hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Stefan Savić (Serbian footballer): Using his name in Cyrillic (Стефан Савић), my Google search exclusively came up with that Montenegrin footballer; nothing about the Serb with the same birth name.  The only reliable source regarding AfD target seems to be Sportski Žurnal when he played for FK Sloga Petrovac na Mlavi in 2015.  However, after translation , it's only a passing mention in squad list which definitely doesn't count as significant coverage.  Article fails WP:GNG overall.  Clara A. Djalim ( talk ) 11:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Serbia .  Clara A. Djalim ( talk ) 11:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:32, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 19:56, 29 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
James Thomas Fishback: No new developments as far as I can tell, still likely to fail WP:NBIO KH-1 ( talk ) 05:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  KH-1 ( talk ) 05:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Still not seeing notability, sourcing is PR items or non-RS.  I don't find any other sources we can use, SALT so this doesn't come back in a month.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:18, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : WP:RUNOFTHEMILL business person.  No indication of notability.  He's done one interview with Fox News but there is no independent, significant coverage at all.  C F A 💬 16:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I find articles that he has written, and he has been on Fox News.  The main source about him regards a lawsuit he filed against a former employer.  That would not be sufficient for notability.  I tried shortening his name to "James Fishback" which is what I mostly found in the sources in the article but that brought up mainly false hits.  The article is ref-bombed and if the excess were removed it would be a very thin article indeed.  Lamona ( talk ) 05:30, 25 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
Jones!: After some searching, I couldn't find any reliable sources that would support its notability, not to mention the article itself has no sources.  It's just not a notable TV channel, end of story.  Kuchi Kopi ( talk ) 11:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and New Zealand .  Shellwood ( talk ) 13:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  It's just a channel of acquired programming.  Not even sure if it worth a redirect.  Ajf773 ( talk ) 10:54, 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
Corwin, Henry County, Indiana: The GNIS entry lists its source as "Illustrated Historical Atlas of the State of Indiana. Chicago: Baskin, Forster and Company, 1876. An extensively illustrated atlas which includes several U.S. and Indiana thematic and political maps, and maps of counties, towns and cities. The atlas also has many illustrations and portraits, patrons' and business directories, county histories and a U.S. Post Office list."  As far as I can tell this was never anything more than a named point on the railroad.  – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable railroad waypoint, nothing more.   The name "Corwin" does appear on USGS topo maps starting in 2010, which makes me think someone as USGS just blindly entered the term from GNIS, much like the creator of this article certainly did.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 13:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Henry county Indiana, has a few good sources that discuss it's place names EG [41] that don't mention this place, so why should it be mentioned here?  James.folsom ( talk ) 21:09, 19 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
Rosewater Limited Liability Company: Also, created by one of the co-founders.  Graywalls ( talk ) 01:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Companies .  Graywalls ( talk ) 01:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Doesn't meet any GNG, and even if it did meet WP:NCORP this would require a TNT due to the POV of the creator.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Let'srun ( talk • contribs ) 02:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Ohio .  AllyD ( talk ) 07:29, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Only mentions of rose water found, nothing about this company (?).  Even what's given for sourcing in the article is minimal, not sure what the scan of the official document adds for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:47, 14 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
I Live Here Projects: First 4 refs are not WP:IS .  Next 4 are about a book produced by the topic, so not WP:SIGCOV .  Fails WP:NORG and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Africa ,  and United States of America .  UtherSRG (talk) 12:57, 11 September 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!  06:38, 18 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
Jack Salvatore: Both sources are not independent, failing WP:IS .  One is just social media, and the other are clearly PR Newswire.  I didn't think being in Marquis Who’s Who is an automatic sign that he is notable, more references are required to establish notability.  Thank you.  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:33, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Businesspeople , United States of America ,  and Arizona .  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:33, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Can't find SIGCOV.  And yes, Marquis Who's Who is unreliable and can't be used to establish notability , much less solitary articles about getting into Marquis Who's Who .  〜 Festucalex • talk 07:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Nothing in the article is adequately sourced.  Nothing in the article confers automatic notability.  For accomplishments of this nature, we need GNG-level in-depth reliable independent sourcing and we do not have it.  Certainly Marquis doesn't count as reliable.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 07:16, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Both sources in the articles are bad (LinkdIn and a press release) and I didn't find any good.  Deckkohl ( talk ) 13:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 23:35, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Comparison of IDE choices for Haxe programmers: HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 04:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Lists .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per WP:NLIST , the grouping itself has to be shown to be notable by reliable sources, which it does not appear to have been.  popo dameron ⁠ talk 04:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:24, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Doesn't meet WP:NLIST I'm afraid.  Something like C++ might, but this is an obscure language and this comparison is not made in any reliable sources.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:51, 23 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
Eagle Eye Home Care: Sourced to advertorials.  KH-1 ( talk ) 01:46, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  KH-1 ( talk ) 01:46, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance , Health and fitness ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:55, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination does not appear to meet criteria of WP:NCORP GuyBanks ( talk ) 02:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete doesn't have enough independent, reliable sources to prove its importance Yakov-kobi ( talk ) 11:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : appears to be lifted directly from their LinkedIn profile.  Pure PROMO with no coverage outside of PR items.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:47, 27 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
Portuguese in Vatican City: The vast majority of the article is off-topic, being about Vatican-Portuguese relations rather than Portuguese people in Vatican City.  Cordless Larry ( talk ) 18:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups , Religion ,  and Portugal .  Cordless Larry ( talk ) 18:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Sources already referenced and linked in the article readily demonstrate GNG, including [11] [12] and to a lesser extent [13] [14] [15] .  It probably makes sense to handle the topic differently, perhaps with a lead rewrite.  It does indeed cover history of relations, language, etc.  But such a change is an editorial choice, and needn't be enforced at AfD.  — siro χ o 22:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd suggest that the material on relations might be better covered in an article on Holy See - Portugal relations (which would need to be created, but Spain and France already have such articles, so it would fit well with those).  Hmee2 ( talk ) 18:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete 16 people?  Nonono.  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 06:04, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  the existence of this article did cause me to laugh very hard, but that is not any reason to keep it.  a national community of 16 people do not need their own article.  DrowssapSMM ( talk ) 23:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not enough here or sufficiently notable to warrant an article or satisfy GNG.  I note there is an article called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people#Portuguese_diaspora in need of work that could reasonable incorporate a sentence or a line in a table on the Vatican.  Also scope for creating an article on Holy-See Portugal Relations.  Hmee2 ( talk ) 18:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would support some sort of split/merge like this.  — siro χ o 18:59, 26 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
Valiyaveettil Movie International: No inherent notability.  Passing mentions and routine coverage won't count.  The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 20:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 20:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:54, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom.  No significant coverage from multiple reliable sources to meet GNG.  116.68.98.76 ( talk ) 12:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 20:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ORG is not meeting here.  Okoslavia ( talk ) 06:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom  -- Devoke water 09:44, 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: delete
Gonzalo Lira: Minor mentions in publications, non-notable films.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Chile .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete no evidence he’s somehow become more notable since the last time. —- Ermenrich ( talk ) 20:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Do not Delete Gonzalo Lira is a notable person because he was imprisoned by the Ukrainian police, for only using his freedom of speech.  Imprisonment of political opponents by the Ukrainian government and the Western world, is notable, and therefore this article should not be deleted.  It's a First amendment right: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." *: Nybygger ( talk ) 04:37, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We aren't Congress, we can't pass laws.  He isn't American.  Please re-read the article on the first amendment, it's not applicable here.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:NOTABILITY is established by coverage in WP:reliable sources , not by the fact that something is in the first amendment or you think it's important.  There is no evidence that mainstream reliable sources outside the pro-Russian information bubble care about this man.-- Ermenrich ( talk ) 12:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This is the 4th time in AfD, I'd salt liberally if this goes towards deletion, again.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Ben Aissa (Benji): As an entrepreneur, coverage is limited to passing mentions for business awards and press releases.  As a swimmer, you'd think there'd be coverage for winning gold in the 1987 African Games ( List of African Games medalists in swimming (men)#200m Breaststroke ), but I can't actually find any coverage stemming from that victory that's not a database.  A412 ( Talk • C ) 22:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Sportspeople ,  and Tunisia .  A412 ( Talk • C ) 22:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Coverage found is about another individual involved in the SNC Lavalin affair, nothing about this person.  Having a patent or two doesn't make you notable.  Rest reads like fluff.  And crypto.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Seems like a WP:SPA -created WP:NOTCV -failing promo to me.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 14:25, 25 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
Panthers–Seahawks rivalry: Nothing has changed since this article was deleted in 2020 (though I do not think WP:G4 applies, this article was created by a different user who was not on Wikipedia in 2020).   The references fail WP:GNG in terms of establishing a rivalry.  All are WP:ROUTINE coverage except this Rolling Stone article which explains the teams "could become" a great rivalry (with no follow-up that such a rivalry was established).  Frank Anchor 13:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football , North Carolina , and Washington .  Frank Anchor 13:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not an actual rivalry.  SportingFlyer T · C 13:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not an actual rivalry.  The Rolling Stone article is from 2016, evidently nothing emerged.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The only sources are from 2016 and merely suggest that a rivalry could hypothetically develop, but there is no substantive evidence that it actually exists or ever existed.  This agrees with the deleted 2020 version of the article: In 2016, Seahawks coach Pete Carroll claimed the Panthers were not a rival.  USA Today claimed in 2019 that a rivalry no longer existed between the two teams and a Seahawks USA Today blog in 2019 gave the Panthers only an honourable mention for biggest rivals, saying "this isn't too much of a rivalry."  Beyond that, this is nothing but a matchup log hardly worth its own article.  -- Kinu t / c 21:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Did a quick search and found the Rollin Stones article, but we do not WP:CRYSTALBALL about rivalries.  They either exist with WP:SIGCOV or they don't.  Conyo14 ( talk ) 23:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As the nom mentioned, the sources are all routine coverage for the NFL.  There's not enough here to show that there's actually a rivalry.  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 19:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : none of the cited sources are centered on a "rivalry" between the teams.  PK-WIKI ( talk ) 01:10, 29 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
Mediapoint: Orphan article.  Many of the sources listed (and not cited inline) are dead.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : All sources are listed are dead.  It's an orphan article and I agreed with LibStar.  CastJared ( talk ) 00:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] archives exist for all of the links so the fact they are dead is not relevant Jack4576 ( talk ) 11:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry, I think I suggest that it will keep.  CastJared ( talk ) 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'll reverse to delete.  CastJared ( talk ) 04:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising , Companies ,  and Australia .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 02:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Archives of the links demonstrate this org had SIGCOV in 2009.  Notability is not temporary Jack4576 ( talk ) 11:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Jack4576 : Although I appreciate the sources that you've added, I would say that it still fails WP:SIGCOV because both are largely comprised of interviews.  You mention "SIGCOV from 2009", however both of the sources you added were from 2012.  Do you have any 2009 sources that could be added to the article?  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 06:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If you click and open the archived link.  “Brothers Persist as downturn bites advertisers” you can see the article date as 2 Aug 2009 Jack4576 ( talk ) 06:44, 19 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, 19 May 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!  04:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Still fails WP:GNG , and per my earlier comment the sources added fail WP:SIGCOV .  Jack hasn't added any more sources and is now banned from AfD, so I don't think much is going to be done here.  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:38, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete