hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Mahesh Kumar Garg: Thilsebatti ( talk ) 02:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and India .  Thilsebatti ( talk ) 02:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Article was created by someone with a similar name, and it fails WP:NAUTHOR .  The sources provided in the article aren't enough to meet notability.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 03:28, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - The Economic Times references falls within WP:NEWSORGINDIA (no author bio so no indication of editorial oversight).  The other only mentions him along with a program he is involved with.  An online search found nothing better.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 04:20, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Uttar Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:36, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear Wikipedia Administrators,
 I am preferring this appeal to enable me to keep the Wikipedia page for Mahesh Kumar Garg who is an accomplished poet and writer.  I am aware that there is a policy against creating autobiographies on Wikipedia.  The page for Mahesh Kumar Garg has been created after extensive research on poet's life, and I have included citations to the sources which are all authentic and comply with Wikipedia's standards and policy.  I have also been respectful of other editors and have not engaged in any disruptive behavior.  It is requested to revoke the block so that I can continue working on the Wikipedia page, which will be of help to the community and millions of readers and scholars of Hindi Literature.  Note: Please do not delete my page.  It is a valuable resource for others.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaheshGargBedhadak ( talk • contribs ) 11:06, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello, MaheshGargBedhadak , AFD discussions are determined by consensus of editors so your plea to keep this article is one opinion.  The other editors have based their opinions on Wikipedia policies which carries more weight for the admin who will evaluate and close this discussion at the end of a week.  But if you want to continue to work on this article, you should request that it be "Draftified", either to Draft or User space.  As of the discussion right now, this is a more plausible outcome than a "Keep".  L iz Read!  Talk!  03:36, 31 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
Arthur Gill (priest): Chumpih t 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Ireland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Or, failing that, redirect to Archdeacon of Cloyne .  As with other similar articles by the creator contributor, there is nothing to indicate that the subject has any notability independent of the role/job that they held.  The sources in the article (including this directory style entry alongside HUNDREDS (thousands?) of other clerical people) do not constitute material biographical coverage.  Nor can I find any.  The sources barely support (as the creator, frankly, should have done) a sentence or two about the subject WP:WITHIN the article on the role that they held.  Other than for the "completionist" reasons that seems to have driven most of the creator's submissions, there is nothing to support or justify a short sub-stub/stand-alone biographical entry.  Guliolopez ( talk ) 23:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  No reliable sources to validate notability of this individual.  Unlike bishops, archdeacons are not inherently notable by virtue of their office.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 01:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SIGCOV .  Twe directory listings is not significant coverage.  Bearian ( talk ) 17:32, 29 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
Pegasus Software: It reads like an ad/catalog and doesn't have any news or scholarly articles (or anything at all, really) that I could add to save it.   — Paper Luigi T • C 05:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Non-notable SME ; fails WP:NCORP .  Jfire ( talk ) 05:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance , Business , Companies , Software ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As stated in proposal, this article isn't notable.  ''Flux55'' ( talk ) 06:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Hardly any independent sources found.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 23:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Instinctively, seeing this AfD my reaction was "What? But I've heard of Pegasus Opera!" - which seems to have been the overriding sentiment in the 2006 "Keep" AfD.  But my searches are not finding the coverage needed to demonstrate attained notability .  A redirect to Infor could be a possible WP:ATD .  AllyD ( talk ) 09:26, 18 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
Savage Ridge: The article also includes a brief biography of the person the ridge is named after, but as that isn't directly related to the ridge I don't believe it justifies an article on the ridge.  BilledMammal ( talk ) 04:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Antarctica-related deletion discussions .  BilledMammal ( talk ) 04:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:GEONATURAL .  – dlthewave ☎ 15:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:GNG and WP:GEONATURAL .  Last1in ( talk ) 20:50, 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: delete
Marco Borges: The article was created by a sockpuppet, which is not promising – in the sockpuppet investigation , Spicy said "fairly obvious UPEs" i.e. undisclosed paid editing, like this thing.  Any media coverage discovered in WP:BEFORE is stuff like "I ate like Beyonce & lost 16 pounds in 3 weeks" that mentions this guy in passing.  ☆ Bri ( talk ) 16:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Food and drink , Health and fitness ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Borges does not inherit notability just because he has worked with notable people.  We would need to see reliable sources give significant coverage of Borges himself.  The sources I saw were either obviously unreliable or only mentioned Borges in passing when discussing Beyonce.  – Tera tix ₵ 03:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I agree with Teratix, notability is not inherited.  The subject lacks significant coverage and generally fails to meet WP:N .  ZyphorianNexus ( talk ) 14:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  his news is around being Beyonce's trainer, etc. I could not find any articles that are primarily about him.  Yolandagonzales ( talk ) 20:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There does not appear to be substantial in-depth coverage of the subject themselves or their professional activities, with most coverage being brief and primarily in relation to their association with high-profile clients.  X ( talk ) 04:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Teratix, subject has no notability of their own Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 10:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Article lacks independent evidence of the subject's notability and appears to be promotional.  Waqar 💬 17:06, 5 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
CudaText: Most of the secondary sources I could find are by people with unknown credentials.  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 01:18, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:35, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I oppose deleting this as it's clearly a very active project (note the forum) with some history.  I know people that use it.  Okay it's no notepad++ popularity wise.  I also see no gain from CudaText's side as it's open source and my adblocker kicked in only for the github link (to those that don't know GitHub is a VERY popular code hosting site and this is very normal).  The article is also being kept up to date.  86.140.41.40 ( talk ) 08:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: The activity of its forum or the number of people that you know that use the software has nothing to do with whether this should be a Wikipedia article.  Please read WP: N .  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 00:21, 8 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!  00:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  00:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Their own website, SourceForce, Github, then discussion boards.  I don't see any sites reviewing this software, or any mention of it in media we'd use as a RS.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : with no independent sources providing SIGCOV, this fails NSOFT.  Owen× ☎ 10:26, 26 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
Minor characters in CSI: Crime Scene Investigation: Delete or merge to List of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation characters (but 99% of this is unreferenced).  WP:FANCRUFT plot summary in list form...  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:09, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and failing WP:NLIST .  Minor character lists require notability along with an impact to the outside world.  This list doesn't even need to be merged since the character information on the main list covers it quite well.  Conyo14 ( talk ) 16:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Fails WP:NLIST as a group without significant coverage.  The main list is already covering this more appropriately.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 22:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and failing WP:NLIST .  Others have already said my opinion.  Spinixster (chat!) 02:25, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If we're not going to keep this article, I'd rather take up the suggested merge per WP:ATD .  - B RAINULATOR 9 ( TALK ) 19:38, 15 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
Edgar Pineda (footballer): Joeykai ( talk ) 02:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:38, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - a person of no notability.  MisterWizzy ( talk ) 08:42, 27 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
Spirit Level Film: Source consists of WP:PRIMARY .  The BBC source does not credit the production company.  This, like many of those also listed via AfD, may have been created by WP:COI .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 12:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 12:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Politics , Companies ,  and Transportation .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 16:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and NCORP.  Sources in article and BEFORE showed mentions in subjects they are associated with but nothing that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth .  // Timothy :: talk 19:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  and TimothyBlue.  Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG .  Sal2100 ( talk ) 19:40, 16 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
Choe Mi-gyong: Simione001 ( talk ) 23:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT .  All that came up were trivial mentions ( 1 , 2 , etc.) JTtheOG ( talk ) 23:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:31, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 04:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 10:35, 2 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
KaSelly: Bio not yet shown to meet WP:GNG .  UtherSRG (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Africa .  UtherSRG (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Failed AFC, fails WP:GNG as all sources are promotional in nature.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 07:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Honourable curators, a lamentable truth presents itself: the textual tapestry of KaSelly, suffused with undue promotion, beckons the axe.  Yet, I rue the vexing paradox: a refashioned article, stripped of its promotional palette, would meet the same fate.  This grievous state of affairs stokes the ember of underrepresentation, a bane that continues to shroud the vibrant narratives of Africa within our digital archive.  Jack4576 ( talk ) 10:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] OMG!  That comment needs to be preserved for all time!  - UtherSRG (talk) 11:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Promo for a non-notable "designer".  No sources other than the fluff one in the article that I can find.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Agrees with all Delete comments and nomintor.  Historical Heritages of Bihar ( talk ) 18:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Oaktree b.  Fails GNG and lacks SIGCOV.  Nythar ( 💬 - 🍀 ) 09:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Just promotional material really.  ULPS ( talk ) 20:48, 22 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
JR Esterhuizen: The closest to WP:SIGCOV I found was this piece on his apparent career switch.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG .  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Wholesale Souls Inc.: I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass WP:NEXIST .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 00:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 00:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , fails WP:NFILM Donald D23 talk to me 11:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete likely a student film, clearly fails WP:NFILM .  Here's a passing mention in Greely Tribune .  Mooonswimmer 15:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Proofs of elementary ring properties: The material better belongs on Wikiversity or Wikibooks; it's already been exported to Wikiversity.  Jasper Deng (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions .  Jasper Deng (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominator.  Left guide ( talk ) 07:26, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom.  A well-intentioned, cleverly executed but ultimately misguided effort that doesn't belong here.  Owen× ☎ 15:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominator.  This would be possible to verify many times over (using elementary textbooks) but it's out-of-scope per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK .  — Bilorv ( talk ) 16:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Retranswikify to Wikiversity ( their current version hasn't really been updated in a decade ), then Delete per WP:NOT .  Folly Mox ( talk ) 19:48, 23 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
Randy Stageberg: Let'srun ( talk ) 15:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Sportspeople , Women , Florida ,  and Virginia .  Let'srun ( talk ) 15:57, 2 August 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!  17:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:41, 16 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