Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Peter sohn

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. JohnCD (talk) 23:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Peter sohn[edit]

The article Peter Sohn already exists. : Noyster (talk), 14:13, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 20:22, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as basically speedy material. SwisterTwister talk 06:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep. No AFC tag and from the creator of Draftspace, If they're being deleted at MFD for only because stale, those MFDs are wrong. - 166.170.49.77 (talk) 09:28, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: (1) the IP editor appears to be an indefinitely blocked editor, evading a block. (2) The idea that it is somehow "wrong" for consensus at MfD to delete a draft because it is "stale" is just the opinion of one editor, unsupported by any policy or guideline, or, so far as I know, by general consensus. (Indeed, the existence of speedy deletion criterion G13 shows that there is consensus that drafts can be deleted because they are stale, and the notion that somehow that is appropriate for speedy deletion but not for MfD is an odd one.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:56, 21 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.