hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Sarah Jane's Alien Files : Tagged for notability since 2022 Donald D23 talk to me 12:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United Kingdom .  Donald D23 talk to me 12:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No coverage online except primary sources and a Fandom article.  Thriftycat Talk • Contribs 23:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with and Redirect to The Sarah Jane Adventures .  It was essentially a tie-in with the series.  While there is probably not enough notability/coverage for a separate article, it is worth covering it in the series' article and also it is a plausible search term.  Dunarc ( talk ) 23:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge properly sourced content with The Sarah Jane Adventures .  Fails GNG.  // Timothy :: talk 11:47, 27 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
List of deputy leaders of the house in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly : — H e m a n t D a b r a l ( 📞 • ✒ ) 06:47, 15 June 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 June 15 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 07:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment you don’t need an AfD for a merger proposal.  See WP:MERGEPROP .  Mccapra ( talk ) 08:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Follow guidlines at WP:MERGEPROP for merge.  AfD is not necessary for this.  GAGIWOR ( talk ) 11:16, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Lists of people ,  and Maharashtra .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:23, 15 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
Ayer Itam line : No sourcing beyond the regional government has been shown to give any coverage to this concept.  It is clearly too soon to have an article on this proposed line given the lack of coverage in secondary sources.  A basic BEFORE search turned up no further coverage.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 20:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Malaysia .  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 20:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/redirect to Penang Transport Master Plan .  I would expect the regional government to be the best source, but it should have something beyond the master plan.  Reywas92 Talk 00:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agree with merge , and the present tense in the article is certainly inappropriate.  CMD ( talk ) 21:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hold – I'm currently in the process of adding more content for the article.  Hold it until the rewrite is complete.  gavre  (al. PenangLion) ( talk ) 08:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I have expanded and amended information related to the article.  Please review it.  gavre  (al. PenangLion) ( talk ) 12:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The line is scheduled for opening by 2045.  This is not something we should be giving a dedicated article when it won't open for more than 20 years, per WP:CRYSTAL .  This should be a paragraph within Penang Transport Master Plan .  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 20:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This is a project that was originally not part of the PTMP (until it was included in 2016), and was in development hell since the early-2000s.  The dates of construction went from 2002, 2006, 2012 and was cancelled and revived repeatedly.  It warrants an article of its own.  gavre  (al. PenangLion) ( talk ) 06:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Please review recent changes to the article.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:13, 24 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
Christie (Dead or Alive) : And please understand I'm not saying you can't focus on reception about a character being sexy...but there needs to be some back and forth, or at least some actual meaningful discussion about it.  Otherwise it's just not enough, and this definitely fails SIGCOV.  Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 15:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 15:45, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 15:45, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per nom.  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 16:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Dead or Alive characters .  Another Niemti article about a character that pretends to have reception but doesn't.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 17:57, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Dead or Alive characters .  Another video game character with high quality coverage in articles such as Top 10 Gamer Babes .  Doesn't have actual WP:SIGCOV ULPS ( talk ) 20:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge these are the article equivalent of Breastaurants .  Dronebogus ( talk ) 22:09, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per everybody above.  I'm mostly responsible for the reception and while it was fun adding content about her movie appearance, it no longer cuts the mustard.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 03:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 18:38, 14 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
Falco Lombardi : There's a few Smash sources, but most of it is just oddly specific listicles.  I'd be fine with using listicles if there were whole articles dedicated to or using Falco as a major bulk of the article, but the article is quite literally just built on them.  A brief search doesn't yield up anything else either: little to no hits in Scholar or Books, and any other sources don't yield much that isn't of the same caliber of what's in the article.  Unless other sources can be found that I missed, I feel an ATD merge to the Star Fox character list would be for the best.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 05:43, 20 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 Video games .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 05:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Star Fox characters per nom.  Will admit that yeah this flew under the radar for me too but looking at it I do agree completely, there's no meat here. -- Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 08:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Per nom, the sources are very lacking. Definitely worth a list mention, but there is no need for a standalone page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 11:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or merge with List of Star Fox characters in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE . -- Rtkat3 ( talk ) 18:21, 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
Life TV : Chidgk1 ( talk ) 14:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural keep Please state a true reason for deletion.  Nate • ( chatter ) 21:47, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "Not notable" is number 8.  in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#REASON Chidgk1 ( talk ) 07:20, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Still not acceptable; please properly expand your reasoning beyond that short statement.  Nate • ( chatter ) 16:25, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Looking at this, I would not oppose merging/redirecting Life TV, Life 24 , Life Showcase TV , and Life One into Life TV Media .  The articles sorely need references, and there are no hits for "Life TV Media" in ProQuest.  Even Digital Spy has few references to offer aside from those in Life TV Media .  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 21:51, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  A fuller deletion rationale, beyond two words, would be appreciated, one that indicated that a BEFORE had been completed.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with other articles about the same company.  There seems to be a few incidents of note on Ofcom's site that could be used to expand the articles too.  TubularWorld ( talk ) 17:02, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Life TV Media per User:TubularWorld|TubularWorld]] Bookworm857158367 ( talk ) 07:37, 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
Tata Tinplate : All sources seem to be self-source, stuff generated from press releases, routine business reporting, and listings in business directories.  Tagged for notability and citations since 2021.  Fails NCORP.  Valereee ( talk ) 12:09, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Valereee ( talk ) 12:09, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 13:55, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:22, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As per submission.  Samuel R Jenkins ( talk ) 05:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock.  NmWTfs85lXusaybq ( talk ) 03:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge any sourced content that can be salvaged into parent Tata Steel#Subsidiaries as an alternative to deletion.  Maduant ( talk ) 19:50, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No objection to merge.  Valereee ( talk ) 12:27, 2 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Added material on the company's early history from two books and time permitting will look to source more.  Does need improvement but I'm sure independent further sources can be found.  The company is under 75% owned by Tata Steel.  With the remaining shares publicly traded there's likelihood of investment research reports and analysis on the company.  WP:LISTED In fact, there are two reports on the company available for purchase via Research and Markets.  One is 30 pages long, the other 50 pages, see here [13] At the prices charged I'm not going to be purchasing either.  Nonetheless, they count towards satisfying NCORP.  Rupples ( talk ) 02:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Tata Steel#Subsidiaries as a WP:ATD.  MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:50, 6 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
Petit Eva : Other languages' citations don't offer any support of notabilty.  Donald D23 talk to me 14:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Video games , Comics and animation , Anime and manga ,  and Japan .  Donald D23 talk to me 14:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Neon Genesis Evangelion (franchise)#Petit Eva: Evangelion@School .  There are two sizable articles about the production linked at Japanese wiki: [16] , [17] .  The site is Mycom.co.jp (Mainichi Communications), a game publisher according to IGN: [18] .  They did have editorial content like this Final Fantasy 4 review: [19] .  Only review (about the game) I found is this by ITMedia: [20] .  If someone knows more about these sites and can say they are reliable sources, I could change my mind, though it's kinda borderline case even if they are.  -- Mika1h ( talk ) 18:12, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As nominator I would be ok with a merge.  Donald D23 talk to me 13:46, 19 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
Scottish Socialist Party United Left : It isn't notable independent of them.  It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it.  Boleyn ( talk ) 18:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Scotland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/Delete - Merge content to Scottish Socialist Party.  I'm not sure it's necessary as a redirect, it's a faction from a minor political party that didn't last very long.  Stevie fae Scotland ( talk ) 13:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions ) 01:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and delete — Merge reliably sourced content to Scottish Socialist Party , then delete this article as the redirect title is unlikely to be searched.  Despite being around for almost 18 years, :Scottish Socialist Party United Left" only returns 10 results on Google, all mirrors of Wikipedia.  SSP-United Left returns a few hundred results, but the results that are from reliable sources are less than what you can count on two hands.  Yue 🌙 20:51, 29 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
Crime Master : Hasn't received any non-primary sources since it's creation 2007.  Industrial Insect (talk) 01:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Comics and animation .  Industrial Insect (talk) 01:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or merge with List of Marvel Comics characters: C in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE .  -- Rtkat3 ( talk ) 19:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or merge with List of Marvel Comics characters: C in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE .  BoomboxTestarossa ( talk ) 20:55, 14 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
Georgia Nonpublic Postsecondary Education Commission : There are approximately 100 news results that turn up in a search: every one that I have checked is a passing mention.  This is the best source I've found so far, but it's far from enough.  If a reasonable merge target can be found, I do not oppose a merger.  Vanamonde ( Talk ) 22:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education ,  and Georgia (U.S. state) .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are several other references in the article that User:Vanamonde93 overlooked; specifically [1] , [2] and [3] a comparison of responses from five states facing the problem of sudden institution closure.  Many states do little or nothing to help their residents with this problem; Georgia has a comprehensive plan that seems to be working.  Mgrē@sŏn ( Talk ) 23:31, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I didn't overlook them; I skimmed the first two (all I can do before the paywall locks me out) but that's quite enough to see they're not substantive with respect to this topic.  Similarly, the 47-page report that is the third link essentially states one fact about the GNPEC.  There is no evidence of WP:SIGCOV here.  Vanamonde ( Talk ) 02:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree that this article needs work to assert notability.  I suggest the primary author point out exactly which articles are significant coverage to pass WP:GNG .  Unfortunately, I do not see them at this time.  Flibirigit ( talk ) 01:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Education in Georgia (U.S. state) : a substantially trimmed down and properly sourced version.  Sources are not there for a stand alone article.  This is an unneeded CFORK, the content will fit well in the target.  // Timothy :: talk 17:52, 18 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
2017 Chaman suicide bombing : No lasting coverage or impact to meet WP:EVENT .  LibStar ( talk ) 09:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Terrorism ,  and Pakistan .  LibStar ( talk ) 09:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Per usual disclaimers (later sources may exist in other languages, it's Pakistan), merge (cut down version) to Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2017 .  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 21:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : per PARAKANYAA.  Queen of ♡ | speak 03:19, 23 April 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 ) 14:18, 25 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
1924 Humboldt State Lumberjacks football team : Let'srun ( talk ) 21:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , American football ,  and California .  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Humboldt State Lumberjacks football, 1924–1929 a la similar action for Delaware State Hornets football, 1924–1929 , Temple Owls football, 1894–1899 , and Henry Kendall Orange and Black football, 1895–1899 .  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 23:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] From page creator: I created these pages to provide a complete record of every football season played by all of the Cal State schools.  I have zero objection to merging the 1924-1929 seasons into one page if that's the consensus.  ocfootballknut ( talk ) Delete per WP:NSEASON .  This is about as low-level as one can get in college football, as the team played only one game during the year and it was against a high school team.  -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note I have created Humboldt State Lumberjacks football, 1924–1929 and redirected 1927 Humboldt State Lumberjacks football team , 1928 Humboldt State Lumberjacks football team , and 1929 Humboldt State Lumberjacks football team there.  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 03:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge , per Jweiss.  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 03:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per the other noms and per @ Jweiss11 Cray04 ( talk ) 04:40, 3 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
Opinion polling for the 1949 Canadian federal election : No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG.   Also wp:not.   Only "Stats only" sources.  North8000 ( talk ) 19:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] BTW I did this for 4 of these articles at the same time: Opinion polling for the 1958 Canadian federal election , Opinion polling for the 1980 Canadian federal election , Opinion polling for the 1949 Canadian federal election and Opinion polling for the 1945 Canadian federal election North8000 ( talk ) 16:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Every single other election with available polling in Canadian history has a similar page, with a similar scope of sources.  If they are to be deleted, it would have to be up to the 2021 election, and the practice in most elections has been to have a polling page.  CharlotteWhitton ( talk ) 19:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Canada .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I'm baffled why this was created as a stand-alone article rather than within 1949 Canadian federal election , which is quite short and can accomodate it easily.  The practice is to include polling and to have a separate page only if length warrants a WP:SPLIT .  Reywas92 Talk 23:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Reywas92.  We only need a separate opinion polling article for an election if there are, or are likely to be, a large number of polls to include.  -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Reywas92.  — Joeyconnick ( talk ) 16:02, 15 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