hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Veronika Kropotina: PROD removed.  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women ,  and Russia .  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Skating-related deletion discussions .  Owen× ☎ 12:46, 18 May 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!  02:33, 24 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: no consensus
Télé Lyon Métropole: Additionally, it may lack independent, third-party references to establish its significance in the context of television broadcasting.  Welcome to Pandora ( talk ) 15:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and France .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep One would expect a TV station reaching 1.3 million inhabitants fulfills WP:GNG and it does.  The French Wikipedia article shows an abundance of WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources.  I agree the article needs to be updated and better sourced (the TV station seemingly does not exist anymore), but WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP .  Broc ( talk ) 12:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It appears that BFM Lyon Métropole is the rebrand/successor of this station [2] .   There is no sourced content in the (English) article; the article should not be kept in its current form.   A redirect (to BFM TV ) might be better than trying to fix this article.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 19:10, 4 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!  21:13, 4 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!  21:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to BFM Régions , where we learn that Télé Lyon Métropole was bought out by BFM, and rebranded as "BFM Lyon Métropole" then "BFM Lyon" as part of the BFM Régions network.  In an ideal world the article could be kept and expanded from the frwiki article (which itself is way out of date), but realistically that isn't going to happen for a defunct local channel.  Rosbif73 ( talk ) 15:19, 12 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: no consensus
Deep Purple Tribute: The band, Cactus Jack, have a dubious notability, though the article on the band, Cactus Jack (band) , survived an AfD ( no consensus ) in 2010.  SilkTork ( talk ) 14:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Although currently they are not very significant, Cactus Jack were a very prominent act of the Serbian rock scene in the 2000s.  The album was mentioned in the last two editions of Petar Janjatović's Ex YU Rock Enciklopedija , the most important book on rock scenes of Yugoslavia and successor countries.  All other releases by the band have their own articles.  Ostalocutanje ( talk ) 14:18, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We have an article on the author, Petar Janjatović , and an article on the book, Ex YU rock enciklopedija 1960–2006 , which is a good indicator of the reliability of that source.  I did note, however, in our article on the book, that it says: "The book also contains basic information about a large number of less notable acts", and that while the Serbian Wikipedia has an article on the band, Cactus Jack , it doesn't have an article on this Deep Purple Tribute album, so a mention in Janjatović's book may not in itself be an indication of notability.  And even if the album were written about in depth in the book, per WP:NALBUMS , we prefer to have multiple reliable sources.  Given that the album does not appear to meet any of the criteria in WP:NALBUMS , nor in WP:GNG , and there is no article on the Serbian Wikipedia, it may be more appropriate to do as WP:GNG suggests and what the Serbian Wikipedia have done, and that is to merge relevant information about the Deep Purple Tribute album into the Cactus Jack (band) album.  SilkTork ( talk ) 08:05, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Basic information about less notable acts in Janjatović's encyclopedia are included in the articles about more notable related acts.  When it comes to Cactus Jack, they do have their own article in the book.  (I'm not sure if this information is of any relevance for the discussion.)  Ostalocutanje ( talk ) 15:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Serbia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify : Notability of the performer(s) has nothing to do with that of their recording as per WP:NALBUM .  Currently there isn't any sign of notability whatsoever of the subject, no news outlets, passing mentions, nor reviews.  At that time news were published through paper, sources may exist, until such is listed the article should be draftified for incubation.  dxneo ( talk ) 08:04, 19 October 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!  17:09, 24 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: no consensus
Bernardo Calvo: There are simply no references to him on the internet other than compendiums of baseball stats which include his name.  Dennis C. Abrams ( talk ) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Baseball ,  and Mexico .  Dennis C. Abrams ( talk ) 03:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Found some routine coverage on newspapers.com such as [ [5] ] and [ [6] ], but nothing that is GNG worthy.  However, it is quite possible that there are Mexican sources that could help this subject meet the notability guidelines.  Let'srun ( talk ) 11:56, 8 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!  03:56, 15 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!  05:47, 22 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: no consensus
Love Sex Aur Dhokha 2: Should be in DRAFT, but was moved there and then was moved back by the creator.  Creator also removed PROD.  Donald D23 talk to me 15:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  Donald D23 talk to me 15:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] DRAFT until release and add cast section OR Merge into Love Sex Aur Dhokha#Sequel .  DareshMohan ( talk ) 17:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: I can't soft-delete or re-draft because of the move back to mainspace by the creator, so relisting to establish clear consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 07:00, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just to point out that if the consensus of this discussion is to Draftify, this article can be moved back to Draft space.  L iz Read!  Talk!  03:52, 27 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!  07:56, 29 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: no consensus
Brian Andrews (actor): Lots of mentions on less reliable sites/blogs.  Weak keep in 2006 when our standards were much lower.  Boleyn ( talk ) 07:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Television ,  and Arizona .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : One quite notable role and some mildly notable ones have him meet WP:NACTOR , which is the applicable guideline.  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 22:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC) PS- Added various sources and think the subject also meets WP:GNG with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources addressing the subject in depth and directly.... :D [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 07:59, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , roles add up to enough.  Hyperbolick ( talk ) 08:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete : it's not about whether the roles are significant or not, it is about whether the role is significant or not.  and so far... the only significant role i can find is his role as tommy doyle from halloween.  other roles/movies listed in the article do not really make him significant, failing WP:NACTOR brachy 08 (chat here lol) 08:56, 16 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!  05:02, 23 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: no consensus
Bautista Stavile: De-prodder has stated sources he believes pass GNG, however I believe all of these to be WP:ROUTINE coverage, and I've not seen anything in a WP:BEFORE to suggest a GNG pass.  Given he may well make his debut for Zebre Parma in the 2023/24 season, I wouldn't be against draftyfying as more coverage will likely exist within the next 6 months.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union , Italy ,  and Argentina .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 21:35, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:57, 28 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: no consensus
Samsun Atatürk Anatolian High School: – anlztrk ( talk ) 10:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  – anlztrk ( talk ) 10:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Turkey .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Probably the most well known school in the city.  I have added an academic reference.  Pretty sure native Turkish speakers can find more by searching for the previous name - including "Maarif" as you can see at Anatolian High School .  It is a bit irritating that the Turkish article has no cites - if you are Turkish it would be handy if you could add cites for us to copy here, at least for İsmet İnönü visit.  Chidgk1 ( talk ) 15:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 13:58, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:21, 17 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: no consensus
Quadeca: Quadeca has received some coverage which is more promising, such as what I've linked at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Didn't Mean to Haunt You , but it's limited.  I suspect he's on his way to notability and could easily get there with his next album cycle, but I don't see it just yet.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 22:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California .  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 22:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep has one Billboard charting album and significant coverage such as AllMusic here and Flood magazine here , The Fader Atlantic306 ( talk ) 02:46, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete all promo sources, database, primary, nothing (including the above promos) meets IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  BLPs need clearly 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 00:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Atlantic306 - the relevant criteria he meets is WP:MUSICBIO .  The Fader and AllMusic are reliable sources per WP:A/S and Paper and Flood magazine look reliable as well.  All of which significantly cover his career and are not press releases or promotional material, so he meets #1 of the Music criteria.  Also, he does indeed have an album that charted on not one, but 2 Billboard charts.  So he passes #1 and #2 of the music criteria.  PantheonRadiance ( talk ) 06:35, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  06:07, 14 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: no consensus
Full-Option Science System: ~ T P W 13:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions .  ~ T P W 13:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 16:59, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The link in the nomination says no studies of Full Option Science System™ (FOSS) were found that fell within the scope of the Science review protocol and met WWC evidence standards , which is a narrower claim than it might have first come across.  A Google Scholar search finds, e.g, Robardey et al. (1994) , Holahan et al. (2004) , Mangrubang (2004) , Zimmerman et al. (2011) , and others.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 01:56, 3 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:50, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The tone isn't quite encyclopedic, but I think wiki-notability is established.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 14:00, 12 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: no consensus
Teruko Kiriake: WP:BEFORE shows only Japanese language sources with nominal statistics-type coverage of the competitor e.g. [28] and [29] .  As a commentor at the bundled AfD stated, standard athlete blurb...stats page with no secondary coverage...local-interest community news story and so forth do not demonstrate notability; WP:NATHLETE requires additional, NOTNEWS coverage, or medals at major event, which does not pertain here.  ☆ Bri ( talk ) 18:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Olympics ,  and Japan .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , per my argument at the bundled AfD.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 22:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: the bundled nom was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Jahn ☆ Bri ( talk ) 00:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nishonippon.com seems to have several stories focusing on her, but they're behind paywall: see (translated) "Kurume City presents Sports Achievement Award to Olympic female canoeist Kiriaki" and "Canoeist Kiriaki reports on his 7th place finish in the World Cup and visits his hometown of Yame City" , which each look like they have a decent chance at being sigcov.  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 22:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 10:23, 3 January 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, Daniel ( talk ) 02:08, 11 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: no consensus
Tosh Masson: Fails WP:NFOOT and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 18:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Sikhism , Football , United Kingdom ,  and England .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:40, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:BASIC too, the only sources I could find were passing mentions NotAGenious ( talk ) 11:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep updated with more sources, WP:BASIC says for sports people "Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject." 1 in depth source is required which this definitely has.  As first Sikh player in English top flight rugby I think it is quite likely there are more off-line sources available to improve the article in future.  Skeene88 ( talk ) 13:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Looks to be just enough to satisfy GNG.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 19:08, 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!  18:37, 15 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!  19:30, 22 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: no consensus