hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
No. 674 Squadron AAC: PercyPigUK ( talk ) 15:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Aviation ,  and United Kingdom .  PercyPigUK ( talk ) 15:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep or merge as it appears to be notable but heavily relies on a single sourcing from RAF .  So It could have been a strong keep only if there were more sources for this article.  Although merging in Royal Air Force is always an option.  Based Kashmiri TALK 10:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to RAF Barkston Heath .  The squadron has only existed there, so its history forms part of the history of the station.  Buckshot06 (talk) 08:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:15, 24 May 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!  04:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to RAF Barkston Heath .  User:Hamterous1 ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ ) 18:24, 1 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
WWE & Company: I also checked the sources of the article on zh.wp, and there are only PRs.  Maybe Chinese-speaking users can find independent reliable sources where I couldn't.  Broc ( talk ) 18:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Fashion ,  and China .  Broc ( talk ) 18:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Websites .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Apart from press releases, there seem to be passing mentions in reliable/independent sources.  I can’t find anything that supports WP:GNG here.  TLA (talk) 04:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to The Wharf (Holdings) .  IgelRM ( talk ) 04:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Why?  It is not a fully owned subsidiary and it is not even mentioned in that article.  Broc ( talk ) 07:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It is a joint venture, although Christopher Lau might be better redirect according to jingdaily .  WWE & Company is mentioned and linked in history?  With company names, I think it is generally helpful to redirect to something associated.  IgelRM ( talk ) 07:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Selective merge/redirect to Christopher Lau , a co-founder, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion .  The article about Christopher Lau doesn't currently mention WWE & Company.  A very selective merge using the source IgelRM provided will address that.  Cunard ( talk ) 10:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting as there are multiple Redirect/Merge targets being suggested here.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  20:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Christopher_Lau#WWE & Company : per source presented by IgelRM 94rain Talk 09:23, 21 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
Broccoli slaw: WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV .  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 23:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions .  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 23:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Coleslaw#Variations_and_similar_dishes .  Substituting one ingredient for another doesn't make it a separately notable concept needing a stand-alone article.  Reywas92 Talk 13:50, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Selectively merge and redirect as suggested.  Bearian ( talk ) 16:08, 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
List of places named Sokil: I initially merged the content to the disambiguation page Sokil but was opposed by Bkonrad due to the lack of any blue links.  As an WP:ATD , I still support merging this content into that disambiguation page but in any case don't think this topic is notable enough for its own stand-alone article.  Dan the Animator 16:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , Lists ,  and Ukraine .  Dan the Animator 16:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Sokil – the oblast links make up for the villages being red links, as WP:DABSTYLE says the link can be in the description if the entry is red-linked or unlinked .  RunningTiger123 ( talk ) 19:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Most if not all of the entries fail both WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL and would be removed if merged.  As such, merging is functionally equivalent to deletion.  older ≠ wiser 19:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and Bkonrad.  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions .  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 21:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The formatting of that statistics website is weird, but if I get it right, it expresses the population numbers in thousands of people, so this is a number of villages with population in the hundreds, and at least one over a thousand?  That's completely normal WP:POTENTIAL , so they should be listed in their higher level administrative unit article and these entries merged into Sokil (disambiguation) .  The Ukrainian interlanguage link from Sokil shows that they are included there and mostly have articles.  -- Joy ( talk ) 07:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  No policy reason to delete.  This page is no less notable than any other in Category:Set index articles on populated places in Ukraine .  Shhhnotsoloud ( talk ) 20:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Runningtiger.  Agletarang ( talk ) 10:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It doesn't really matter - this is a valid disambiguation page and all of those villages could potentially have articles written about them, so any possible option as long as we don't lose the information.  SportingFlyer T · C 15:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per RunningTiger123.  This should just be a DAB for Sokil, and we already have that.  I'm not sure if the redlinks should all be included ( WP:DABMENTION ), but this page should be redirected to the existing DAB at Sokil.  Toadspike [Talk] 22:05, 29 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
Craig Powell (musician): Not opposed to a merge as suggested.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  nf utvol ( talk ) 17:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No sources to establish notability.  @T.C.G. [talk] 18:25, 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: merge
NOAA Flight 42: From what I've gathered, a Hurricane Hunters flight had an engine failure in flight during a mission, but was still able to return to base and land safely, see Hurricane hunters#Other incidents .  This does not merit a separate article.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 21:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 21:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Aviation , Barbados ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to Hurricane Hugo .  The subsection of NOAA Flight 42 already explains in detail what happened.  I don't really think a separate article is needed.  Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 15:00, 20 April 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!  23:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and delete, possibly WP:SALT .  This is such a minor incident, with no loss of life, as to be a footnote .  Bearian ( talk ) 18:11, 30 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
Freddie Slater (EastEnders): Citadeol (talk) 08:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:05, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment if kept, the article should be moved to Freddie Slater , which has always been a redirect to List of EastEnders characters (2004) , so no merging required.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 11:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of EastEnders characters (2004)#Freddie Slater .  Info from article stolen from the list article without attribution and not developed enough to meet GNG.  – Meena • 11:57, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and merge to List of EastEnders characters (2004)#Freddie Slater and restore the content there.  Usually I would say that it can be kept and developed, as the character is notable enough for his own article (especially as the actor just won a NTA for the role) but since the content was taken without attribution or development I say that it should be restored back to the list page, unless the correct attribution is given in the talk page and the page is developed further.  DaniloDaysOfOurLives ( talk ) 13:00, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete : Per A10 .  The article is almost entirely copied from List of EastEnders characters (2004)#Freddie Slater without attribution or significant added value.  Since the redirect Freddie Slater already exists, I don't see the value in keeping this as a redirect either.  StartOkayStop ( talk ) 16:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/redirect .  Slater does not meet our notability requirements for standalone articles.  Invading Invader ( userpage , talk ) 16:16, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge a short summary to List of EastEnders characters .  Not to sublist like List of EastEnders characters (2004) because such weird sublists are not notable and need to be merged or deleted.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 13:51, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am in favor of retaining this page.  At a time of the rapid development both of the East Enders contorted plot line, and the exciting appearance of the actor on Strictly Come Dancing, it is very helpful to have all the information about characters and performers that one can get!  Foiled circuitous wanderer ( talk ) 09:09, 17 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
Wild Gals A Go-Go: Fails the general and album-specific notability policy.  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Japan .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 17:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Acid Mothers Temple discography .  I could not find enough sources to support a standalone article.  Jfire ( talk ) 02:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/Redirect to Acid Mothers Temple discography per WP:ATD .  4meter4 ( talk ) 23:07, 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
Roboto (character): 🍕 Boneless Pizza!  🍕 ( 🔔 ) 11:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Television .   🍕 Boneless Pizza!  🍕 ( 🔔 ) 11:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe characters .  Seems very niche based on content in article, 10+ place in rankings in listicles on popularity, etc.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 03:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the character list; the few sources from the "Reception" area could be included there. I actually found the character pretty neat, but he is a secondary figure across the franchise with little attention afforded to him.-- PanagiotisZois ( talk ) 13:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to character list per Piotrus.  The sources only mention it in context of the series, and it isn't separately WP:NOTABLE .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 18:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe characters per the above discussion.  Aoba47 ( talk ) 21:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe characters .  A sensible medium-term alternative to Delete, and an article that can be patched up on and improved.  Should sources for GNG be found it can always be returned to standalone.  Comment I know next to nothing about MOTU and care about it even less than that, but this flood of near-identical nominations would give anyone with the knowledge to put together a Keep vote far too much research to do.  This is yet another case of eschewing a potentially constructive discussion on talk pages that could genuinely improve articles and Wikipedia by selectively merging salvageable material to a strong list instead being turned into someone yelling "BALEET!" because it's easier.  I used to wonder why so many articles are neglected.  Now I know it's because passionate editors get tired of being at the mercy of lazy rubbish like this.  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 10:13, 24 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
Rob Beckley: There is the possibility of a merge/redirect to Pillar, however 'Rob Beckley' is ambiguous (there is Rob Beckley (police officer) , and a merge might unbalance this article.  Boleyn ( talk ) 18:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Kansas .  Owen× ☎ 19:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge selectively to Pillar (band) as not independently notable imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 21:26, 14 January 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!  20:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge properly sourced summary to Pillar (band) .  BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO.  Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth and are in connection with the proposed target.  BLPs require strong sourcing.  // Timothy :: talk 14:00, 4 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
Multiplicity (psychology): lizthegrey ( talk ) 01:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Psychiatry and Psychology .  lizthegrey ( talk ) 01:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Multiplicity (subculture) , rather than to Dissociative identity disorder .  The original proposal to remove the article is correct that we shouldn't have two articles about the same psychological phenomenon, but I think people are better served by a direction to (subculture) than to DID.  subculture already links to DID, and subculture and psychology aspects are not sufficiently distinct to deserve their own articles.  lizthegrey ( talk ) 02:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Multiplicity (subculture) : There is a sizeable overlap between the community and the psychological state of being plural.  Since both of these articles are very short, it would make sense to discuss both aspects in the same place.  One could debate as to which title the resulting article should be under, but that is another debate for another day.  Similarly, any attempt to merge the resulting article into dissociative identity disorder would probably require another discussion.  ― Susmuffin Talk 09:33, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Unclear to me whether the parenthetical "(psychology)" is appropriately disambiguated to the subculture article.  There don't seem to be a lot of sources which say that psychology recognizes "multiplicity" as a group identifier -- which isn't surprising as psychology is pretty individualistic when it comes right down to it.  As far as I can tell, DID remains the main organizing principle for this concept within the context of psychology.  An alternative would be to Delete the redirect entirely as it is not clear to me that this is a normal search term.  jps ( talk ) 17:48, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Multiplicity (subculture) per Lizthegrey.  Some1 ( talk ) 18:00, 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
National Registry Emergency Medical Technician: Personhumanperson ( talk ) 17:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 19:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The article just describes EMTs in the United States.  Most, if not all, of the details in this article are either told in the page for EMTs , or the page for the organization which administers the certification .  Not only that, but the page lacks notability.  Most of the sources cited, besides a couple which aren't related to the general topic, are primary sources from organizations that administer the certification, or the NREMT itself.  Personhumanperson ( talk ) 16:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians per nom.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 20:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 01:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per nom.  Note that this article duplicates info at Emergency_medical_technician#United_States .  LizardJr8 ( talk ) 20:14, 16 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