hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Center for Middle East Policy: Nothing inherently independently notable about the center that would justify a stand-alone article.  The non-SPS sourcing are just 2 copy-pastes of criticism.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:26, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Brookings Institution .  Next to no content in the article that can easily be added to host page.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 23:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics , Middle East ,  and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above, Brookings Institution .  -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 11:37, 30 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: merge
Rainbow Minute: Outside of being a relatively short article with very few sources, the subject is not very well known outside of Richmond, Virginia.  Not to mention, the article comes off more as a promotion for Diversity Richmond rather than an informative piece on the radio show.  CycloneYoris talk!  08:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Sexuality and gender .  CycloneYoris talk!  08:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with WRIR-LP : A short write up on the WRIR-LP page should be a sufficient alternative to deletion.  - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:16, 4 March 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!  07:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as suggested seems ok.  It's purely local in nature, from what I read.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 11:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Neutralhomer Hemmers ( talk ) 14:08, 11 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: merge
Foot in Mouth (EP): Appears to have not charted or been covered by reliable sources - May be some Japanese coverage, but difficult to locate.  Mdann52 ( talk ) 06:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music .  Mdann52 ( talk ) 06:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Stnh1206 ( talk ) 07:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Green Day discography#Extended plays : None of the coverage in the article is from reliable sources, and I found no reliable coverage.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 12:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The Japanese title is Bakuhatsu Live!  +5 and charted at number 45 on the Oricon Albums Chart .  I wasn't able to find much in the way of reviews, but I admittedly only made a surface-level check (爆発ライブ!+5, if anyone wants to search further for sources).  IanTEB ( talk ) 20:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for this info it helps me out.  i will add this to the page Stnh1206 ( talk ) 00:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Someone has found a oricon article on this EP where it shows to have charted.  number 8 on the reference page Stnh1206 ( talk ) 00:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment :Except it's not an EP, it's the same length and a longer track listing than the bands debut album.  If it's redirected it should be to live albums, but if it's charted it shouldn't be redirected, just retitled.  Hoponpop69 ( talk ) 13:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The thing is tune in Tokyo is 33 minutes and it says it is a live ep Stnh1206 ( talk ) 20:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Commentary in relation to WP:NALBUM number two and the new information that this EP charted in Japan?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Malinaccier ( talk ) 01:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 02:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the target mentioned above.  Prolonged discussion and scrutinty has produced relatively little.  The reason it needs to be merged is that the discography page currently claims that Foot in Mouth did not chart in Japan.  Geschichte ( talk ) 11:31, 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: merge
Holocaust Encyclopedia: There is supposedly one review(?) of this on JSTOR from "Reference & User Services Quarterly" but it was being odd and wouldn't show it to me.  Even then, not enough.  Redirect/merge to United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ?  FWIW this is not about the book The Holocaust Encyclopedia , which is notable but we don't have an article on it.  This is about the USHMM online resource.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 11:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions .  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 11:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : to the Museum as suggested seems fine.  This is basically an extension of the collections housed by the Museum.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries , History , Judaism , Websites , Germany ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as proposed.  Part of the museum and can easily be covered within.  Star Mississippi 02:53, 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: merge
Embassy of Indonesia, Kyiv: The Ukrainian and Indonesian language versions of these article have more sources but they merely confirm former ambassadors.  Fails WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Indonesia ,  and Ukraine .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: These should also be deleted: Embassy of Indonesia, Brasília , Embassy of Indonesia, Caracas , Embassy of Indonesia, Bandar Seri Begawan , Embassy of Indonesia, Tokyo , Embassy of Indonesia, Ankara , Embassy of Indonesia, Brussels , Embassy of Indonesia, Prague , Embassy of Indonesia, Athens , Embassy of Indonesia, The Hague , Embassy of Indonesia, Wellington .  CakalangSantan ( talk ) 18:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting in hope of more participation.  However, if you wish other articles to be considered for deletion, you need to make a bundled nomination at AFD, just mentioning them in a comment has no effect.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Just how many of these articles are there?  Cortador ( talk ) 11:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Indonesia–Ukraine relations : no independent notability.  Owen× ☎ 13:56, 17 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: merge
Batik Air Flight 6723: Also a lot of other cases of pilots falling asleep are not on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by SignorPignolini ( talk • contribs ) 05:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Batik Air#Incidents and accidents SchoolChromebookUser ( talk ) 13:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete it doesn't meet the notability guidelines and i agree with the reasoning behind this deletion.  this article was deleted previously so i have no idea why it was re-added.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDKUggaBanga ( talk • contribs ) 13:00, 10 May 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 May 10 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Aviation ,  and Indonesia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per WP:NOTNEWS .  It's too early to say whether this event will have lasting effects but there is a clear failure of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE .  Obviously, events in which pilots falling asleep are somewhat uncommon but the fact is that the aircraft was not close to causing a major incident/accident, although, it definitely could've had they been unresponsive for more than 30 minutes.  Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 15:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge it anyway to Batik Air#Incidents and accidents , not highly important.  DDG 9912 04:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Batik Air#Incidents and accidents .  WC gudang inspirasi ( Read! Talk! ) 02:53, 17 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: merge
Prestige Communications: Let'srun ( talk ) 01:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Companies ,  and Illinois .  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Regional Media-Virden Broadcasting , as this appears to be the successor corporation.  I agree that Prestige Communications is likely non-notable, but some of the content might be useful in building a history section in the proposed merge target.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 02:56, 21 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: merge
Beaker (drinkware): No refs on the page for many years and appears to be a WP:DICDEF with little way to expand or cite properly.  There are related ideas such as Beaker (laboratory equipment) and Bell Beaker culture but I'm not seeing the RS for this term.  JMWt ( talk ) 18:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions .  JMWt ( talk ) 18:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Technology .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Beaker (archaeology) which is also about drinkware except that it was dug up from the ground.  Could use a line that the term has been used in modern contexts?  Reywas92 Talk 19:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Cup .  Beaker (archaeology) is not a good enough fit.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 12:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed that's better.  Reywas92 Talk 19:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Cup no point of the article with no sources.  Merge per above.  The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 18:58, 23 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: merge
Destoroyah: Seems to fail GNG.  My BEFORE shows only passing mentions, and article's reception is cobbled from a few mentions in passing (from film reviews) and one listicle.  So WP:SIGCOV is not met.  WP:ATD-R easy solution is to redirect this to Godzilla vs. Destoroyah .  PS.  Note this was already redirected in this fashion in 2014 after the first AfD.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Godzilla_vs._Destoroyah .  Since the page does not have enough content and is more related to the movie, i propose merging with Godzilla_vs._Destoroyah killer bee 05:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy , Film ,  and Japan .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Godzilla vs. Destoroyah .  When it was recreated, no effort was made to demonstrate SIGCOV.  It's still in the same FANDOM-style state and better discussed in the main article.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 15:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per those above.  BD2412 T 19:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  Does not meet WP:SIGCOV .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 17:55, 13 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: merge
General Maritime Corporation: Devoke water 16:22, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 16:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: The Wikipedia Library includes access to the extensive Miramar database of shipping articles and data.  I have applied for access.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 19:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 19:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: I left a message about this AfD at WikiProject Ships asking for their comments here.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 19:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comments: I think this company is defunct.  Their domain is for sale.  I found information about them at company-histories.com/General-Maritime-Corporation-Company-History.html.  I'm not sure that's a reliable source but they mention some article sources at the end of the page.  If they once operated 43 big Suezmax and Aframax tankers, they were  certainly notable.  Tonnage-wise, that's about the size of the entire French-flagged merchant fleet and bigger than Russia's.  I don't know if we can find sources to prove this, though.  No proof, no article (because that means we don't have enough to build a reliable article).  We can potentially use selected EDGAR data as a reliable source for article-building but only if we prove notability first.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 20:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] At the time of the bankruptcy filing the company's assets exceeded a billion dollars, and the article has (uncited) statements on the size of its fleet.  At one time the entity surely was notable.  Kablammo ( talk ) 20:18, 11 July 2023 (UTC) And the New York Times also has published a number of articles on the company.  Kablammo ( talk ) 16:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to Euronav .  No in-depth article about this one to meet our guideline but refs to support some text in Euronav, which is notable.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 20:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge (selectively) into Euronav per above.  By default includes redirect.   Thanks for the research, A. B. ! gidonb ( talk ) 19:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge: to Euronav if by default there is already a redirect.  WonderCanada ( talk ) 18:35, 24 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: merge
American Educational Trust: Much of the content is self-published or copied from the organization's better-known magazine Washington Report on Middle East Affairs .  Longhornsg ( talk ) 05:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Washington Report on Middle East Affairs as an ATD.  It's almost certainly possible to find SIRS sources for this 40-year old influential organization, but a lot of them are going to be in paper/archives, and WP:NOPAGE probably suffices here due to their primary focus.  — siro χ o 06:49, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education ,  and Washington, D.C. .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:21, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to target as per above.  JackFromWisconsin ( talk | contribs ) 21:25, 23 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: merge
List of Saini people: There are not more names in list and few names which are present here also need quote for verification.  I propose this list to be deleted and few names of the community members that exists here can be added below Saini article as that article is also short.  Admantine123 ( talk ) 09:41, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism and Lists .  Admantine123 ( talk ) 09:41, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Ethnic groups .  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 10:36, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge any verified material to a new "Notable people" section in the Saini article.  The latter article is short and a standalone list is not really warranted.  Mooonswimmer 17:54, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as proposed by Mooonswimmer .  This does not pass WP:NLIST under either notability or usefulness.  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 14:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Insufficient content to make a standalone article.  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 16:21, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:23, 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: merge
Touched by an Angel (novel): four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy , Literature ,  and England .  Questions?  four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but needs edits and citations, especially the release info Sansbarry ( talk ) 01:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Find those sources and then vote keep.  Questions?  four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge selectively and redirect to New Series Adventures#List of New Series Adventures as WP:Alternative to deletion to preserve the content as history, until someone can show sources to establish notability.  The target could benefit by preserving a condensed plot summary.  Daranios ( talk ) 11:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Daranios.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 03:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to New Series Adventures#List of New Series Adventures .  I wouldn't oppose a merge, but when I tried just now to add a few sentences on the plot to the target, I couldn't see a good place for it.  There's a lot of great fan-wiki material here, but luckily, it is already preserved on the fan wiki .  With no sources for NBOOK there is no need for this article.  ~ L 🌸 ( talk ) 02:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ LEvalyn : While there isn't a perfect place as the suggested target site is currently formatted, I'd say one can fit in a brief plot summary in the "Notes" column.  Daranios ( talk ) 10:55, 6 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: merge