Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lea Salonga on screen and stage

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. Consensus that this article is a justifiable fork. Joyous! | Talk 03:57, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lea Salonga on screen and stage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

content fork. A loose necktie (talk) 03:33, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is already amply covered in the main article about the actress and the top half of this article isn't sourced. Oaktree b (talk) 03:46, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per the Wikipedia:Content forking guidelines, "... As an article grows, editors often create summary-style spin-offs or new, linked articles for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage. Examples of this might be the cuisine of a particular region forking from an article about the region in general, a filmography forking from an article about an actor or director or a sub-genre of an aspect of culture such as a musical style." This living and active actress has over 80 credits. This subarticle is necessary. Mjmatousek (talk) 03:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Theatre, Lists, and Philippines. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:15, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per the Wikipedia:Content forking guidelines. The list can be more complete than the credits discussed in the main article, which should use WP:SUMMARY. If the main article is overwritten, that is what should be addressed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per Mjmatousek. References had since been added for the prose section of the article. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Necessary subarticle per above arguments. SBKSPP (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.