hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Xuanchuan: So I think it would be better to merge into Propaganda in China#Terminology .  ときさき くるみ not because they are easy , but because they are hard 01:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Social science and China .  ときさき くるみ not because they are easy , but because they are hard 01:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree.  Especially if you are the one to do the merger - you are a good and careful editor.  JArthur1984 ( talk ) 17:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose owing to unnecessary wordiness.  Merging Propaganda in China (7726 words) and Xuanchuan (1560 words) would result in 9286 words, which exceeds the Article size guidelines .  Keahapana ( talk ) 20:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Keahapana : This is not a major problem, and given that a lot of the content is in fact duplicated and a significant portion of the xuanchuan content is unsourced, it is entirely possible to trim it down to meet the standard.  ときさき くるみ not because they are easy , but because they are hard 05:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 04:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Propaganda in China#Terminology per Tokisaki Kurumi.   This is just the Chinese word for "propaganda", and the sources listed are all discussion of propaganda in China rather than the word specifically.   We are well served by a breif discussion at Propaganda in China#Terminology and mentions in other relevant articles.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 23:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support for a Merge Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Propaganda_in_China#Terminology as proposed.   This overlaps with that section, and not enough here to make it work doing a fork.  There are entire paragraphs in this article that have nothing to do with China or Chinese which can be deleted.  Oblivy ( talk ) 15:36, 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
Governor of Kherson Oblast (Russia): I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 June 17 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 13:57, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Russia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:12, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : to Russian occupation of Kherson Oblast#Government per my comments in the previous AfD, which I think reflect even more on this article considering the novelty of this disputed subnational entity.  Next time, consider using WP:PROMERGE instead.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 18:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  Article is a one-member list, cites only a single, WP:primary source.  No evidence of notability as a subject.   — Michael Z .  18:53, 18 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
List of Socialist Equality Party election results: The article creator posted a number of sources on the talk page, but the only one to even mention results was this local source , though only briefly, about one candidate who got five votes.  Fails WP:NLIST .  Fram ( talk ) 13:28, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people , Politics ,  and United States of America .  Fram ( talk ) 13:28, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Socialist Equality Party (United States) : Some of the candidates who ran could possibly be mentioned in the article on the SEP; if there is no natural way to fit them in or this violates I guideline I am failing to think of at the moment, deletion is also fine with me.  Tartar Torte 14:42, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Socialist Equality Party (United States) .  Carrite ( talk ) 15:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'll be WP:BOLD and merge, this into the SEP article, since I'm the article creator.  SocDoneLeft ( talk ) 00:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Fram : Merged!  SocDoneLeft ( talk ) 00:16, 29 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
Spellbinder (paper-and-pencil game): No evidence of notability.  * Pppery * it has begun... 16:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I can't find reliable sources, but I expect they existed back in the day.   At the least a selective merge to Richard Bartle (so we end up with a paragraph there) seems best.  I'd love to keep this if anyone can find sources that count toward WP:N.  Hobit ( talk ) 03:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Richard Bartle per above suggestion.  // Timothy :: talk 22:52, 18 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
Allende stamps: Vanjagenije (talk) 00:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with the existing entry on Salvador Allende under the Memorials section.  No need for a separate article on such a trivial item.  nf utvol ( talk ) 01:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Salvador Allende as per WP:PAGEDECIDE .  Specifically, I would suggest renaming the 'Memorials' section on the Salvador Allende article to 'Legacy', with two sub-sections, one being the current content in this section (titled 'Memorials') and the other being the content of the AfD-nominated article (titled 'Stamps').  Redtree21 ( talk ) 02:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Chile .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Salvador Allende, it fails to establish individual notability (and I agree with the proposal made by Redtree21 above).  Unknown-Tree🌲?  ( talk ) 01:57, 16 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
Michigan State Spartans men's ice hockey statistical leaders: Nothing seems to indicate the notability of its subject, as previously noted on the talk page.  The article is also built primarily from a primary source from Michigan State.  — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh ) 12:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Ice hockey .  — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh ) 12:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge partially to Michigan State Spartans men's ice hockey#Statistical leaders .  Maybe just the top 5 in each category/breakdown.  Sources aren't there for notability of these statistical leaders, and probably won't find much outside of school mentioning them together.  WikiVirus C (talk) 12:58, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ WikiVirusC : I'd be happy to perform the merge if we can find a reliable source for this information.  Like I said, until today there were merge tags on the pages advocating for this change, but the inability to verify anything is what made me bring this to AfD.  If no other source mentions this subject, we shouldn't be including this in the article at all per WP:WEIGHT .  — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh ) 16:16, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It's already in the main article though at the section I linked, although not the entirety of it.  Primary source are used as the source, which is typically fine aboutself references, but not for notability in a standalone.  If you think that section should be removed completely from there, then that is different discussion.  WikiVirus C (talk) 16:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge the properly source information into the parent article on the team.  This fails WP:NLIST with only databases as sources.  Flibirigit ( talk ) 15:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as noted.  I'll also mention there are other similar "University ice hockey team statistical leaders" pages that could be included in this AfD as well, as they all likely will fall under the same rationale.  Kaiser matias ( talk ) 02:31, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Kaiser matias : You're absolutely right.  I just took a look at the other pages created by Kkuchnir , the creator of this article.  Turns out they've made nearly 300 of these "statistical leaders" articles since 2020.  From the few that I've glanced at so far, it seems that they all have the same issues as this one.  — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh ) 05:25, 23 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
2000 Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix circuit: Appears to fail WP:NEVENT.  Cited sources (which are rather dubious in terms of WP:RS) are just simple score results with no prose or independent analysis.  Could be redirected to Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix ( t · c ) buidhe 21:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sports .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:20, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] How are the sources in this article not good enough when this article provides even less sources for a similar event in a different sport and has not been proposed for deletion?  -- ThiagoSimoes ( talk ) 21:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] By all means send that article to AfD.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France , Germany , Netherlands , Russia ,  and Ukraine .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix as an WP:ATD .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 16:58, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Rhythmic Gymnastics Grand Prix as an WP:ATD .  // Timothy :: talk 14:19, 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
Lei Wulong: Even checking sources like Scholar just brings up a few small mentions but nothing with meat on them.  This fails notability unfortunately.  Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 04:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games .  Kung Fu Man ( talk ) 04:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge .  The Kotaku source is good, but other than that, it's too weak, sadly.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 21:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Unfortunately the reception has no teeth, just the usual cookie-cutter character-ranking content and even less total than Lucky Chloe (though the bizarre comparison to Jar Jar Binks is admittedly remarkable).  Seconding the notion that Kotaku is the only thing worth salvaging.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 07:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak merge : One of the few Tekken character AFDs I can actually get behind.  He does seem to have a little notoriety in being based on Jackie Chan , and maybe with one or two more good sources, I would argue for a keep, but for the time being, I'm unopposed to a merge.  MoonJet ( talk ) 10:07, 6 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
Mac Beathaidh mac Ainmire: Single EL but no references.  Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Poetry , History ,  and Ireland .  UtherSRG (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete "Little is known" about the person, means there is no sourcing.  I can't find anything in Gscholar, Books or Jstor we could use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or, failing that, redirect to Ollamh Érenn .  If all that can be said about a subject is that they lived, held a title/post/role and then died, it would seem that they do not meet any applicable criteria.  The short pieces of text that we have in the article (copied/pasted from the Irish annals ) could just as easily be covered in the Ollamh Érenn article.  Not seeing the need for a standalone article on one such office/title-holder...  Guliolopez ( talk ) 15:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Ollamh Érenn : as an WP:ATD .  There is simply no coverage of this person at all, save for extremely passing mentions in the four medieval annals.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:30, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or merge (to Ollamh Érenn ).  Note that there are multiple possible spellings of both Beathaidh and Ainmire.  Srnec ( talk ) 11:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete due to lack of online sources contemporary to the subject.  Better yet, due to lack of sources altogether.  Note: One would advise caution about Merging text unsupported by sources, since it is customary in these parts to defenestrate said texts rather than moving them about.  But a Redirect cannot be excluded.  - The Gnome ( talk ) 20:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] lack of online sources contemporary to the subject .  The subject died long before the internet.  All the contemporary sources cited in the article are available online.  Just click through to the articles.  Srnec ( talk ) 20:07, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge - seems like a worthwhile section on a different page, if one can be agreed.  It's not inconceivable that more could be found if one looked in offline archives and libraries.  As/when someone does that, maybe there would be enough to satisfy the notability criteria.  JMWt ( talk ) 07:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete One of the lines in the article is "Little is known of his life, other than his obituary" so via WP:NOTMEMORIAL delete.  Questions?  four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:22, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  05:03, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Ollamh Érenn .  Spleodrach ( talk ) 22:01, 3 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
Michael Tarbox: Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 22:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Michael Tarbox Tarbox Ramblers .  Failed to find significant coverage for the individual, only trivial mention of him as part of the band or coverage of other people with the same name.  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 21:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Tutwakhamoe : , what are you suggesting here?  Your redirect target is the same as the current article.  Natg 19 ( talk ) 05:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry, I have made a mistake, I meant redirect to Tarbox Ramblers .  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 06:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 05:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I think the merge is ok, seems to be more well-known for the musical group.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] merge and redirect to Tarbox Ramblers .   Could add a separate section on solo works to include his album, but otherwise his career (and even the single WP:RS citation ) is bound up with that group.  Oblivy ( talk ) 05:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Mege with Tarbox Ramblers .  Subject is non-notable aside from the band, but some content could be included in the band article.  Schminnte ( talk • contribs ) 18:15, 21 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
Opinion polling for the 1958 Canadian federal election: No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG.  Also wp:not.  Only "Stats only" sources.  North8000 ( talk ) 19:31, 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 ) 16:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Canada .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I'm baffled why this was created as a stand-alone article rather than within 1958 Canadian federal election , which is quite short and can accomodate it without the need for a WP:SPLIT .  Reywas92 Talk 23:19, 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
Legend: Legacy of the Dragons: I searched on Google news and it's all just pages about different games with the same name.  Also, this page is written like an advertisement : things like "The most notable difference in Legend: Legacy of the Dragons to most other games of this genre is the fight system which is animated and allows for great tactical depth." -  "great tactical depth" is subjective.  Finally, most of the article is about game mechanics, not reception or development or anything real-world related.  Jannaultheal ( talk ) 18:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to VK (company) (i.e. by creating a "Games" section).  It got mentioned here and here and here , which is enough to show it exists and merit a mention in the article, but doesn't appear standalone notable, though other language sources may exist for it.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 21:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : per sources brought by ZVCQFX.  Merge discussion can be left to other venue like the talk pages.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 04:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seawolf35 T -- C 06:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Zxcvbnm.  Disagree with the assessment that it should be kept since only GamesTM is WP:SIGCOV .  OceanHok ( talk ) 11:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge as above.  The sources lack reliable significant coverage about the game itself.  Of the above sources, none review the game.  Only the Games Industry article is a reliable source that describes the content of the game.  There is enough to adequately merge into the developer's article.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 03:07, 2 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
GNOME Panel: As such, it may be appropriate to consider merging the information into the GNOME or deletion.  ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha ( 🧾 - 💬 ) 17:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Software .  ― ☪ Kapudan Pasha ( 🧾 - 💬 ) 17:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 19:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] MERGE into GNOME .  Agree with nominator's reasons.  Bikerose ( talk ) 01:30, 27 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!  23:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with GNOME : Lacks sources for a standalone article but still an important part of Gnome 1 and 2 and should be mentioned.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 02:45, 28 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