Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerusalem during the Crusader period/draft

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. Delete as a poor "draft" in articlespace. If someone wants it userified, they may let me know. Proposed changes should be made on the Kingdon of Jerusalem page, which appears to be a better target anyway (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem during the Crusader period/draft

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

bad quality duplicate of Kingdom of Jerusalem Jugador de rugby (talk) 13:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's unfortunate given the amount of work that's gone into this article, but this article covers the same ground as Kingdom of Jerusalem. If there's anything here that should be merged into the other article, that should be done. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, the work has not gone into this article. From the talk page, the place where the work was put in was he:ירושלים בתקופה הצלבנית over at the Hebrew Wikipedia, and this article is a machine translation that several editors made good faith but incomplete attempts to clean up. It's still in broken English. Indeed, it still matches in large part the Google Translate version of the Hebrew Wikipedia original. Uncle G (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The English needs fixing; that's all that's needed here. --Lambiam 20:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close Invalid nomination. This is not an article. This is draft; work in progress. Please see Talk:Jerusalem during the Crusader period for details. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If its draft why its in article space?--Shrike (talk) 08:12, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article used to be at Jerusalem during the Crusader period but was moved by Staszek Lem to Jerusalem during the Crusader period/draft, with edit summary A great disservice for wikipedia to keep an article in this shape. Next, he turned Jerusalem during the Crusader period into a redirect to Kingdom of Jerusalem. --Lambiam 22:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to Jerusalem during the Crusader period and decide if the content should be merged to Kingdom of Jerusalem in the talk page and slap Staszek Lem with a trout. You do not move an article that been there since 2011 to a "draft" because it needs work while in namespace. This is why we have user subpages, and drafts are worked on article talkpages as well. This should have been moved back to it original state instead of AFD. Secret ^account 04:59, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What a mess! First a machine translation gets dumped on English Wikipedia without regard to whether it fits in with the way that our content is currently organised, and then, in perfectly good faith, an editor moves the article but leaves it in article space rather than put it in talk or user space, which would have achieved what that editor intended. This reminds me of the old story of the (insert your favourite butt of racist jokes here) person who, when asked for directions, replies, "if I wanted to get there I wouldn't start from here". If there is any useful content here that is not available from a machine translation of the Hebrew article then it should be kept somewhere (I don't think it makes much difference where, except that we should remember that we don't do subpages in article space) and then a discussion should be held about how best to fit that content into our article structure, which is almost certainly different from that of Hebrew Wikipedia. As with any content about this region it would be important to ensure that such a discussion is advertised at the various Wikiprojects with an interest in Jerusalem and its history. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:31, 20 June 2012 (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.