Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Early life and work of Clint Eastwood (3rd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. There is agreement that the amount of prose size justifies a split from the main article. ✗ plicit  13:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Early life and work of Clint Eastwood
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This is a WP:content fork and tells an encyclopaedia audience nothing of interest that isn't in the main article. Specialist information such as this can be read in an autobiography if the reader wishes to know. There have been two previous AFDs but I believe content forks such as this are now very much out of favour and a new AFD is required. I don't have any prejudice against merge and delete. Desertarun (talk) 09:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and California.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:01, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think you should have a prejudice against merge and delete because that would remove attribution from the merged material. Thincat (talk) 10:35, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Noted, struck. Desertarun (talk) 10:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. Clint Eastwood has over 10,000 words of readable prose, which is above the suggested amount for considerung splitting at WP:Article size. Given agreement at its talk page, the main article should be reduced in size before merging this stuff in. Thincat (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete this sort of article is just overdetailed fancruft. Gugrak (talk) 16:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep We have early life articles on some very notable people, Clint Eastwood I would consider notable enough. This has a few thousand views a month. It could be condensed in places to reduce the cruft concern but I think we're better off as a resource having more detail than the main article on his background, and there are plenty of sources which document it.♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep the Clint Eastwood article is 72686 characters. This article is 25037 characters. This is just necessary and appropriate splitting. I do not think the nominator has made any claim about this not being a notable topic. I also do not think "content forks such as this are now very much out of favour".  Lightburst (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would say we don't need an "early life" article for Clint Eastwood nor most subjects, but I would say that when the article gets to a certain size, splitting it is a useful navigational aid as discussed in Splitting. I don't see any evidence that splitting has drastically changed from an accepted outcome at the second nomination in 2019, but is "now very much out of favour" either. Jacona (talk) 15:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)


 * 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.