hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Garodia School (icse) : No sources to meet WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 05:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 07:57, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep There appears to be coverage , this source from Mid-Day has a write up about the school's lack of registration with the authorities [19] , there is more at the Mumbai Mirror about a fee hike and protest from parents [20] this is covered by The Mumbai Mirror as well [21] and a passing mention again in (this one doesn't count for GNG) [22] , these sources have write ups about the school defending a handball title [23] and [24] .  The school's "parent organization" Garodia International Centre for Learning also appears to have some coverage [25] .  Perhaps we could merge the two and add all available sources to the "primary topic".  Bingo bro (Chat) 08:56, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:59, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:39, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : it does not meet the criteria of WP:NSCHOOL and WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES .  RPSkokie ( talk ) 09:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Garodia International Centre for Learning .  There isn't enough coverage about the school for a stand-alone topic, but a merge to the parent organisation seems like an acceptable ATD.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) Merge - seems like an acceptable solution; if later on people can source enough for a stand along article, separate it out.  Denaar ( talk ) 08:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Garodia International Centre for Learning .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 11:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 16:23, 1 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
Influencers Dinner : This received some flash-in-the-pan coverage in 2013 and has subsequently not received any meaningful coverage in RS.  If there is any content worth keeping, it can easily be merged with Jon Levy (behaviorist) , the person who runs this business.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 11:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Organizations ,  and New York .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:59, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Merge to Jon Levy (behaviorist) .  Both articles have a very strong feel of undisclosed paid editing and meat/socking.  This one has a single source that would help here, the Forbes is by a "former contributor" and can't be used to support notability.  Valereee ( talk ) 15:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Merge to Jon Levy (behaviorist) - It's hardly what the article claims is a "a secret dining experience" when it has its own website .  And not a new concept, considering the entertainment business has been doing such things for over a century.  William Randolph Hearst was famous for his gatherings.  Heads of government do the same thing - gather a variety of people to a given event.  Since the onset of the internet, "Influencer" has become a common label, but there's nothing new about a gathering of diverse dinner guests.  — Maile ( talk ) 15:59, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Jon Levy (behaviorist) .    This dinner is secret like Fight Club and thus by definition cannot independently meet WP:GNG. -- Milowent • has spoken 20:22, 19 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
American Presbyterian Church (founded 1979) : Citations are exclusively to primary sources or to outdated sources of questionable independence and reliability.  Participants in the 2013 AfD discussion highlighted the availability of coverage in Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions (8th edition, 2009), page 252 , but the coverage is so cursory that I do not believe it qualifies as "encyclopedic" coverage for purposes of establishing notability.  (Citations to the two-paragraph Melton mention were never added in the first place.)  The Melton source is based on a list of Reformed entities, most of which are not notable, published in 1999 ( see here ).  I cannot identify other independent, secondary, reliable sources that verify the notability of this denomination.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 17:20, 3 April 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 April 3 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and United States of America .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Suggest Merge as a section of Bible Presbyterian Church from which it emerged as a dissident faction.  Jahaza ( talk ) 19:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Jahaza -- Jfhutson ( talk ) 20:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete :.  There is no comprehensive, non-encyclopedic coverage GQO ( talk ) 7:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Bible Presbyterian Church as it is relevant content there, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 19:51, 11 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
Central Coast Mariners FC 2–8 Newcastle Jets FC : No aftermath out of the ordinary.  More than enough to mention it on a record list, as well as in the F3 Derby .  Geschichte ( talk ) 15:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Football ,  and Australia .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to F3 Derby , where it can probably have its own section.  Giant Snowman 19:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to F3 Derby .  Swan505 ( talk ) 03:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete oppose redirect as unlikely search term.  Fails WP:SPORTSEVENT .  LibStar ( talk ) 14:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agree with WP:SPORTSEVENT about not needing redirect.  Add to record list is enough.  Spinifex&Sand ( talk ) 00:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to F3 Derby .  While I agree with the redirect not being a likely search term, if the content is merged, the history needs to be preserved for attribution purposes.  I think there's enough content to merge here to make this the best option.  Daniel ( talk ) 12:06, 5 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect/Merge .  While I agree much of the game is not notable, the record of being the "highest scoring-match in A-league history" is. I also see it passing notability (events) in every category and think it passes to a degree via WP:SPORTS at least to the level of the record being notable.  UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI ( talk ) 14:16, 5 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
K-pop in Latin America : Even then, I do not think this topic merits inclusion in Wikipedia.  I can't recall any articles off the top of my head that goes into genres by country.  Since K-pop is a global phenomena, the information here is probably better included in the article on K-pop rather than on a separate page.  Also WP:NOR - this appears to be original synthesis interpreting articles than providing sourced analysis.  Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 15:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  This topic is appropriate under the K-pop article (where it already sits).  The page itself is inappropriate for a full article and would fit better as a personal website.  Googleguy007 ( talk ) 15:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Latin America .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This article feels like it should have been South Korean–Latin American relations but someone left the window open and their K-Pop fan kid decided to finish it up with details about their music instead.  Nate • ( chatter ) 22:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or very selective merge into K-pop#Latin America -- there are secondary sources discussing K-pop in Latin America as a distinct phenomenon (#328, #329, #330 in the main K-pop page, #1 here), but most of the information unique to this article is synthesizing trivia.  Gnomingstuff ( talk ) 00:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I agree with Gnomingstuff for their suggestion very selective merge .  It fits to be merged with K-pop particularly merge with "Popularity and impact" section after filtering unnecessarily details.  Lililolol ( talk ) 19:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with K-pop#Latin American : As there are sourced information that are suitable for the main K-pop article Lightoil ( talk ) 11:39, 21 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
Thaai Kelavi : Can easily be merged with Thiruchitrambalam (soundtrack) .  Charliehdb ( talk ) 10:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs , Film ,  and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Song is from the film Thiruchitrambalam that has a soundtrack page Thiruchitrambalam (soundtrack) where this song is listed.  A song from a film's soundtrack does not need it's own separate page.   If needed, some information can be merged to the soundtrack page.  RangersRus ( talk ) 11:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : possible merge candidate.  Song is not independently notable.  microbiology Marcus [ petri dish · growths ] 17:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Thiruchitrambalam (soundtrack) not independently notable.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 17:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] per nomination and comments above Merge to Thiruchitrambalam (soundtrack) .  Sk1728 ( talk ) 10:32, 30 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
Foundation for Jewish Camp : The page was originally created 15 years ago by a COI account, and since then per WP:BEFORE , no WP:SIGCOV found on this organization (beyond fleeting media mentions) that would establish WP:NORG and justify a standalone article.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 21:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Judaism .  Longhornsg ( talk ) 21:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United States of America and North America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Jewish summer camp .  Omnis Scientia ( talk ) 11:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above -- Welcome to Pandora ( talk ) 08:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Jewish summer camp .  I see no way of including information from this article into the target page.  Why should this specific organization be mentioned and none of the others?  A redirect is the best way to preserve the edit history without creating problems on the new page.  Broc ( talk ) 11:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as suggested above.  It's a good organization, but essentially it's a foundation, not a real charity.  Bearian ( talk ) 14:29, 4 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
WS-Context : I suggest merging with the WS-CAF .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 22:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing , Internet ,  and Software .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 22:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  Makes sense, since the notability is questionable.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 14:17, 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: merge
Kim Mã station : The one article cited provides no information about the station beyond naming it in two image captions.  Toadspike [Talk] 14:13, 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 ) 14:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:13, 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
Shame (Trash Talk album) : Fails the general and album-specific notability policies.  Could be redir to Trash Talk (band) .  - UtherSRG (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs , United States of America ,  and California .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Trash Talk (band) .  — siro χ o 19:31, 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: merge
Amir Soleymani : Cannot find any reliable non-primary sources about him.  Aintabli ( talk ) 21:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Iran , United Arab Emirates ,  and United Kingdom .  Aintabli ( talk ) 21:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Nifty Gateway : All of the coverage about him outside of press releases and interviews is about his lawsuit against Nifty Gateway which can be covered in that article.  S0091 ( talk ) 14:54, 12 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!  23:39, 13 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!  23:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Just delete , I think.  Merge (see below) I'm not sure if it's due or undue to put reference to this into Nifty Gateway , but I don't really see any reason to merge this content in particular.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 04:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Asilvering the reason I think a merge might be appropriate is because the case itself is significant according to The Telegraph (footnote 5): "In a case with huge repercussions for the UK consumer,...". and "The case is of such significance that the UK’s Competition and Market Authority is backing Mr Soleymani’s legal claim."  S0091 ( talk ) 14:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ S0091 hm ok, I buy that. -- asilvering ( talk ) 17:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Asilvering thanks for your consideration.   Of course had you not been convinced, ok as well.  S0091 ( talk ) 17:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Changing my vote to merge as nom per the discussion above.  Aintabli ( talk ) 19:13, 27 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
Copa Raúl Colombo : This "cup" was not a tournament or recurring sports event but just a friendly match between a national team (Argentina) and a regional/combined team (Rio de Janeiro) with no significative relevance (in fact, the AFA does not consider it an official match).  This page could be merged into Argentina national football team results (1940–1959) which lists all the unofficial matches of Argentina during that period.  Fma12 ( talk ) 18:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Football , Argentina ,  and Brazil .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:52, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I agree with the nominator that the competition lacks notably.  However, a more appropriate article for a merge, should that be the outcome, would be Argentina national football team results (unofficial matches) which includes all unofficial matches of the Argentina national team.  The article suggested only includes official results for the period.  Stevie fae Scotland ( talk ) 22:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose - I am against deleting the Copa Raul Colombo article for one reason: this match in some sources such as World Football Elo Ratings is considered a Full A game between Brazil and Argentina.  I agree that for the Argentine team itself the relevance is low, but greater clarification of what this match was about, in my opinion, is necessary.  It is also fundamental to remember that at that time, state teams in Brazil had a lot of prestige.  Svartner ( talk ) 09:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd be happy with a redirect as well.  Giant Snowman 17:48, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Argentina national football team results (unofficial matches) I feel Stevie fae Scotland makes a good case for a redirect, although I strongly suggest to merge the lead paragraph to the article.  As the unofficial matches article has no prose on lead, it would help to bulk that a bit.  Govvy ( talk ) 13:43, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I strongly support user:Govvy suggestion.  A redirect to the unofficial matches article would be the most appropriate idea.  Fma12 ( talk ) 18:16, 21 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!  21:24, 24 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