hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
AS/NZS 3760: CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:13, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per WP:GNG and WP:KITCHENSINK .  TarnishedPath talk 09:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 20:56, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails GNG.  No third party sources provided.  LibStar ( talk ) 03:10, 24 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
Ashish Kansara: While language is an issue, sourcing is mostly inappropriate for a BLP and no assertion he meets N:ARTIST.  Appears to be a commercial artist, vs. one who would be in a museum or otherwise meet Notability criteria.  Star Mississippi 23:07, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Artists , India ,  and Gujarat .  Star Mississippi 23:07, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For what it's worth, it's not the first time the article was pushed into mainspace .  In any case, the sources seem mostly promotional in nature, so I would say delete .  Liliana UwU ( talk / contributions ) 00:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] They've been promoting the artist for a month now.  I will block for UPE if they don't declare.  Star Mississippi 01:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, you are right, I am promoting the artist because, Rogan painting artist is now rare.  now only two artists, that's why I care so much.  this is not for promotional purposes.  Thanks Usblogger27 ( talk ) 02:50, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That is not the purpose of Wikipedia.  Please stop, or you will be blocked.  Star Mississippi 12:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Per Usblogger27 's recent claim, it seems the issue is leaning towards WP:ADVOCACY .  But they are unable to accept that Wikipedia is not for it per WP:NOTADVOCACY .  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 12:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  A strange article I have seen.  I have checked about the article person in all Google search (found nothing) and the references also.  Even those YouTube videos too don't cite the article person instead the art.  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 12:30, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Move back to draft and move-lock the page so as to require administrative review before this can be restored to mainspace again.  BD2412 T 17:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I can't find any indication this person passes WP:NARTIST .  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Catfurball ( talk ) 19:38, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This article bears a similarity to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashish shantilal kansara .   Very questionable pictures uploaded to the Commons.  The article is about a working craftsman, but does not rise to the level of notable.  Quite a bit of the article is about Rogan painting rather than the artisan.  WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 23:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks, that was helpful.  I just pinged you in the SPI Star Mississippi 02:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Move back to draft , agree with BD2412 , I could see this becoming an article, but it's certainly not ready for mainspace in its current form.  Wikipedialuva ( talk ) 06:00, 17 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
Murad Gayali: No sign of WP:GNG or even WP:SPORTBASIC #5.  The best sources found were a goalscorer listing in Sportal , a transfer announcement based on a social media post in Offside Plus and a squad listing in Redaktor .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Azerbaijan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:01, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete —per nom.  I couldn't find anything of substance on this player.  Seems not to have played in four years...  Anwegmann ( talk ) 20:03, 14 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
Suchodębie PGR: Kotbo generated these articles based on articles in PL Wiki, but this one has already been deleted.  The location is in Suchodębie which we already have an article about.  FOARP ( talk ) 13:26, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland .  FOARP ( talk ) 13:26, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No pl interwiki, no evidence this State Farm (PGR) has stand-alone notability.  TERYT only lists the main village for that county, no related hamlet or anything else.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Piotrus -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 00:24, 23 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
Homa (company): BoraVoro ( talk ) 13:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - This topic has been deleted previously.  See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homa Games .  Hitro talk 15:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games , Companies ,  and France .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - The article was created and edited by User:Kevin Wolstenholme who has a self-declared conflict of interest with the article subject.  -- Mika1h ( talk ) 14:58, 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!  23:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Doesn't satsify WP:GNG for my liking and shouldn't be made by COI editor.  MaskedSinger ( talk ) 08:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - It has coverage from sources that indicate notability - VentureBeat (considered reliable) and Techcrunch (likely reliable in this instance).  It may need paring-down, no doubt, as some of the content referenced from less reliable sources may not meed the standard.  WmLawson ( talk ) 00:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hey WmLawson , neither the VentureBeat article (regurgitated company announcement on raising funding) nor either of the TechCrunch articles (both regurgitated funding announcements) meet GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability, or am I missing something?  Can you indicate which paragraphs in those articles contain "Independent Content" and I'll take another look, thank you.  HighKing ++ 20:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I believe there is no need for deletion for this article.  It has coverage, and is a relatively notable company, I would not delete this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhyIsThisSoHard575483838 ( talk • contribs ) Delete This is a company therefore GNG/ WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company* .   "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject .  I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing ++ 20:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Jonathan Ávila (footballer): Simione001 ( talk ) 00:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 00:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 00:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 00:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  His career would suggest there should be coverage.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:40, 26 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
Mario Party (disambiguation): Loytra ( talk ) 16:42, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nom, basically all of them are partial disambiguations.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 16:52, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  Looks more like a poorly put together game list, which isn't necessary since we already have a series article at Mario Party that lists them all out.  Sergecross73 msg me 17:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above JoshuaAuble ( talk ) ( edits ) 15:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Redirect to Mario Party - I think a redirect could be useful since I don't see it would violate WP:G14 since it links to to a disambiguation page or a page that performs a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).  JuniperChill ( talk ) 19:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC) (Changed to delete, per comment below) [ reply ] But it's not disambiguating anything though, that's the problem.  And why in the world would anyone use that as a search term?  Sergecross73 msg me 19:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Ah yes, I forgot that there are only two articles that could be refered to as 'Mario Party' and the rest, not so much.  Changed to Delete JuniperChill ( talk ) Delete .  Not a useful search term, plus not a dab page.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 21:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom; all the entries are listed in the main article for the franchise, and most are partial title matches.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 02:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , (oddly organized) partial title list with no practical use.  TappyTurtle [ talk | contribs ] 14:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  MK at your service.  10:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  There's nothing here that isn't already at the primary topic article.  Shhhnotsoloud ( talk ) 20:55, 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: delete
Moäng Ratu Dona Ines Ximenes da Silva of Flores: External links do not seem reliable or verifiable.  Kazamzam ( talk ) 16:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Indonesia .  Kazamzam ( talk ) 16:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Royalty and nobility .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Support : No results on Google Scholar and the only connections to Indonesia with "Ximenes da Silva" are with Thomas of Sikka, per Brill and Springerlink, and Alexius of Sikka, per De Gruyter and Springerlink.  XxTechnicianxX ( talk ) 03:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Marianne Ugalde: I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG .  All that came up in my searches were transactional announcements , a story about the subject contracting COVID , and a story about the subject responding to fan insults .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 02:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Costa Rica .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 02:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 14:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 14:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per nom.  Svartner ( talk ) 17:20, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Slight Delete , I feel like you might be able to claim that she passes GNG with the coronavirus and fan insults articles if you also count the sources already on the page.  However, I those look like databases and, in my opinion, should count to notability as much as a mention.  This one is really borderline though.  ✶Qux yz ✶ 01:41, 19 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
Abrar University: Previously draftified but immediately moved back to the main space by the author, so next stop AfD.  -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 17:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education ,  and Somalia .  DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 17:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I find it difficult to understand the concept of a "non-notable university" (apart from a diploma mill, which this is not ).  I note that there is a university of the same name in Tehran .  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 07:52, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Per WP:NSCHOOL , "All universities, colleges and schools [...] must either satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations, the general notability guideline, or both." .  Those guidelines ( WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT ) require significant coverage in multiple independent and reliable secondary sources.  This article cites no such sources, hence it fails GNG.  -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 08:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:33, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete doesn't demonstrate a GNG pass, and didn't find any evidence that was the case on a cursory search of online research databases.  They might exist in another language, but I don't think there's smoke in English options.  Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:47, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nominator and David Fuchs.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 22:57, 17 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
Gemini (rapper): Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 18:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Created by seemingly one purpose stale account, about a non-notable rapper with inadequate coverage.  The listed sources are mostly product pages detailing their records.  Cursory google search didn't provide with any in-depth RS coverage.  Surprised how it lasted for 16 years.  X ( talk ) 19:27, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete together with numerous albums - Altenmann >talk 22:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - The rapper also had three album articles and one more for a song, which were all dependent on just a single retail source each, and for each I could find no reliable reviews or other sources via Internet searches.  Those articles should have never fallen through the cracks in the first place, so I have redirected them all to the rapper's article as standard procedure for non-notable albums/songs.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 13:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Note that this guy has released records under various names, probably because his original zodiac name was already taken.  Under the name "Big Geminii" (note the extra "i") he has a basic AllMusic bio ( [6] ), but it doesn't provide very much detail beyond a list of releases.  Otherwise I can find nothing beyond the usual retail and streaming sites.  Not enough on which to build an encyclopedic article.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 13:34, 17 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
Ghost (operating system): QuietCicada - Talk 14:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software .  QuietCicada - Talk 14:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Unable to find coverage that isn't the project website or github page, doesn't meet WP:GNG .  If every hobby OS needed a page we'd be here all week with random articles.  Author of the article is the person who made the program, making it a WP:COI issue as well.  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 18:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .   I was unable to find any secondary sources referencing the Ghost kernel.  Holzklöppel ( talk ) 21:55, 31 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
India's Most Attractive Brands: I only found this page after looking to add an image book cover in the infobox, but then I looked into it further and discovered that the page itself really qualifies for a deletion AfD.  Iljhgtn ( talk ) 22:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and Products .  AllyD ( talk ) 08:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : An article on a non-notable research company's survey, published between 2013 and 2018.  These picked up the expected passing mentions of the named top brands but I am not seeing evidence that the published survey was in itself notable .  AllyD ( talk ) 09:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: The article appears to simply promote a paid survey by a market research company.  Further, no significant third-party media organizations are referencing the study, indicating that it has minimal to no value in and of itself.  Volcom95 ( talk ) 07:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom lacks sources.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 11:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom.  Page is WP:SYNTH and is made for WP:PROMO .  Research is not notable and not backed by any secondary independent sources.  RangersRus ( talk ) 12:08, 1 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
Truth Is (Brother Ali song): UtherSRG (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  Wikipedia should reflect notability, not be used to attempt to create it.  Kablammo ( talk ) 10:05, 14 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