Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of Linus Pauling (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of Linus Pauling

Abandoned content fork for a single existing article. Has been around for years with no improvement. Should be subject to G13 except it is stored in the wrong place. See previous discussion here Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of Linus Pauling Legacypac (talk) 17:02, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a proposal that would allow these outlines to be deleted under CSD G13. Users who participate in this MfD may want to comment on that proposal by going to WT:CSD#Proposal: Expand G13 to outline drafts. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Regardless of what to do about outlines in general, we don't need an abandoned empty outline that has been disused for nearly three years. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Proper place for past WP:Outlines experiments. No good reason to delete. WikiProjects should manage their own subpages, MfD is not WP:WikiProject Management.

I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines should be deprecated and archived in favour of Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals, but definitely not deleted. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:SmokeyJoe will you make that nomination at MfD? Legacypac (talk) 10:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a deletion discussion, the pages absolutely should not be deleted. The required action is a thirty day RFC. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:08, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pythoncoder is this something you were going to vote on? Legacypac (talk) 18:17, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CONTENTFORK. Should have been placed in draftspace making it eligible for G13. Just FYI your ping looks a bit like canvassing considering my votes on related discussions. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 19:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was reviewing old MfDs and given your comment it looks like you meant to vote but did not. Legacypac (talk) 19:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. — pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:26, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete CSD G7 (per author request) – I don't have time to work on it right now. — The Transhumanist 23:21, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The Transhumanist, I read G7, "I don't have time to work on it right now" as a denial / refusal to engage. The standard for deletion of a WikiProject subpage, nominated by a WikiProject outsider, is that it is not appropriate and should not have been created in the first place. Your comment implies that if you later find time, you may re-create it. This is wrong from both sides. Is this a worthy project page, WikiProject page, or not? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - You mentioned above that it was an experiment. As author, I can tell you that it wasn't. It was just a draft start that went nowhere. It's an empty outline, useless in its current form. Clean up is a valid reason for G7. There is no need to have this heading skeleton laying around. I stand by my request. — The Transhumanist 18:10, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This one was selected pretty randomly from a long list as a test case. Please tag the other few hundred empty outline drafts G7 as well. Save other editors from cleaning up your bunge creation of empty drafts. Legacypac (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2019 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.