Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Gamergate controversy
- 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 Gamergate controversy. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:00, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
Draft:Gamergate controversy[edit]
Not edited since Oct 2016, this was a page for proposing changes. It is now just a shadow outdated article living in draft space. Legacypac (talk) 03:24, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- This draft has seventy authors. How can we be sure that it includes no attribution history for the article Gamergate controversy that needs preservation? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Has to be kept for attribution, unless some brave soul wants to try and do a history merge. The draft has twice been copied to the main space article. — Strongjam (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Is a redirect sufficient for attribution? Legacypac (talk) 13:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, a redirect. It's just the history that matters. The draft page was just a redirect for awhile (Old revision of Draft:Gamergate controversy). — Strongjam (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Redirect completed for attribution reasons. This can be SNOW closed. Legacypac (talk) 13:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect per WP:RDRAFT and many users above. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 17:10, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to Gamergate controversy as {{r from merge}}. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 16:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
- 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.