###Instruction: Multi-class classification, answer with one of the labels:['no_consensus', 'delete', 'keep', 'comment', 'merge', 'redirect'] : ###Input:  Q104936078: Elmar Ahmadov (Q104936078) : soldier : ( delete | history | links | entity usage | logs ) Fails notability. Sun8908 💬 13:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC) The article for Q104936078 was not listed on the item when you nominated it. But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) But whether or not they have articles, I still question why we need half a dozen individual articles for people who died in the same battle when we could give a subsection of the battle to each individual instead. Quakewoody ( talk ) 21:08, 22 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Quakewoody , Wikidata users usually don't involve why other wiki's articles are kept or deleted. Only when all the sitelinks are deleted and make a Wikidata item fail WD:N , a request should be made here. The azwiki article has been patrolled by a sysop there so it should not be spam. Also, every wiki has its own notability policy. Some wiki e.g. enwiki has a harsh notability policy. We do not discuss them here (except for Wikidata notability policy). Sun8908 💬 04:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC) And if they have their own section of an article, that would pass notability for WD anyhow. I accept that. That doesn't mean that I agree them having articles. Quakewoody ( talk ) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC)