hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Christopher Wursteisen: If not deleted, may be a fit as a merge into the early life section of Galileo , or to Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems , the latter of which is the article about the 1st source.  Source 3 is an IP link.  Gscholar reveals very little.  Fails WP:GNG .  UtherSRG (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators ,  and Science .  UtherSRG (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Move to something like Cristiano Vurstisio or perhaps Identity of Cristiano Vurstisio instead, because that is what the topic that meets GNG is truly about.  A merge as nom suggested may also be appropriate, but should be kept either way.   some coverage [7] [8] .  — siro χ o 12:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Galileo or Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems , does not seem independently notable beyond that historical connection and other sources are hard to find.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 19:23, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would favor a move to Cristiano Vurstisio per Siroxo.  That would require a modest rewrite to encompass other theories, which I am happy to do if pinged.  No real objection to a merge to Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems , although it seems to me that having more than a glancing mention of someone who himself is only glancingly mentioned in that work might be a bit undue.  -- Visviva ( talk ) 04:35, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 03:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 03:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems .  The historical person is not notable apart from the possibility that he is to be identified with the "Christian Wursteisen" of the Dialogue (who could not have been Christian Wurstisen ).  Srnec ( talk ) 20:03, 3 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
Ogre (Tekken): GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 00:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 00:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  GlatorNator ( ᴛ ) 00:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Jam-packed with "TheGamer"/"Game Rant" sources, which are listed as situational.  I couldn't find any sort of significant coverage outside of those - seems like a minor NPC character.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 02:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge salvageable details into List of Tekken characters (à la my vote for Kuma and Panda ).  -- Slgrandson ( How's my egg-throwing coleslaw? ) 02:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  Kazama16 ( talk ) 11:41, 22 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
Camp Evangelista shooting: No lasting impact or coverage to meet WP:EVENT .  Also WP:NOTNEWS applies.  LibStar ( talk ) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime , Events ,  and Philippines .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the location it occurred in its own section at Camp Evangelista .  Its closest claim to notability is making the army reevaluate some of their practices.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 03:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Camp Evangelista per WP:ATD -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Camp Evangelista .  More significant to that article.  Borgenland ( talk ) 09:24, 29 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
List of ambassadors of Pakistan to France: .  Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 21:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 21:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people , Bilateral relations ,  and France .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to France–Pakistan relations following WP:DIPLOMAT .  Broc ( talk ) 12:28, 25 June 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!  23:33, 26 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
1995 Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix circuit: Apparent WP:NEVENT fail.  Could be redirected to Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix .  ( t · c ) buidhe 22:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Events ,  and Sports .  ( t · c ) buidhe 22:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Belgium , Germany ,  and Netherlands .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just because the Wikipedian lacks familiarity with the sport, it does not mean that the event is not notable.  A quick Google search shows hundreds of thousands of results for Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix and an article covering the results of events should not be responsible for stating the notability of the event, since the original article Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix does this.  -- ThiagoSimoes ( talk ) 23:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix as an WP:ATD .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 16:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix as an WP:ATD .  // Timothy :: talk 14:13, 26 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
C. M. Rubin: The article was written by a blocked user and seems to primarily serve the purpose of self promotion as defined in WP:NOTADVERT .  P3D7AQ09M6 ( talk ) 23:04, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header.   Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.  — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 23:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note : I have fixed this heretofore-malformed nomination.  No opinion at this time.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and South America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to a line in Alice Liddell 's Alice Liddell in other works section.  Stuartyeates ( talk ) 19:42, 6 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
Slashing (ice hockey): It goes as far as to define slashing, and not much more can be said that isn't already said about it.  Maccore Henni user talk Respond using tb , please.  22:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ● Merge to Penalty (ice hockey) - per ATD 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 23:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Common ice hockey penalty and perfectly sourced stub.  I see no real reason for deletion.  Nate • ( chatter ) 00:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Ice hockey Penalty (ice hockey) : That it is a common hockey penalty is as may be, but is no part of any notability criteria, and with just a single primary reference , I am at an utter loss as to how this could be considered "perfectly sourced" -- that's the definition of inadequately sourced.  For anyone for whom those aren't good enough reasons in of itself, that this also violates WP:DICDEF is another. Ravenswing 09:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Wouldn’t the list of infractions section at Penalty (ice hockey) be a more appropriate place to merge it? -- NHL04 ( talk ) 16:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes it would I haven't thoroughly read the Ice hockey article so I was unaware of that article.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 18:16, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to penalty article.  Don't really see why this should be a standalone.  The Kip 19:18, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and Redirect to Penalty (ice hockey) as it would fit better with the rest of the infractions.  Powerplay44 ( talk ) 20:21, 17 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
Survey stakes: CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:41, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect/Merge Survey stakes are included in articles such as [22] .    It's likely the subject doesn't need it's own article - recommend merging and redirecting into Construction surveying .  Resonant Dis tor tion 08:22, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and Redirect : Utilizing sources like what ResonantDistortion provided and Modern Residential Construction Practices (2017) [23] , the topic can be properly merged into Construction surveying .  XxTechnicianxX ( talk ) 23:35, 22 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
Mughal conquest of Baglana: Also it lacks notability as only found a line around this event, that "Aurangzeb easily overran the kingdom".  Based Kashmiri ( talk ) 18:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military ,  and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 18:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I support the deletion request for this article, as I couldn't find any sources on the internet.  I think that this article should be deleted unless there is more sources.  Eason Y. Lu ( talk ) 22:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Merge to Shah_Jahan#Early_military_campaigns .  Two reliable sources from John F. Richards and Munis Faruqui, also a historian but these two do not have any coverage on the battle or siege.  One line that says that an Expedition was sent to Balgana and the kingdom was easily ran over and the kingdom became a vassal and this is not enough to warrant a standalone full fledged page.  Maybe best for merge under military campaigns of Shah Jahan.  All other sources fail reliability as they are translation of primary sources.  RangersRus ( talk ) 11:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:04, 17 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!  23:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
Olive salad: WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV .  Contents of this article could be covered in 1 or 2 sentences on the Muffuletta article.  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 23:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions .  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 23:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Muffuletta .  Per nom, this is not a distinct enough product with sourcing specific to it to need a stand-alone article.  All sources here are in the context of the muffaletta.  Reywas92 Talk 13:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as opposed to redirect, to save some information and sources.  Bearian ( talk ) 16:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I realize this is not a typical argument at AfD, but you can also put it on pasta.  Olive salad is associated with the muffuletta , and to be sure some version of it will be on every muffuletta, but you can also add it to any cold cut sandwich.  You can drop a spoonful on an actual salad with leaves.  I think it will be hard to establish notability for olive salad away from its parent sandwich because even recipes or articles talking about it in another context will still likely mention the sandwich.  If it can't be kept though, it should likely be merged rather redirected or deleted outright to give more context for people unfamiliar with the spread.  Rjj iii ( talk ) 05:05, 31 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
Fontys Academy of Journalism: Ktkvtsh ( talk ) 21:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Netherlands .  Ktkvtsh ( talk ) 21:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Fontys University of Applied Sciences#Tilburg as a premature SPINOFF without prejudice against a justified spinoff.  No valid reason to delete was brought forward so tempting to just procedural keep.  Merge, however, is a correcter resolution.  gidonb ( talk ) 00:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect as above.  Appears to fail GNG, and therefore WP:NORG .  This, however, is based on an English language source, and better sources proving notability may exist in Dutch.  Bgv.  ( talk ) 08:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
4Dwm: There was a previous nomination in 2021 that failed on the basis that there are mentions of the software in Google Books and Google Scholar.  However, these sources are either not independent (published by Silicon Graphics) or are not in-depth (passing mentions in a book chapter or a paper).  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 14:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to IRIX : no independent notability.  Owen× ☎ 15:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software .  Owen× ☎ 15:15, 23 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!  23:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to IRIX per above.  Aaron Liu ( talk ) 02:32, 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
Data-driven astronomy: It describes what will be done as part of an apparently funded proposal.  Since there already is a more general page on the wider topic at Astroinformatics , I see no rationale for this page.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Astronomy and Computing .  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 08:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : the two topics appear to be similar sub-fields of data science , so perhaps a merge of Data-driven astronomy and Astroinformatics is in order?  It appears notable.  Praemonitus ( talk ) 21:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The article seems to be a mix of general discussion about a field of research and a description of a specific project.  A merge with astroinformatics as Praemonitus suggests could be reasonable, as could a merge with Galaxy Zoo .  As the article is only a couple of weeks old, I think the best approach would be to draftify and allow the author to refocus this article so it is more clearly about a specific notable subject, or to move relevant parts into existing articles.  Mgp28 ( talk ) 22:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Astroinformatics per my original proposal.  No deadline, as usual.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 11:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Astroinformatics : doesn't seem notable by itself.  Owen× ☎ 22:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
Amaze (software): All I found is authored by the company Deque Systems , which is obviously not independent.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also it is written like an advertisement, so I could as well just tag WP:G11 on this and Deque Systems with it, but I'm not completely sure.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 17:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability and Internet .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Deque Systems : there's just about enough to exist as a brief mention in the company's article, but not for a standalone page.  Owen× ☎ 01:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: merge
OMNI (SCIP): This was contested with the addition of a "Manufacturer's Brochure", which is in no way a notability-establishing source, so the original PROD reason stands.  * Pppery * it has begun... 02:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 02:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Since it verifiably exist(ed) and has a logical merge target available, I'd go with merge as a single bullet point under L3 Technologies#Products per WP:ATD , WP:DGFA point 4 and WP:PRODUCT .  (I would do it now but do not want to preempt the discussion here, since a merge would require non-deletion).  -- Visviva ( talk ) 01:41, 12 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
The Sidney Award: The sources in the present article are all directly from the website of the Sidney Hillman Foundation (which presents the award), and I'm unable to find significant coverage of the award itself from multiple independent reliable sources.  The award is mentioned in The Sidney Hillman Foundation , so I think that a blank-and-redirect to the section of that article which talks about this award is warranted.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , Awards ,  and United States of America .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 15:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and merge content to Hillman Foundation - Agree with above.  --- Avatar317 (talk) 01:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, —⁠Scotty Wong ⁠— 05:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge is fine.  Nothing notable otherwise.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:10, 30 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