Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter/PA Differences

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. -- Jreferee (talk) 13:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter/PA Differences[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter/PA Differences (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

No reason to keep around. No discussion. Almost entirely untouched since 2007, except in 2013 when an IP added some nonsense. I see no historical relevance in this, and it's not linked from anywhere. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 23:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • What it shows is that Wikipedians used to engage in fan fiction original research. The IP editing the page further, despite the tag, shows that these things, if kept for the sake of keeping Wikipedian historical records (which I favour), should be kept blanked, or redirected. Page histories are the appropriate place to browse histories, there is no need to keep one of the versions live. No strong objection to deletion, but I think that all such pages (Wikipedian work ultimately not used for good reason) should be blanked, replaced with {{ombox|image = [[File:X mark.svg|30px|link=|alt=]]|text = '''This Harry Potter WikiProject subpage is no longer in use and is kept primarily for historical interest.'''}}, and then redirected to Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter, substituting the WikiProject name for "Harry Potter" for other WikiProjects. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is essentially a draft of a previously deleted article; see AfD. I think WP:STALEDRAFT applies, though I would be open to changing my opinion if project members are interested in keeping it fresh with an eye to republication. The project really should've been informed of this, which I'll do now. I'd request the closer give this some more time in light of this. --BDD (talk) 00:08, 8 November 2013 (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.