###Instruction: Multi-class classification, answer with one of the labels:['no_consensus', 'delete', 'keep', 'comment', 'merge', 'redirect'] : ###Input:  Q114869071: Q114869071 : no description : ( delete | history | links | entity usage | logs ) No relaible source; fictional concept; incorrect opposition. WildStranger ( talk ) 20:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC) On hold This item is linked from 5 others. -- DeltaBot ( talk ) 20:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC) This item linkef from single other, and this link seems to be the purpose of its creation in principle. This look as fantasy esotherical concept, that is incorrerctly (without reliable sources) applied to contemporary military topics. WildStranger ( talk ) 21:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC) This item linkef from single other, and this link seems to be the purpose of its creation in principle. This look as fantasy esotherical concept, that is incorrerctly (without reliable sources) applied to contemporary military topics. WildStranger ( talk ) 21:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC) Delete . This is incoherent. The only kernel of notability here is that some Russian propaganda has claimed "de-Satanization" as a goal of their invasion of Ukraine, but I'm not convinced this is a distinct enough concept (or even a true enough statement) to represent as an entity. Not every political talking point is independently notable. Even if this is kept, it needs to be cleaned up heavily to focus on the specific concept as used as a justification for the invasion of Ukraine, not the general (and practically tautological) concept of religious opposition to symbols of evil. Statements like "Participant: Cain and Abel" or the description as "atonement for the sins of the ancestors" are nonsensical. Omphalographer ( talk ) 19:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)