Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijay filmography


 * 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. (non-admin closure) czar ♔   07:38, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Vijay filmography

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not sure what to make of this. I assume this ties into Vijay, but there is no lead, it is all tables, very little context. Found when patrolling the end of the NewPages log. There are some sources although entire sections are unsourced. The amount of tables and listing without context seems just overkill. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  17:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It was moved from Vijay (actor). For some reason, the material was put back. So either Delete as redundant or Keep and remove duplicate content from parent. --Neil N  talk to me 17:44, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see why it can't stay in the main article if it must stay and there is no context in the separate article here, which should be deleted. Thanks for the heads up, I didn't check all the history, just knew this was a mess. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  17:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dennis that the article is complete mess but I'm also of the view that the parent article has become very lengthy. So it should be edited to look better rather than deleting the page.   Mr RD     12:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  23:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Keep. It certainly needs work, but it seems like a typical break-off article for someone who's notability is not in question and parent article is lengthy.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 01:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep but complete restructuring of the page would be required as it is direct copy paste from the parent article which has really become lengthy.   Mr RD     12:06, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep As per further restructuring is needed and Vijay (actor) article has been very long and is clearly salvageable.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2014 (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.