Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nina awards and recognition


 * 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   delete. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Nina awards and recognition

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

Content fork that makes little sense for independent article. Most of these awards are not independently notable. Article mistitled, too. THF (talk) 15:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete the same content is already in the main article, and there is no compelling reason for this information to be split out. -- Whpq (talk) 21:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. On the contrary, the main article must be cleaned of this list (done), leaving only most notable ones. Just the same, there is no compelling reason to keep everything in one looooong page. Wikiepdia is not paper, and spitting out this article along a clean-cut crack only increases readability. - 7-bubёn >t 00:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete an attempt to have an additional article on a single topic. It should be obvious that a persons awards is not a separate topic from the person's bio. There may be some cases where t he list is to large to be managed in the main article, but this is not one of them. DGG (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge back into the Nina Girado article; that article is not too long, and the subsection is not notable enough to justify a split, per SUMMARY. Baileypalblue (talk) 04:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: unnecessary fork, listcruft. JamesBurns (talk) 04:03, 28 January 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.