easy pass of WP:NFILM and the WP:GNG .  The nomination is a clear WP:NEXIST failure!  WP:SNOW also applies.  15:24, 31 March 2024 (UTC) 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
Lambert Hamel: Boleyn ( talk ) 17:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Germany .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I added some references that I found in the corresponding German article.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 18:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 18:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep looks like more or less a straight translation from German WP.  I'm willing to defer to their judgment.  Carrite ( talk ) 10:22, 25 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: keep
AC Hotel Portland Downtown: Coverage is mainly travel listings or very local as per WP:AUD .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business , Companies ,  and Oregon .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 02:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per GNG (disclaimer: creator).  I'm not convinced nominator has done a thorough reviewing of sourcing.  I quickly identified in-depth coverage in sources which are not specific to a local audience.  I've expanded the entry with more than a dozen sources and I've not even attempted to access the Oregonian archives yet.  This is the third time in 48 hours I've disagreed with nominator about hotel entries.  I believe this article should be expanded, not deleted.  --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:16, 18 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
Union Chargeability Act 1865: There is an ununtilized section, so it appears under construction without its valid template.  Brachy 08 (Let’s Have A Kiki, I Wanna Have a Kiki) 00:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Law ,  and United Kingdom .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 03:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  Satisfies GNG easily and by a very wide margin.  There are entire books on this Act, and William Cunningham Glen's book is already cited in the article.  There are clearly valid sources and there is no "ununtilized section".  James500 ( talk ) 15:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per James500.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Agree there should not be an issue of notability, but that wasn't self-evident at the time the article was nominated.   I have added several citations and have expanded the article somewhat to provide context.  My text could use some attention from a person more familiar with this topic.   The Caplan and Spectator articles are available online for free.  Oblivy ( talk ) 08:59, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- This is a short article, but a perfectly valid one on an aspect of the English Poor Law.  Peterkingiron ( talk ) 18:18, 23 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
Dr. Antonio Da Silva High School and Junior College of Commerce: Hey man im josh ( talk ) 02:55, 8 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep established in 1851 it is 172 years old.As per WP:NEXIST offline sources are bound to exist for such an old institution.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 06:48, 8 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep very old, and seems to be mentioned in lots of old directories , which might be usable sources for its history, although they don't count for much in terms of notability.  More importantly, it was the site of a major terror attack and there's lots of coverage of the school regarding that and subsequent closures of the school ( [37] ).  Its sports teams also seem to be somewhat notable, participating in most of Mumbai's major school-level tournaments ( [38] , [39] , [40] ), and there's also some random coverage ( [41] , [42] , first source is a bit questionable).  Overall, the coverage is somewhat spotty, but that's because schools in India aren't usually reported on by local newspapers like they are in the US, and the age really makes it unlikely that this isn't notable.  AryKun ( talk ) 07:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to reassess new sources added to the article.  Does the deletion rationale still fit?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:02, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per @ Pharaoh of the Wizards .  Okoslavia ( talk ) 08:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Seems to meet WP:GNG .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 14:00, 17 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: keep
Teja Oblak: I knew nothing about basketball-related articles, but am nominating for deletion due to lack of sufficient sources.  The closest things related to this woman herself are Ref 1 and Ref 2 .  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 15:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Basketball ,  and Slovenia .  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 15:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , she is the captain of Slovenian women's national basketball team, among other things.  Plenty of coverage from a quick google search, including dedicated interviews on national news MMC .  Her brother is a much more famous sportsperson, true, so it is only logical that he is often mentioned in articles covering her.  Of course, sourcing in the article needs improvement, but this is not a reason to delete.  Tone 15:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Did you search in Slovenian sources?  Haven't gone through them but there seems to be alot of Google hits on her there, not unsurprisingly since she is the captain of the Slovenian national team.  Alvaldi ( talk ) 15:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Easily enough in-depth coverage in Slovenian media, mainly because of Jan Oblak , but that doesn't matter – 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 etc.  Snowflake91 ( talk ) 15:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets GNG per above.  ~ EDDY ( talk / contribs ) ~ 22:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Tone, she fulfills GNG criteria, but in foreign sources. -- A09 | (talk) 22:06, 1 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