hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Bobroedka: It's about petty conflict between Alexei Navalny and Margarita Simonyan (the articles referenced are mostly about "why Alexei Navalny calls Margarita Simonyan beaver-eater").  So it's an article about Internet drama, is that necessarily notable?  Part of the article isn't even about this term, just about Simonyan being petty to Navalny.  The article is also very badly written and meant to promote a certain point of view, which is not what Wikipedia is about.  At best this might be redirected to Simonyan's page.  Jaguarnik ( talk ) 03:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics , Internet ,  and Russia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:38, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If anything is both reliably sourced and due then it can be merged with Margarita Simonyan and redirected.  Otherwise delete.  We don't need two articles about the same person, one under her real name and another under a nick-name.  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 19:02, 25 February 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!  07:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Margarita Simonyan - I'm concerned about this as a POV fork, and see no reason we can't cover this meme on Simonyan's page in its own section.  Suriname0 ( talk ) 17:12, 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: merge
Temürtas: Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 22:36, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Iran .  Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 22:36, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Malek Ashraf as ATD.  I agree the subject isn’t notable.  Mccapra ( talk ) 00:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No citations.  The section at Malek Ashraf#Family is also uncited and I couldn't find any reliable sources either.  As a second choice, redirect to the father on the basis of too little coverage for a stand-alone article.  Celia Homeford ( talk ) 15:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Malek Ashraf .  Subject non notable to be a stand alone article.  Piscili ( talk ) 12:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Malek Ashraf .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 23:56, 17 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
Vera Freeman: The obituary reports on a tragic death from a morphine overdose but provides no further biographical details.  None of the sources cite anything specific about the subject's career as an actress (ie where she performed, parts she played, etc.).  The article also has some rather humorous errors, such as calling "The Fencing Master" a company.  It's a play adapted from the novel The Fencing Master which Max Freeman was working for as its stage manager on tour in 1893.  In a WP:BEFORE search, which included google books, JSTOR, EBSCOE, and newspaper archives I could find zero mentions about this particular actress (no reference works, no reviews, not even advertisements), although a British actress of the same name who was alive later was in many sources.  In short, there is nothing here demonstrating the subject meets WP:NACTRESS or WP:SIGCOV .  On a side note, I have now started an article on her alleged husband (according to the sources cited in the Vera Freeman article he claimed they were never married in court) Max Freeman who was in reference works.  Perhaps a redirect/merge to this article would be preferable per WP:ATD ?  However,  I'm not sure that is even appropriate given that the later British actress did have a significant career and would be the more likely search term.  4meter4 ( talk ) 21:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Women ,  and Theatre .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:17, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I cannot find anything about her career.   As the nominator mentions, all the references are regarding a British actress who was working 15 or 20 years after her death.  -- Ssilvers ( talk ) 01:18, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't know - working 15 years after you die sounds pretty notable!!! -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 22:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect I also can find nothing about her career, but found multiple references on their separation, divorce, and her death. DaffodilOcean ( talk ) 10:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to Max Freeman . -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 22:07, 20 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: merge
Pemi attack: No sustained significant coverage.  The big ugly alien ( talk ) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime , Events , Terrorism ,  and Nigeria .  The big ugly alien ( talk ) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Timeline of the Boko Haram insurgency .  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 02:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as suggested above.  It's obvious that this fails WP:NOTNEWS , but it does deserve to be mentioned and documented in the larger conflict.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 02:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Timeline of the Boko Haram insurgency : Based on nominator's rationale.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 18:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Timeline of the Boko Haram insurgency : per above.  Drowssap SMM 23:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
Dutch Olympic Sailing Team: Not very many similar Country×Sport at the Olympic Games articles exist for non-teamsports.  Kaffet i halsen ( talk ) 21:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , Olympics ,  and Netherlands .  Kaffet i halsen ( talk ) 21:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unconventional and ugly duplication of the Category:Netherlands Olympic sailing team templates Kingsif ( talk ) 22:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge (selectively) into Royal Netherlands Watersport Association#Olympic sailing as a totally unjustified WP:SPINOFF or WP:CONTENTFORK .  This discussion and the direction it is heading reminds of a recent discussion here .  The nominator and the sole respondent thus far DID WELL to take a look at the navboxes that blow up the size of the article and may have triggered the unjustifiable (!) spinoff.  That said, these navboxes should NOT be the basis for the AfD conclusions as the article is NOT a list so the prose is the CORE and the rest is just auxiliary information if not deadweight.   The Royal Netherlands Watersport Association is the organizer of this team.  There is ONE proper paragraph of 7 sentences in the article that is BADLY needed at Royal Netherlands Watersport Association , where the section on Olympic sailing is totally EMPTY (yikes!).  A selective merge with redirect also works WAY BETTER with WP:ATD , WP:PRESERVE , and WP:CHEAP .  gidonb ( talk ) 04:20, 2 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge (selectively) into Royal Netherlands Watersport Association#Olympic sailing .  "Selectively" meaning not with the templates, but with any useful, sourced prose text.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 12:26, 2 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Absolutely!  We need a SUMMARY table, not tables/templates/navboxes specific to individual games.  It doesn't exist so in this merge nothing should move with the long paragraph! gidonb ( talk ) 16:41, 2 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: merge
Criminal accusation: Chidgk1 ( talk ) 18:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A clear-cut case of WP:NOTDICTIONARY .  TH1980 ( talk ) 00:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already brought to AFD so Soft Deletion is not an option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to accusation , which already covers this topic.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 17:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As stated by TH1980 , Wikipedia is not a dictionary .  Jacona ( talk ) 00:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just to clarify, Merge to accusation is also an acceptable outcome, IMO.  — Jacona ( talk ) 10:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to accusation per Thebiguglyalien and WP:ATD .  The current content of the article is a dicdef, but the concept can be developed in greater depth.  BD2412 T 03:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to accusation per Thebiguglyalien Bookworm857158367 ( talk ) 07:04, 27 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
Embassy of the United States, Zagreb: Biruitorul Talk 14:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Croatia ,  and United States of America .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:10, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As far as embassies in Croatia go, this is probably the largest and most odd one, so it sounds like there's at least some WP:POTENTIAL .  -- Joy ( talk ) 15:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That’s a fair point.  On the other hand, as long as everything we currently have fits into the article on the bilateral relation, it seems like this article is not quite necessary.  Perhaps a redirect is the solution?  Biruitorul Talk 15:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete unnecessary content fork of bilateral relations article.  LibStar ( talk ) 05:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the bilateral relations article, if there is any content to merge.  I find the argument that this is an unnecessary content fork to be compelling.  Carrite ( talk ) 03:42, 23 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
2022 Oakland party shooting: Coverage is simply a statement of facts, crime happened, suspects arrested.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - per WP:NOTNP Grahaml35 ( talk ) 18:57, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The mere fact that something was reported in newspapers is not enough to warrant an article.  Events either need sustained secondary coverage ( WP:GNG ) or social/political ramifications that establish historical significance or affect a wide region ( WP:EVENTCRIT ).  This has neither.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 22:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - or merge to an Oakland crime page.  It affected the Berkeley and Oakland community due to their young ages and also how often do you hear about young brothers being murdered for no reason in some psycho’s rampage?  BigBeefShareef ( talk ) 15:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To be honest, almost routinely now in the USA...  Oaktree b ( talk ) 18:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It was pretty notable in the East Bay area.  Ask any teens or 20s people or parents with teen kids and they most likely heard of this BigBeefShareef ( talk ) 15:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - honestly, I don't see the notability of the event.  Most of the sustained coverage comes from more local sources and there's no real impact outside of a few arrests.  Now this can be Redirected or Merged into the List of mass shootings in the United States in 2022 article as that mentions the mass shooting.  Onegreatjoke ( talk ) 17:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to consider the possibility of redirecting or merging some of the article content.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Agree with nominator; and doesn't meet N:TEMP either.  User:Let'srun 19:52, 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: merge
Chief firefighter: The article was created in 2005 yet is a single-paragraph stub with no sources.  It covers the exact same topic as fire chief but with a different name and for some reason a Prussian focus.  It's also obviously inaccurate at a glance, calls North American "chief firefighters" "fire captains" despite the existence of an article for fire chief .  JM2023 ( talk ) 05:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to fire chief and be done with it.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to fire chief .  Should probably merge chief fire officer too.  Firefighter ranks in general could probably use cleanup.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 20:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to fire chief per those above.  I can find no source that delineates a distinction between a fire chief and a chief firefighter.  I do think, however, that chief fire officer may be something different, and UK-specific.  BD2412 T 02:36, 22 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
Hibiscus Coast busway station: Just press releases and routine news reports of events occurring there.  I propose merging to Northern Busway, Auckland I am also nominating the following related pages Albany busway station ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Constellation busway station ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Sunnynook busway station ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Smales Farm busway station ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Akoranga busway station ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Traumnovelle ( talk ) 01:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and New Zealand .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:05, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural oppose I don't think it was a good idea to bundle this nomination.  At the very least, Constellation Station is notable; there's enough coverage to bring it over the GNG line.  I therefore have to oppose this in its entirety.  Schwede 66 07:33, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If you can provide sigcov I'll withdraw Constellation.  I couldn't find anything with a search.  Traumnovelle ( talk ) 08:03, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge all to Northern Busway, Auckland per lack of significant coverage.  If the issue of notability can be determined for individual stations then the articles can be reassessed.  Ajf773 ( talk ) 10:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Bundled nominations like this require more participation than this one has had so far.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge all to Northern Busway, Auckland .  Djflem ( talk ) 10:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect all to Northern Busway, Auckland#Bus stations .  No objection to merge if very selectively yet best left to the bus people via redirect.  gidonb ( talk ) 23:48, 5 July 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
Cầu Giấy station: After scouring the Internet, I found [48] [49] two extremely similar sources with photos of this station.  I am not sure if they count toward significant coverage, but that is all I could find, and it is not enough to meet the GNG.  The one source in the article [50] doesn't qualify as significant coverage either – the station is mentioned once in a quote and twice in image captions, and the images weren't even necessarily taken at this station!  Toadspike [Talk] 14:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , Transportation ,  and Vietnam .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge the position data, etc. to Line 3 (Hanoi Metro) and redirect there if sources cannot be found (they're most likely to be in Vietnamese, so do check in that language).  There is no reason to delete the information present in the article which will be useful if it is expanded in future.  Thryduulf ( talk ) 18:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge there isn't enough coverage (or content) for a separate article from Line 3 (Hanoi Metro) yet, but there might be in the future.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 23:19, 21 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
Mokujin: Reason: "Because the sources don't really talk about him and sources are just top 10 Tekken characters, top 11 Tekken characters etc."  Additionally, Mokujin hasn't received any commentary at all.  Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 22:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 22:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge No actual commentary found about the character and the sources don't mainly talk about him.  Kazama16 ( talk ) 17:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge All primary or listicles.  "28 of the most favourite video game trees ever."  Yeah, no.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 20:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Tekken characters : Even though I still don't agree with these mass AFDs, I'm not seeing much for Mokujin that could save his article.  He's barely even a character, just a mimic for the other characters in the series.  So I don't see how someone like him could get the coverage.  MoonJet ( talk ) 00:50, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per all.  The sources support notability for the list of characters, but not individually.  Some of this can be selectively moved there, per WP:PRESERVE .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 13:19, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  [26] Found a significant and in-depth study that specifically examined Mokujin.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 14:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I doubt a single sigcov could be enough for the article to be notable, hence still on for the Merge .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 17:31, 28 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: merge
Lake Youngs Park: DirtyHarry991 ( talk ) 02:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Lake Youngs where it's worth a mention.  No merit to a standalone per my BEFORE.  Star Mississippi 02:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge - I agree that Lake Youngs is a good target as an alternative to deletion.  Netherzone ( talk ) 05:07, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment this park is extremely obscure, and there is no coverage from RS.  A merge could be performed, though it would just mean adding a single sentence to Lake Youngs .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DirtyHarry991 ( talk • contribs ) 06:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] leaning delete I'm seeing the same thing: I can tell the park exists, and that is all.  The county website says nothing about it, for instance.  17:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC) 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