hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington : Lacking coverage to meet WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Indonesia ,  and New Zealand .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as this should be about the physical embassy, not relations in general, and there is no demonstrated notability.  Geschichte ( talk ) 10:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as this article lacks any independent reliable sources and therefore fails to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG .  Marshelec ( talk ) 06:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not enough notability for standalone article.  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:53, 28 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
KVHC-LD : Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 15:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Texas .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 15:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] And doesn't seem to be accurate since its ownership with Bridge Media Networks since it's still an affiliate of Paranormal TV and not NewsNet according to RabbitEars.  OWaunTon ( talk ) 15:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Texas .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : We are already up to a second nomination here because the first nomination was malformed — specifially

Discussion outcome: delete
Alicia and Annie Sorell : Natg 19 ( talk ) 18:48, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film ,  and United States of America .  Natg 19 ( talk ) 18:48, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  Natg 19 ( talk ) 18:48, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Hot Twin and screaming woman are trivial roles.  I'm not seeing anything that would satisfy ACTOR here.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sourcing found is a Youtube video, wiki mirrors/blogs and in Gnews, they're in a list of hottest twins.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:41, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Current sourcing is obviously deficient, and I was not able to find GNG or NBASIC meeting references per a search.  The roles are especially minor and fails WP:NACTOR .  VickKiang (talk) 02:32, 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: delete
Rory J. Cutaia : Links are to interviews (primary sources) and promotional content such as PR copy and articles that he has written.  ... disco spinster talk 03:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  ... disco spinster talk 03:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I prodded this but it was removed, The links used are primary or brief profiles.  Nothing else found in RS Oaktree b ( talk ) 05:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Sourcing currently used is either primary or trivial coverage. A Google search only brings up these links, PR items or social media. Google news only delivers PR items. Should be deleted for lack of extensive coverage in reliable sources." was the prod reason.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 05:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Technology ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Google doesn't show much significant , independent coverage of him.  On Newspapers.com, there were various passing mentions or quotes from him in newspaper articles, especially when he worked as an attorney, but almost all were not significant.  Altogether, these mainly local, passing mentions don't seem enough to combine into notability.  These were the 3 best sources I saw on Newspapers.com: [102] - Substantial coverage, but the writer discloses an affiliation (that Cutaia was an investor in, and producer of, an independent film he wrote), making it likely not independent enough [103] [104] - Coverage of him organizing a community effort to buy a local store that was going to close: the Middlebrook General Store.  Both were written by the same local newspaper.  - Whisperjanes ( talk ) 05:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment It seems like if he founded a company that was sold for over a billion dollars, there would be more substantial coverage of this millionaire.  Makes me wonder if his role in that company was exaggerated.  L iz Read!  Talk!  03:47, 1 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There was also mention of crypto in the last go-around at AfD, wondering if this is still some sort of PROMO for whatever business he's currently involved with.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 03:50, 1 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
Ian Cottage : Neither of the sources in the article meet the threshold for notability.  The article itself has been tagged with {{ BLP sources }} since October 2012.  I've attempted to search for reliable sources on the director and his works, and while I can confirm the works exist, I've not been able to find any reviews of them nor of his work more generally.  The closest I was able to find was a potential interview in a now defunct publication (Boolean Flix) that is now offline and not archived anywhere.  Finally, someone

Discussion outcome: delete
High school rank : Perhaps this can be converted into a proper disambig or redirected?  Student rank is likely the same as Class rank ; high school rank seems to be American-only ranking equivalent to College and university rankings but for high schools, which we do not have an article for.  Although of course high school rankings exist outside US, so this is also badly in need of globalization.  Can anyone fix it, or will we redirect this WP:TNT is also a consideration.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  This old stub seems more like a dictionary definition than an encyclopedia article.  Some of the content about it's use is also close to WP:OR and not useful.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 22:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , there's no article here, nor one that could be created from it.  If we had articles on the USNR annual ranking of US public high schools or the WaPo equivalent and articles on similar surveys in other countries it could be an index page, but we don't.  4.37.252.50 ( talk ) 01:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:24, 19 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
Small and Medium Business Development Agency (Azerbaijan) : There is nothing that indicates that the subject is notable.  There is no independent reliable sourcing of the subject – it's only covered by Azerbaijani government outlets.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 18:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I have no trust in Thenightaway nominations, this is an article about a government agency.  I feel it's perfectly an acceptable article under WP:NORG .  Regards.  Govvy ( talk ) 15:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Many states have some kind of office or agency oriented around small businesses promotion, yet the only Wikipedia article for those agencies is the US Small Business Administration , which has lots of RS coverage.  What exactly is there about this Azerbaijani office created in 2017 that makes you say it meets notability requirements?  Simply being a government body of some sort is not a notability requirement.  Every subdivision or office of a government bureaucracy does not inherently have notability.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 16:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : being a government agency does not provide automatic notability.  Owen× ☎ 21:58, 7 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!  21:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails GNG and NORG.  All sources fails WP:IS.  #2 is routine mill news based on gov press release.  BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS.  Azerbaijan government sources are not independent reliable sources.  // Timothy :: talk 05:14, 21 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
Krishna Kaul (actor) : Imsaneikigai ( talk ) 08:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Uttar Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Draftify : As per Nom.  Pri2000 ( talk ) 14:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per the views of Nominator.  TheChronikler7 ( talk ) 16:05, 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
Embassy of Palestine, Tashkent : All this article does is confirm it exists.  Fails WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 09:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Uzbekistan ,  and Palestine .  LibStar ( talk ) 09:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  If embassies are not inherently notable, then there is no reasons offered in the article for it to be kept.  WonderCanada ( talk ) 09:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not notable at all.  The article just confirms this exists.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 10:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  You get lots of hits when you search for "Embassy of Palestine" in Uzbek ("Falastin elchixonasi"): https://www.google.com/search? q=%22Falastin+elchixonasi%22#ip=1 Embassies are often built to be impressive, so there might be coverage in Uzbek media of the building's architecture.  It's always worthwhile to search for references about an embassy in the languages of both countries.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 17:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Embassies are often built to be impressive" has zero bearing on notability in WP.  LibStar ( talk ) 12:07, 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
Sahil Adeem : Gossip rags and primary catalogues, or content farms, are the only sources.  Fermiboson ( talk ) 04:31, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion .  Fermiboson ( talk ) 04:31, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:29, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This but it's a spam site -www.google.com/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi4-6GY_uCCAxW-lIkEHb1TCPoQxfQBKAB6BAgLEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Freviewit.pk%2Fsahil-adeem-controversial-discussion-on-dajjal-yajuj-majuj%2F&usg=AOvVaw29g4rM3fg4j9NjI7IE_w4z&opi=89978449] I don't think we're at notability, could even be a hoax.  A whole five hits in Gnews...  Oaktree b ( talk ) 06:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Site is blacklisted, so I can't even link to it.  That's proof of non-notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 06:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete !  Clearly not notable Crunchydillpickle🥒 ( talk ) 23:49, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: per forementioned reasons above.  Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 11:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The article has been significantly improved and now includes multiple reliable sources.  Ainty Painty ( talk ) 17:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete while the article has indeed been rewritten, none of the sources in the rewrite meet GNG or RS at all.  Daniel ( talk ) 03:04, 3 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
UltraFly Model Corporation : Could not find any coverage in English.  Would reconsider if someone found indepth Chinese sources.  LibStar ( talk ) 04:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Taiwan .  AllyD ( talk ) 05:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete promotional for a dead business.   No coverage.  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 17:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : interviews (ref 1) can sometimes be reliable/notable, but not in this case with so few sources.  The second ref is WP:LINKEDIN .  Asparagusus (interaction) 13:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : An article setting out the former product proposition of a company, supported by an interview and a shopping site EL.  No evidence of attained notability provided or found.  AllyD ( talk ) 08:08, 13 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
Giovanni Deterville : JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:03, 23 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 ) 18:03, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:19, 24 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
Archie Fletcher : Broc ( talk ) 22:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Music ,  and United States of America .  Broc ( talk ) 22:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  This is one of hundreds of Tin Pan Alley composers, a one hit wonder .  We don't even know when he died.  Bearian ( talk ) 15:16, 28 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
Analía Céspedes : I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Cuba .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:56, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - best I can find is CONCACAF , which doesn't address her in enough depth Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:GNG Whitemancanjump23 ( talk ) 08:27, 20 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
Urban Search and Rescue Nebraska Task Force 1 : If there was anything to merge, it could go to FEMA Urban Search and Rescue Task Force as am AtD JMWt ( talk ) 12:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions .  JMWt ( talk ) 12:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:01, 24 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!  07:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I can find articles about things this force has done and disasters they've assisted with, but nothing about them as an entity.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 14:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Coverage consists solely of trivial mentions and routine local coverage about their deployments.  Mooonswimmer 23:53, 6 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
AFL Sydney 2023 season : This is unreferenced, and there ought to be a better route than AfD for things like this.  However here we are.  Draftify if it is not properly referenced.  If good references are provided please let me know and, if the rules allow me to withdraw the nomination, I will do so.  (Obviously AfD is not cleanup, except that in this circumstance it is) 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - This article has no references, and so fails not only notability , which is a policy, but verifiability , which is a non-negotiable policy.   Moving a page back into article space after it has been draftified because it has no references provided is disruptive editing , but AFD is a content forum.   Wikipedia doesn't need articles with no references.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 00:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The only source I could find when doing a before was this .  It's behind a paywall so I haven't examined it fully, so unless someone can examine it and provide more sourcing showing SIGCOV in RS then this doesn't pass GNG.  Ping me if something changes.  Tar nis hed Path talk 12:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : a low level league which receives minor routine newspaper coverage only, the individual season would not meet GNG.  (Also, AFL Sydney 2023 season is completely inconsistent syntax, and if it survives the AfD it should be moved to 2023 AFL Sydney season with the incorrect syntax arguably deleted as a tidy-up rather than redirected).  Aspirex ( talk ) 23:26, 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: delete