hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
List of former Foothill Transit Bus Lines: If there is any valuable content, it can be merged to parent article.  I suggested PROD but the creator decided to drop an angry message on my talk page.  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 06:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 06:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator .  The author of the only significant content has asked for the page to be deleted after it was blanked.  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 07:52, 11 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: keep
Rozalia Sultangareeva: Onel 5969 TT me 11:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There isn't an article in Russian?  No, but there is one in Bashkortian!  I didn't know the place, or language existed, let alone that it had a WP!  Now I do - and I also know that outside very specific limited interest to a Bashkortian audience, the subject is not notable and does not pass WP:GNG.  But interesting, nevertheless...  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 13:08, 24 March 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!  17:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Women ,  and Science .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Bashkir folklore appears to be a very low-citation subject, but if you search Google scholar for Султангареева rather than Sultangareeva you will see 185 citations for "Семейно-бытовой обрядовый фольклор башкирского народ" and 116 for "Жизнь человека в обряде: фольклорно-этнографическое исследование башкирских семейных обрядов" (as well as many less-cited works).  I think in this subject that may be enough for WP:PROF#C1 .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions .  TJMSmith ( talk ) 13:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , the article would certainly benefit from some cleanup, but generally I do not have any problem.  The subject seems to have an impact in their field, got some coverage on the state level, some media coverage, got an article by an academic publisher entirely covering her activity, looks good enough for me.-- Ymblanter ( talk ) 07:22, 2 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
Novomykolaivka, Synelnykove Raion, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast: Onel 5969 TT me 16:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:19, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This entry does not meet GNG or an SNG as worded.  Regrettably, an impartial application of existing guidelines requires that this page be deleted, irrespective of other considerations Jack4576 ( talk ) 17:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:17, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Appears to be a separate settlement and thus meets WP:GEOLAND .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 18:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Necrothesp.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 23:23, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : see here - Novomykolayivka is listed 9th (code UA12140050090012313), demonstrating that this is a legally-recognised place and thus passes WP:GEOLAND .  Mupper-san ( talk ) 21:35, 24 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
Def Dames Dope: Shaws username .  talk .  15:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions .  Shaws username .  talk .  15:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Can you explain why this article would not have sufficient notability?  It has an article in Dutch https://nl.m. wikipedia.org/wiki/Def_Dames_Dope And if I search on Google I get plenty of results.  This group is quite notable within the Eurodance scene.  Thanks for clarification.  Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply ) 15:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The page has zero references, and the only thing that links to it is a redirect and a list of top-30 Number 1 singles.  This doesn't suggest notability to me.  Revirvlkodlaku ( talk ) 15:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Then add {{Unreferenced}} Shadow311 ( talk ) 16:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Notable and easily meets WP:BAND #2 - many record releases in a national chart.   This include topping the chart - per the list here .  Resonant Dis tor tion 09:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as an easy pass of WP:BAND #2.  It took the nominator 2 minutes from their previous edit to set this AfD in motion.  The following text: The page has zero references [...] This doesn't suggest notability to me appears to show disrespect for the golden WP:NEXIST rule and strengthens the impression that no serious WP:BEFORE was performed.  gidonb ( talk ) 20:14, 24 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: keep
Ping (restaurant): 2 of the supplied sources are primary, and this source is a 1 line mention about its closure.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Companies ,  and Oregon .  AllyD ( talk ) 06:08, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Hung Far Low (restaurant) , considering the brief writeup and existence of Ping (restaurant) .  Same space.  Maybe under a title "Aftermath: Ping" or something of sorts.  gidonb ( talk ) 10:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Gidonb : Thanks for weighing in.  I have expanded the article significantly and continue to find more sources to add.  I think there's clear evidence the subject has been discussed in detail by reliable sources.  Can you please take another look?  I'd like to see if I can change your vote to "keep".  Thanks, --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 13:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Changing to keep .  My concern here was the length of the article and excessive fragmentation, not notability.  Now that the text is longer a merge would create a situation of WP:UNDUE so this is no longer desirable.  gidonb ( talk ) 08:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per GNG.  This is yet another nomination by LibStar, who seems to be nominating Portland restaurant articles indiscriminately, or at least without doing thorough source assessments before jumping to AfD.  I've asked them to slow down, or use tags/talk page comments instead of mass nominating, but here we are.  I've worked to expand the article and continue to find in-depth articles specifically about Ping, published by reliable sources.  The article should be kept and expanded, not deleted.  --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 13:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also, Ping was a James Beard Foundation Award semifinalist. It was also included in Alan Richman 's list of 10 best new restaurants in the U.S. Are we seriously debating notability? Is the nominator even trying? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep easy pass of our notability guidelines with in depth RS.  Lightburst ( talk ) 20:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep re-edited and updated since this nomination.  Informative article that needs to be kept.  — Maile ( talk ) 15:25, 29 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
Darkwell: Upper Deck Guy ( talk ) 02:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music .  Upper Deck Guy ( talk ) 02:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 04:51, 17 June 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!  02:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NBAND .5, released multiple albums on Napalm Records , which is an indy label with releases from multiple independently notable acts including some massive ones like Dee Snyder , Sevendust , Coal Chamber , Cradle of Filth , and Kamelot .  (Notability is not inherited, but being signed for multiple albums to a such a label generally implies notability) — siro χ o 05:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as the article's contents meets point 5 for Musical Notability .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DimensionalFusion ( talk • contribs ) 08:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NBAND#5 .  Maliner ( talk ) 06:22, 25 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
Pink Peacock: The café has now closed permanently.  It's only notability seems to have been the minor controversy surrounding some of the staff members actions Qcne ( talk ) 13:45, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  Qcne ( talk ) 13:45, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The Reader's Digest source used in the article seems ok, it has enough coverage for GNG.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Sexuality and gender , Judaism ,  and Scotland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , unless someone can show a WP:NCORP fail that isn't based on a No true Scotsman of what counts as a notable event.  theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs ) (she/her) 04:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Multiple reliable sources establish notability.  -- DH22 Mim ( talk ) 12:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep article could be improved but sources such as Readers Digest, Glasgow Live and STV show sustained coverage in reliable secondary sources. The fact that the cafe is now closed does not affect its notability. Mujinga ( talk ) 14:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Clearly has significant coverage in reliable sources. -- Grnrchst ( talk ) 17:26, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Sufficiently sourced to keep.  gidonb ( talk ) 15:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - There are enough reliable sources demonstrating this cafe's notability.  Furthermore, notability is not temporary; a subject does not lose its notability just because it's closed.  Epicgenius ( talk ) 03:49, 4 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
Ballydonoghue GAA: Andre 🚐 23:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , Football ,  and Ireland .  Andre 🚐 23:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  In my own WP:BEFORE , I found and added a number of sources which support the text and contribute to a claim to notability under GNG.  At the very least there is sufficient notability/refs to support a merge/redirect (as an WP:ATD ) to Lisselton#Sport .  Outright deletion doesn't appear the correct action and isn't one I can support.  Guliolopez ( talk ) 15:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - county championship winning team, and current senior champions for North Kerry.  Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!  12:43, 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 ) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I've expanded introduction and added a History section with sources.  Club very relevant due to recent successes.  Fox&Pheasant 21:23, 28 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: keep
Mohammad-Hadi Imanieh: I prefer the information of this article be transferred on the  article that contains the list of governors in Iran.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymy365248 ( talk • contribs ) 16:40, June 10, 2024 (UTC) Comment Fixing malformed nomination.   I am neutral at this time.   -- Finngall talk 17:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 10 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Medicine ,  and Iran .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment you don’t need a deletion nomination to achieve a merge.  In any case we have many other articles about Iranian governors, and saying you’d prefer a merge isn’t a deletion rationale.  Mccapra ( talk ) 21:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep no valid for deletion offered, subject passes GNG.  Mccapra ( talk ) 18:38, 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: keep
Jeffrey Northrup: There was no coverage of him until his death.   All coverage is related to his death and related trial.    Biographical sources are essentially obituaries.   No reporter is doing any serious investigation into his life before his last day, nor should they, since he was a private person.   The trial has had lots of coverage, but we're not a news outlet.    While tragic, its not historic.   -- Rob ( talk ) 01:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If he's not notable, well, I think his death is.  No?  What if the article's name is changed to "Death of Jeffrey Northrup"?  - EclecticEnnui ( talk ) 06:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I think a name change of the article would be most fair.  The relevant information could be retained while respecting the private life of officer Northrup.  142.126.191.237 ( talk ) 07:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] OK, sounds good.  Should we wait and see if other users are gonna give their opinion?  - EclecticEnnui ( talk ) 21:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions .  Rob ( talk ) 01:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Canada .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] DELETE.  What was tragic was  (a) Northrup's stupidity in getting killed, and  (b) the fact that an innocent person had his life ruined for three years while the state tried to prove an unprovable case of first degree murder.  This article should be deleted and a new one about this whole case created.  -- 24.80.199.58 ( talk ) 06:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Rename to Crown v Umar Zameer, assuming the case was called that. Connor Behan ( talk ) 15:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but rename . The story here is not the death of the officer, which is tragic, but the conduct of the Toronto Police Service (including possible collusion to commit perjury to lock away an innocent man), that has prompted an investigation. Coverage has gone far beyond the typical murder case. See [46] [47] [48] . ---- Patar knight - chat / contributions 19:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but rename : The story is about police undercover procedures, police bias, conflicts between police officer testimony and expert testimony, weakness in the prosecution evidence and prosecutor bias.  Perhaps the article title should be "Murder trial of Umar Zameer"; there are several Wikipedia articles prefixed by "Murder trial of".  TheTrolleyPole ( talk ) 16:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm fine if somebody wishes to close this early as keep except for the article body, subject matter, and all of the original content which is the clear consensus above.   I withdraw (I don't know how to close it myself).   -- Rob ( talk ) 00:02, 27 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
Capitol Hill's mystery soda machine: This article is about a subject that has no relevance to those other than the residents of Capitol Hill.  PerryPerryD Talk To Me 18:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , seems to be plenty of decent sourcing.  The niche-ness is not a reason to delete, there are plenty of niche topics that receive significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as this one.  -- Cerebral726 ( talk ) 18:24, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - clearly notable per WP:RS so our rules say "keep".  I think the most obvious merge target, our Capitol Hill, Seattle article, is long enough already.  I wish my town had one of these.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 18:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Washington .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (weak keep, more or less).  When there are a whole bunch of local sources, we know that we have enough material to use to write an article, but we need to find evidence that it's of interest to a suitably broad audience.  So that's what I looked for, and found Boing Boing , Vice , and Slate (via Atlas Obscura, but nonetheless published to Slate which IIRC curated some of AO's content for a while).  — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Several reliable sources have covered both its existence and disappearance, so it easily meets GNG.  It has more than just hyperlocal appeal, given the coverage from non-local sources.  Sounder Bruce 21:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per GNG.  --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - While I agree it's a niche article, that's a poor argument for deletion.  Large swathes of Wikipedia are niche-but-notable, might as well nominate those too!  - dasime ( talk ) 14:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Article creator here.  It's obviously niche, which is true for many Wikipedia articles, what matters is that it's sourced and meets GNG.  Wikipedia doesn't decide what's relevant or not, the existence of sources does.  — Alexis Jazz ( talk or ping me) 17:57, 28 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
Modi'in Ezrachi: No indication of wp: notability  under GNG or SNG.  North8000 ( talk ) 02:04, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Police , Companies ,  and Israel .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:07, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I see no indication that this company meets WP:NCORP .  BD2412 T 02:26, 27 October 2023 (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!  01:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep a quick search of the company name returns English sources with a company profile , Haaretz articles , and even a Pulitzer Center piece that notes the company as "the largest security contractor currently employed by the Israeli government".  There are even more sources in Hebrew -- DannyS712 ( talk ) 19:47, 3 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! 22:48, 9 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the four refs found by DannyS712 plus 6 more that I found and added to the article. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 05:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist to assess new improvements to the article.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Remove all content that isn't sourced which is a fair bit of it and then re-assess after we see what's left.  MaskedSinger ( talk ) 11:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  It's an older Israeli company and it is a larger Israeli company, on a national scale.  As pointed out above me, there is plenty of sourcing.  So absolutely no reason to delete.  IF IT WAS part of a larger group, a merge could have been considered.  From what I could find , it is a family-owned corporation and its own entity.  Which brings me back to the sourcing.  DannyS712 found sourcing in English.  That's awesome!  Between 10, 100, and 1000 SIGCOV sources in Hebrew, 100 would be my best estimate.  I added just one that was relevant to the rest of my answer.  gidonb ( talk ) 14:30, 20 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: keep