hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Between-systems memory interference model: Sources are mostly WP:PRIMARY Pepper Beast (talk) 08:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Medicine .  Pepper Beast (talk) 08:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Hippocampus , unless a better target is found.  Agree with nom, this is a very specific mechanism with little notability or coverage in secondary sources.  Owen× ☎ 15:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Since this article's Talk contained only one WP (Articles for Creation), I added appropriate WPs to help draw attention/help for the article.  Regards, JoeNMLC ( talk ) 19:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Hippocampus for the reasons stated at WP:OVERCOME -- Maxim Masiutin ( talk ) 22:32, 12 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
Elena Siegman: Nothing in her article demonstrates notability, and I couldn't find any meaningful coverage on her elsewhere beyond a source I'm unsure on the reliability of ( [4] ).  λ Negative MP1 17:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Video games .  λ Negative MP1 17:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Tijuana Sweetheart where she is mentioned and a believable search target.  Otherwise, however, I am not seeing WP:NARTIST being passed by the current sourcing.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 17:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , California ,  and Massachusetts .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 19 March 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!  22:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not enough sources available for a standalone article.  @T.C.G. [talk] 05:47, 27 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
Yaoundé nightclub fire: Aware of systemic bias, but this does not appear to have been a notable fire.  Star Mississippi 20:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Cameroon .  Star Mississippi 20:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of nightclub fires , it does seem to have wide coverage but limited impact puts notability into question per the nomination.  If anyone does further investigation or more notability is determined in the future, then article re-creation should be allowed.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 21:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No sustained coverage, and this incident is already mentioned at List of nightclub fires .  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 00:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Listed but without references, it requires some material to be merged.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 01:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Indefensible 's reasoning.  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 21:32, 31 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
Mickey Mouse (Last Week Tonight with John Oliver): The character gained minor popularity from a single episode and has not been covered by reliable sources since.  I think this is a clear case of a minor thing getting limited coverage for a single event before being completely forgotten about.  Di (they-them) ( talk ) 16:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television .  Di (they-them) ( talk ) 16:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Mickey Mouse#Legal issues .  I believe this fails SUSTAINED, but a couple sentences at the section on this stuff seems appropriate.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 18:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  In addition to what Di and QJR have brought up, this just feels more like an aspect of an existing thing than a separate thing in itself.   To respond to Di, it's possible for something to be notable for a time and then cease to be notable.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 21:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to wherever someone wants to merge it to, since GNG is very weak indeed.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 03:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I would say with Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (season 10) but given how no seasons past season 3 have articles I think maybe Mickey Mouse#Legal issues .  I think the due to the other articles recently making featured status is is feasible someone would want to make that article and the information in this article could be used there.  Questions?  four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disney-related deletion discussions .  Questions?  four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per all.  No opinion on the target, and it could easily be covered in more than one place.  It doesn't have WP:SIGCOV by itself, but is a clear footnote to other notable topics.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 17:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per others.  Definitely not meeting proper standards by itself but definitely something that's decently notable.  Has one ever considered Magneton?  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 22:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per others.  Also consider doing speedy delete with G7 next time.  Belichickoverbrady ( talk ) 22:54, 1 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
Altani: ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 00:16, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , History , Royalty and nobility ,  and Mongolia .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 00:16, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ok, she exists, but what's here is basically a rehashing from whatever historical text that talks about her [34] .  I can't see how this makes her notable.  That's all that seems to be written, she grabbed the knife and saved the kid.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Tolui : With the very large caveat that I have no knowledge of Mongolian and thus am unable to search for this in Mongolian, I cannot find much coverage of Altani beyond what is in this article, which is rather humorously yet accurately described by nom as a 13th century WP:BIO1E .  Having said that, this can probably be merged a bit more thoroughly into the Tolui article than it currently is.  Tartar Torte 00:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as above is fine, or even insert this brief "anecdote"?  into the Gengis Khan article.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : As stated above, doesn't need to be its own article given its so limited.  TheBritinator ( talk ) 11:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Not convinced there is any content here worth merging.  It is essentially based on a single primary source ( The Secret History of the Mongols ).  Redirecting to Tolui may suffice.  (Did search for secondary sources like this article in JSTOR – essentially a passing mention which makes it clear the accuracy of the main source is contested.)  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 11:38, 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
Baruwar (Rajput clan): However, the content should be merged in Rajput clans , as it is a clan of Rajputs and information regarding it should be there.  - Admantine123 ( talk ) 04:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Hinduism ,  and India .  Admantine123 ( talk ) 04:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  Did a "search inside" of the 3 book citations in the article for the word "Baruwar", didn't get any hits.  If I am missing something, consider adding page numbers to the citations.  Did a Google News and Google Books search for "Baruwar", didn't see any promising sources.  Based on what I just checked, I think the topic likely does not meet WP:GNG .  – Novem Linguae ( talk ) 05:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Many such Dictionary items are created on Wikipedia, which donot contain reliable sources to back them.  It should be merged in Rajput clans . - Admantine123 ( talk ) 09:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  I found that they have 4 citations, but didn't get any results.  I found no results on Google News.  CastJared ( talk ) 12:25, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] FYI — Barwar (caste) ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) exists and is older than this one but duplicates content; might need histmerge or just merged alongside this one if that's the way it goes.  Stumbled upon it via a CSD request .   Feel free to nominate it too; I didn't dig too far into either article.   -- slakr \ talk / 13:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If this closes as merge/redirect/delete, I think boldly redirecting Barwar (caste) to Rajput clans would be a good option.  – Novem Linguae ( talk ) 13:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Rajput clans as I found no search results at all.  𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 12:38, 22 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
Embassy of Argentina, Athens: Fails WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Greece ,  and Argentina .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Argentina–Greece relations as an AtD.  It's fine to cite a primary source there for confirmation it exists and its location in Athens.  Jfire ( talk ) 01:43, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Jfire.  AryKun ( talk ) 20:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge – Per above.  Svartner ( talk ) 10:39, 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
Research Centre for Linguistic Typology: This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it.  Possible WP:ATD could be redirect to its current university, but it has been part of 2, so that could cause confusion.  Boleyn ( talk ) 17:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Australia .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 18:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Education .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:40, 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 ) 19:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/Redirect to La Trobe University#Research as ATD, which seems to be its current parent institution.  No indication of sufficient independent coverage to support a standalone article.  Jfire ( talk ) 03:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to La Trobe University#Research , per Jfire - although Robert M. W. Dixon might actually be a better target, since I don't think this research lab really merits a mention in the Trobe U article.  Suriname0 ( talk ) 17:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] User:Boleyn , do you have a preferred redirect target?  Suriname0 ( talk ) 17:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for your input, both look like reasonable redirects.  Boleyn ( talk ) 17:17, 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
Hadlow Down Parish Council: Parish councils are rarely notable - there are more than 10,000 in England.  No secondary sources.  Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 16:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and England .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 16:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Hadlow Down as an alternative to deletion given the content.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 18:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Hadlow Down as preferred WP:ATD and as suggested in my deprod .  ~ Kvng ( talk ) 16:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Nothing worth merging.  Desertarun ( talk ) 19:35, 19 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
2022 Crooks Fire: No injuries or deaths and appears to be a run-of-the-mill wildfire.  Noah , AA Talk 20:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to 2022 Arizona wildfires - Merging would be more appropriate than deletion.  Noting that this is a WP:BEFORE ! vote, given that article exists and this is a split from that article.  The Weather Event Writer ( Talk Page) 21:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Environment .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to 2022 Arizona wildfires would indeed be the wisest choice for this article.  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:06, 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
Mount Marston: Alternatively, merge into List of mountains of East Antarctica Mach61 ( talk ) 14:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Antarctica-related deletion discussions .  Mach61 ( talk ) 14:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:44, 17 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!  21:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - And frankly it's time we took a harder look at all of these mass-created Antarctica locations that are sourced solely to GNIS, an unreliable source.  FOARP ( talk ) 08:47, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We definitely overindex them, but you’d need to be an SME to choose which ones to delete en masse and avoid a trainwreck, as there are (sigcov-inclusive) reference materials made by scientists and mountaineers.  Maybe use a heatmap of what places humans have visited?  Mach61 ( talk ) 00:13, 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
TOI-1452: Makes a claim to be notable on account of having a planet, but that in itself isn't notable (not any more, anyway).   There are a couple of papers about the planet, none dedicated to the star.  Lithopsian ( talk ) 16:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions .  Lithopsian ( talk ) 16:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to TOI-1452 b for insufficient information to stand by itself.  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 18:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Wouldn't merging the planet to the star system make much more sense instead?  Orchastrattor ( talk ) 18:36, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi, I created the article.   My original goal was to add some information about the star system for the planet TOI-1452b.  The article for the planet already included a link to it's parent star system TOI-1452 (and edit history shows the link has existed since Sept of 2022).   But the link was red since the star system article didn't yet exist.  So I created the new article to populate content for the already existing (but red) link, and added the new content there.   I do think that additional information about the star system will likely be learned in the near term.  But if these two articles were merged in some fashion it would be fine by me.  MetaEtcher ( talk ) 21:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Don't delete since there's already an article on the planet TOI-1452 b .  These two articles should be merged into one, preferably at TOI-1452 (the entire system instead of the planet), but since there's only one known planet in the system it doesn't matter too much.  SevenSpheres ( talk ) 16:40, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting as there are two different Merge proposals here.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:51, 30 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
MPL Philippines S12: Article was filled with unreliable sources, like facebook and etc.  Greenish Pickle!  ( 🔔 ) 02:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Philippines .  ThisIsSeanJ ( talk ) 09:57, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - not too familiar with this topic, but would these sources count in referring to the league and season in particular?  1 2 3 PantheonRadiance ( talk ) 21:45, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Trim and Merge to MPL Philippines parent article.  Too many facebook sources for comfort.  Parent article seems to require trimming as well but that is beyond the scope of this AfD.  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for a Merge.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge very selectively to MPL Philippines , no need for a separate article.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 07:51, 31 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
Beyoncé's three-act project: There is nothing in this article that is not already covered in the other two.  ℛonherry ☘ 18:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  ℛonherry ☘ 18:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and merge anything not duplicative to Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project and the respective albums per WP:MERGEREASON .  We already have 2 places for this info - we don't need a third.  Sergecross73 msg me 18:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Wikipedia:Fancruft , Wikipedia should not have tons of articles about a 3-part trilogy just because it is a trilogy.  This can just be covered on Beyoncé's own page.  AskeeaeWiki ( talk ) 19:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge/redirect to Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project as redundant like has been said above.  Would not be opposed to recreation in the future if more sources discussing all three albums collectively come about, but so far it's mostly, if not entirely, been about the two albums separately.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 19:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , as per above rationales.  Theknine2 ( talk ) 11:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge any new info with Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project and the album pages per above.   If there is none, delete.   It is WP:TOOSOON for a standalone article as there is not enough about the trilogy that can’t just be covered on the Beyoncé and album pages.   If delete is chosen I don’t think a redirect is needed as the name isn’t likely to be a popular search term.  CAMERAwMUSTACHE ( talk ) 13:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , this page does not add anything new when compared to Beyonce's main page or the individual RENAISSANCE and COWBOY CARTER album pages - it is simply repeating the same info.  Anyone following her Discography box will be able to follow through the three albums and notice they are three acts part of a trilogy.  UltimateDisco ( talk ) 14:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Until sources begin to discuss the impact of the trilogy in its' entirety (most likely after Act III is released), all new information should appear under the Beyoncé#2022–present: Trilogy Project section of her page.  Trainsskyscrapers ( talk ) 17:30, 13 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