Wikipedia: Articles_for_deletion/Twitter_Files_Investigation
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
All the 'delete' comments are just saying that the content is valid, just as a subset of a pre-existing page. Which sounds totally appropriate as the 'Twitter Files' stuff is just Twitter's outing of its own internal discussions. There's nothing new there that warrants an entirely new article.
It's not censorship to nest it inside the larger article on the laptop debacle.
But that's what "merge" means, not "delete".
"Delete I would suggest a merge"
"Delete. This is not notable enough for its own article and should be in the main Hunter Biden laptop controversy article."
"Delete - I'm also of the opinion that this could very well fit in Hunter Biden laptop controversy"
"Delete -- under the scope of the laptop article."
Perhaps the nuance here is either 1) people are idiots and meant 'merge' but said 'delete' or 2) there's no need to merge anything if it all already elsewhere, so just delete this redundant article