Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of characters in C.I.D. (TV series)


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

List of characters in C.I.D. (TV series)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

All the information already present at the main horribly written article C.I.D. (TV series). Then why not be bold and redirect it or raise a Merge request instead of deletion? That's because i dont think even a redirect is necessary when readers can directly find the info on the main article and main article would be the primary search topic. (I had tagged it with CSD A10 yesterday but the tag was removed and contested by User:Monty845 with reason that "2011 is not recently created". I hold the opinion that whensoever created if it is duplicate, it can be deleted under CSD A10. And "recent" is a relative term. If i was 90yrs old, 2011 would have been recent for me. Anyways... Just wanted to point out that a speedy deletion of the article was contested.) §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep and merge content from the main article to here per WP:SS, to clear up the length of the main article. Per WP:OUTCOMES, this is how most U.S. television show articles are organized, and I see no reason for this to be any different. Jclemens (talk) 17*:27, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That will make the main article as good as stub. (If i am allowed by all IPs & SPAs to clean it.) And not everything that applies to U.S. works for India. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There may be a problem with the main article's structure if removing character information turns it into a stub. As a reader, there are many more important things that would help me understand (at a glance) what the show is about. I'd want to read about the premise, the style, the production, the critical and audience reception, and so on. Detailed character information can be important for very interested readers, but it should not consume a vast majority of the main article's space. Technician Fry (talk) 11:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It can consume a vast majority of space if there is nothing left in it. If these were two stand alone article, wouldn't they be merged if main article was a stub? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per Jclemens. - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 23:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep this list page, and move all the character information (except a few of the most important entries) from the main article into this page, merging with current content. Technician Fry (talk) 11:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep And merge content into this, as per JClemens. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (Okay! There are chances that you would respond.) After merging all those tables from there to this article, do you think any encyclopedic referred information remains in that article? Is the remainder length of article okay to have? If these two articles were separate in the first case itself, would you not prefer to have all unreferenced and possibly incorrect information on one article rather than spreading it throughout Wikipedia in bits and parts? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:56, 25 July 2012 (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.