Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vassyana/Early Christianity

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. kelapstick^(bainuu) 20:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vassyana/Early Christianity[edit]

July 2007 WP:FAKEARTICLE of an old version of Early Christianity. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete not fake, but user has been inactive for 5 years, and page abandoned for 8 years. If the user want to work on this again, better to start from a different version. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't actually mean fake but WP:FAKEARTICLE or WP:UP#COPIES then but still it's a "page[] that look[s] like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content...." -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. as unused draft with no actual purpose, but we must find a replacement for "fake article" in instance like this. suggestions welcome. DGG ( talk ) 07:17, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- DGG Userspace copy of Early Christianity? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

what we need is so,e general term, to refer to them all, such as FakeArticle , which should only be said for bad faith contributions. Its not an article copy exactly, its a partial copy, or a copy of an early version. & some similar cases will be slightly modified copies where the changes are unneeded. Perhaps "Unnecessary duplicate" with the abbreviation UNNECESSARYDUP ? DGG ( talk ) 19:20, 26 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.