Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of awards and nominations received by Scissor Sisters


 * 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. No consensus to delete. The issue of merging can be further discussed on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Scissor Sisters

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The article can easily be merged into the main article, as it will barely make the article bigger, and can fit into the article easily. It is currently a content fork, which violates [WP:LISTS]]. --  SRE.K.A.L. &#124; L.A.K.ERS ]]  09:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment why not directly propose a merge? Hekerui (talk) 09:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought AfD was for merges too... --  SRE.K.A.L. &#124; L.A.K.ERS ]]  09:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep This is Articles for Deletion, not Articles I think Should Be Merged. The page is referenced and is large enough to stand alone.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 09:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Now now, don't bite. As for the delete/merge thing, sometimes people at AFD will vote "merge" if they think that's a better alternative to deletion, but I think that if you believe a merge is appropriate it's better just to do it with a proposed merge template and a discussion at the article's talk page since AFD is just another level of bureaucracy that isn't particularly needed. That being said, while the article appears long, most of that is artificially boostered up by the section headings and the descriptions of the awards. If they were just merged into one table and the unnecessary repetition of the table information in prose form that now makes up the lead were eliminated, it would easily fit in the main article, so my vote is merge if this indeed stays here.&mdash; DroEsperanto (talk) 12:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Perfectly fine list.  Lugnuts  (talk) 12:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Borderline WP:SIZE-required split. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 14:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: As the article's author, my vote may not count, but I think the article is certainly large enough to stand alone. I will continue watching the article and make sure it remains up to date. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not sure if the topic warrants being a stand-alone list, but this isn't the correct venue. See Help:Merging for the process. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2009 (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.