Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Gambit (2020 film)

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: Redirect to Gambit (unproduced film). — xaosflux ^Talk 17:11, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Gambit (2020 film)[edit]

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:47, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This exists in the mainspace as Development of Gambit. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:33, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy redirect. This happens a lot. Standard process is to redirect. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:33, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Once the MFD tag is put on the draft, it says not to blank or move it while the MFD is in progress, and a redirect is a back-door move. If an admin wants to close this as a speedy redirect, go ahead, but for an editor to do so is, in my view, disruptive. When both a draft and an article exist, the proper procedure is indeed to redirect the draft to the article, unless the draft is more complete, in which case the draft should be left in place to expand the article. It is a good-faith error to tag a draft for MFD because there is an article, but once the error happens, let it run. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No editor should do the redirect while this discussion continues. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Okay, okay. I've read the new guideline. It says that the speedy redirection can be done if the draft is exactly the same as the article. Is it? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No. It is way simpler. If the topic is better covered somewhere else, then redirect. Very often, the draft is a this slice of an article, a narrow content fork. "Redundant with respect to", not "exactly the same", is sufficient for redirection. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:20, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McClenon, I see what you mean. Can we discuss further at WT:Miscellany for deletion/Speedy redirect#Exact match?? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The topic is currently in mainspace at Gambit (unproduced film). I presume that it meets WP:NFF. The drafts should be disallowed as they are content forking. Content forking should be fixed, in the first instance, by redirecting. The redirect tells all old authors where to go.

If someone thinks that a spinout should be drafted, the answer should be "no". The unproduced film is barely notable for one article, let alone a family of article. And if the answer is yes, there should be a consensus of agreement on the talkpage of the parent article. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:11, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now I say this be deleted because it contains "2020 film", and the film will not be released in that year. --Kailash29792 (talk) 08:02, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mainly to address Kailash's last comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:47, 17 May 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.