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. MelanieN (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life of Marilyn Monroe[edit]

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

Taking this to AFD since PROD was contested. The article is an unnecessary content fork since it contains no meaningful content that isn't already covered in the main Marilyn Monroe article. Not even worth redirecting. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as stand alone article. With the very detailed expansion of the main article which is now rated FA, the need for this sub-article amounts to unneeded redundancy/content fork. Kierzek (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unlikely any better signs of a better separate article. SwisterTwister talk 06:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no point in a standalone article. No point in redirecting, because this is an unlikely search term. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or keep. This was split from the article of Marilyn Monroe, and is well sourced. Christian75 (talk) 00:24, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing is not a concern in this case; the issue is that this is essentially an unnecessary duplicate of another article's content. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This may be part of someone's effort to reduce the main article to an acceptable size for mobile browsing. It's a bit.... big now, I ran a check and it took over 1 minute to load. I make no judgement's on validity or notability, but I don't think removing the content from the main article would be of any benefit to non-mobile users. Bahb the Illuminated (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2016 (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.