hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Bryan Fury : GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 22:58, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr.  Bosconovitch and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kunimitsu (Tekken) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlatorNator ( talk • contribs ) 23:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 11:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 11:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Tekken characters .  No notability besides meaningless listicles.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 14:30, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Very Weak Merge to List of Tekken characters .  Bryan is one of the most popular characters in Tekken series and one of the three most used characters in Tekken 7 [1] , and he is also notable for being a half cyborg.  He is also very popular among professional players and audience just see views of this video.  [2] 103.120.117.110 ( talk ) 17:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ https://m.youtube.com/watch? v=tgMTQ0jsXTo ^ https://m.youtube.com/watch? v=GAw5FPy5ufo Merge to List of Tekken characters .  Scrapes the bottom of the barrel for reception and can't really justify a standalone article.  WP:POPULARITY is not a reason to keep.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 21:19, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Tekken characters per above.  // Timothy :: talk 02:23, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No merge or very weak merge to List of Tekken characters See my opinion on the delete request; Talk:Bryan_Fury#Deletion_request TheKerberos01 ( ᴛ ) 13:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If you oppose deletion or merging, type "Keep" in bold.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 11:29, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Tekken characters.  Sources are lacking and third-party reception section is scant.  We've merged Mortal Kombat articles with more than this.  The YouTube links below also do not establish notability.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 17:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Tekken characters per all.  Once you remove the questionable sources and WP:TRIVIALCOVERAGE , you're not left with enough to support an article.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 19:22, 15 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
2016 Pacific Rugby League Tests : CONCERN: Information here is just a copy of International rugby league in 2016 and has no unique information.  Pacific games don't need there own page per size split policy .  Please also see deletion discussion for Pacific Rugby League International .  Mn1548 ( talk ) 17:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby league-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:13, 24 August 2023 (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/2023 August 28 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:20, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lebanon , Oceania , Australia ,  and New Zealand .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/Merge with International rugby league in 2016 .  No need for a separate page.  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 09:36, 29 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: merge
Vathlo Island : Fails WP:GNG .  The best I can find is the cited [38] (Gizmodo), but that mentions it in passing (few sentences).  It has a bit of analysis but I think that's too little ( WP:SIGCOV is not met).  Unless someone can find better sources (my BEFORE, as noted, failed), I can only suggest an WP:ATD-R to the List of DC Universe locations .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 12:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Comics and animation .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 12:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Krypton .  I don't think there is enough here to pass GNG, but there is some good sourced commentary here which would make for a nice subsection about Vathlo Island on the Krypton page.  Merging/redirecting to a relevant article is always preferable to me than a massive list article.  Rhino131 ( talk ) 13:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or merge The cited The Ages of Superman does discuss Vathlo Island for several pages.  In addition to the Gizmondo article, Superheroes and American Self Image and Is Superman Circumcised?  , p. 231 have brief but non-trivial (and similar) analysis.  In total, I think that's enough to establish notability in accordance with WP:WHYN .  Daranios ( talk ) 16:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Looking again I am fine with a merge to Krypton (comics) (but not to List of DC Universe locations ), too, as much of the discussion in the secondary sources is of the relationship of the population of Vathlo Island to the rest of Kryptonian society.  Not on the basis of WP:GNG but Rorshacma 's WP:NOPAGE argument.  And the content then spills over into Kryptonian and Ethnic stereotypes in comics#Black .  Daranios ( talk ) 16:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Krypton (comics) - The The Ages of Superman book does look like a good source, but the other available sources are pretty brief mentions.  But, regardless, I do believe this is a WP:NOPAGE situation, where the topic is better covered as part of the broader subject for the added context that presenting the information in that way would provide.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 22:38, 22 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
Battle of Shevchenkove : It lasted one day and was a minor skirmish in which the Russians hopelessly tried to stop the advancing Ukrainian forces.  The contents can be easily integrated into 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive .  Super Ψ Dro 15:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Russia ,  and Ukraine .  Super Ψ Dro 15:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Military .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive .  Most of the sources in the article are used for the background section.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 16:18, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the "Kharkiv counteroffensive" article, non-notable battle otherwise.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive , minor skirmish as part of a larger action.  Mztourist ( talk ) 03:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to 2022 Kharkiv counteroffensive would be the best way to document this skirmish which was part of the counteroffensive.  TH1980 ( talk ) 02:45, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per nom.  RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 19:15, 3 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: merge
List of NCAA Division III independents football records : This is a list of records for loosely-related college football team seasons.  These teams are "independent" and do not belong to conferences, only joined together because they are in a division of college football together.  The text in many of these templates also show up as wikitext because of improper code writing.  This list was also created as a way to try avoiding deletion of the individual templates at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 June 13#Template:2023 NCAA Division III independents football records .  Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Lists .  Eagles 24/7 (C) 14:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Nothing is here connecting these records together; fails WP:NLIST .  Let'srun ( talk ) 12:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Member of an already established set of pages.  ( List of Division I FBS independents football standings (1973–present) , List of NCAA Division II independents football records ) Unless you plan on also nominating both of those for deletion to remain consistent.  But I reckon that is not the plan since this is the only one hindering the deletion of the Division III independent templates.  Thetreesarespeakingtome ( talk ) 17:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:AGF .  Let'srun ( talk ) 17:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Thetreesarespeakingtome.  At the very least, this article could be merged to NCAA Division III independent schools .  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 03:10, 22 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 ) 15:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Wikipedia is not a stats sheet.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 20:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Just saying - if this isn't a notable list/container article, none of the standings template pages are notable.  SportingFlyer T · C 17:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I did not nominate other articles similar to this because I feel this one in particular is the least notable, and I don't agree that everything else would have to be deleted as a result of this discussion.  WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS would apply.  Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:58, 2 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
Copa 50imo Aniversario de Clarín : Lack of Wikipedia:Notability .  This "cup" was not a tournament or recurring sports event but just a friendly match between Brazil and Argentina with no significative historic relevance for any of them.  Although this article has several reliable sources, most of them refer to the Clarín newspaper (main sponsor) and the presence of forward Tulio Maravilha (who had scored a goal with his hand in the 1995 Copa América – source: here ) rather than the match itself.  This page could be merged into Argentina national football team results (1980–1999) which lists all the matches of the side during that period.  Fma12 ( talk ) 19:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football , Argentina ,  and Brazil .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:36, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 10:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Alternatively merge/redirect to Argentina–Brazil football rivalry .  Giant Snowman 10:11, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge selectively into Argentina–Brazil football rivalry .  The match itself doesn't pass WP:GNG , but merge an redirect to general rivalry article is fine, and similar to the recent AFD for 150th Anniversary Heritage Match , which was also a non-notable friendly match.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 10:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Part merge and redirect per Joseph.  I also feel that prose should be added to Argentina national football team results (1980–1999) about the match, the article is pretty barren on prose.  Govvy ( talk ) 13:11, 22 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
Vilémov u Šluknova railway station : It's not even a building, just a stop on request.  The timetable is not a sufficient reference and there are no others.  FromCzech ( talk ) 12:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Czech Republic .  FromCzech ( talk ) 12:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Vilémov (Děčín District) in a "transportation" section, seems pretty straightforward.  – filelakeshoe ( t / c ) 🐱 12:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The station building is just an unstaffed shelter.  I would guess, though, that when the line opened in 1904, there was a bigger building with at least one employee and possibly several.  Perhaps the original building was damaged by fire or military action, or perhaps the railway company just let the building deteriorate.  Even if a station is only a shelter or a signpost, there's a good chance that it was once a staffed building.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 15:45, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That's pure speculation and unhelpful.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 16:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, it's speculation, and that's why I didn't ! vote keep at this point.  I was pointing out a possible path of research for someone with access to offline or paywalled sources.  The topic of a station covers not only its present configuration but how it existed in the past.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 16:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Coverage sufficient to meet WP:GNG .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 15:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Vilémov (Děčín District) - Looking on Google Earth the shelter doesn't appear to have existed in 2000 so unless the "station" was at a different location then the shelter is new, Anyway fails GNG (can't find anything under it's Czech name), sources in the article aren't reliable sources - just a timetable and what seems to be personal blogs).  – Davey 2010 Talk 17:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Vilémov (Děčín District)#Transport .  Kudos to Eastmain for putting in the sources.  The station apparently dates back to 1904 when the line was constructed and was called Wölmsdorf, as was the village.  I've checked what's on German Wikipedia and didn't find a separate article for the station.  It is noted as a stopping point on the Rumburk-Sebnitz railway line .  The modern shelter looks to have replaced a bigger structure sometime between 2012 and 2019 per Google Streetview.  Haven't found sources sufficient to establish notability for the station therefore as an alternative to deletion suggest merging to the village the station serves.  An official railway timetable helps prove the station exists but doesn't satisfy GNG.  Rupples ( talk ) 00:55, 5 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
Statue of Ma Zhanshan : Existence of art outdoors is not automatic notability and no basis to remove a prod without addressing the unacceptable lack of sources and GNG failure.  Features in a park can also be included in the park article without stand-alone articles.  Reywas92 Talk 03:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and China .  Reywas92 Talk 03:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Page creator here, open to speedy merge/redirect to List of public art in Shanghai .  @ Reywas92 : Does this work for you?  --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes that's fine. Reywas92 Talk 03:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] OK, if you withdraw here, I'm happy to redirect or let an admin complete on our behalf if that's the preferred process. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 03:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Another Believer , one important thing with these articles is to assure that the photo of the statue is on the redirect page.  Prod deletions lose the images, so prod-prone editors should place the images on the pages before prodding.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 12:24, 15 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
KIWB-LD : Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 18:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Idaho .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 18:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge details into KKJB , which is Cocola Broadcasting 's full-power station in Boise; this cluster is better served with one article detailing the LPTV sisters in a shortened table form below KKJB's info.  Nate • ( chatter ) 19:41, 24 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
Flindt Landing : I would have boldly redirected, however it was recently deprodded based on the existence of sources for the VIA Rail station and a nearby camp.  – dlthewave ☎ 21:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  – dlthewave ☎ 21:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Flindt Landing station.  Horse Eye's Back ( talk ) 23:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Flindt Landing station.  Suggest a lead sentence for the merged article of "Flindt Landing railway station is a railway point REFERENCE using {{ CGNDB }} with CGNDB parameter FBEJH and railway station etc." -- papageno ( talk ) 03:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Before agreeing with merge or redirect, what is the notability for an article of Flindt Landing station ?  It appears to be a train station where one can alight to camp and go fishing in the wilds.  Is that suitable for an encylopaedic article?  Wouldn't that be better included in a more general article?  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 07:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Its pretty marginal but its better than Flindt Landing, if it turns out not to be notable then we can just continue to roll the snowball.  Horse Eye's Back ( talk ) 15:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
Dhakota Williams : Majority the linked sources are all 1 source in actuality (News Corp media), and are generally sensationalised and/or not encyclopedic for wikipedia.  This BLP only has association with Carl Williams (criminal) , which is all the subject is known for.  There is no other source or media that demonstrates independent notability.  Tytrox ( talk ) 11:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  Grahame ( talk ) 03:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per WP:NOTINHERITED .  All the media mentions of her include her father.  LibStar ( talk ) 03:54, 16 July 2023 (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/2023 July 17 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Only sourcing I find is the Daily Mail and news.au, both of which are non-RS.  Delete for lack of sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 17:45, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge (but trim first) with Carl Williams .  Extremely superficial coverage in tabloids, but sufficient to justify some reference in the Carl William's page.  Cabrils ( talk ) 08:36, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Notability is largely WP:INHERITED from her father.  MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:16, 21 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!  16:47, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, – filelakeshoe ( t / c ) 🐱 21:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED .  Not convinced by the merge ! votes, as there is no relevance between her and her late father other than biology.  I don't think it's appropriate for her to have a section or paragraph on that page and I wouldn't suggest a redirect either.  At this time, she isn't really notable in her own right so I don't think it warrants any kind of article.  Bungle ( talk • contribs ) 20:32, 7 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: merge