Talk:1612 in Ireland

Untitled
This deletion is a bit quick off the mark and fails to take any notice of context, particularly my trying to add birth and death entries to Years in Ireland. I am adding content to all the Years in Ireland articles as I find it and will be adding more to this, as I will to other such articles. It also allows others to add content in the collaborative way that is supposed to be Wiki - deletion this speedy allows no opportunity for this. Please have a modicum of patience - this speedy deletion approach is a very bad policy when applied in this way. NB this is not the same as 1612 itself. Ardfern (talk) 15:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * In that case, how about you userfy the page(s) for now (move them into your userspace). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur. I have already voiced my feelings on the matter.   WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN  we need to talk.  15:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I declined the speedy delete request because the reason given doesn't match any of the criteria in Criteria for speedy deletion. If there's a good chance that this article can be expanded and given enough content to qualify at least as a stub, then there shouldn't be a rush to delete it. If there are still objections to the article, then the processes WP:PROD or WP:AFD apply. Asking for speedy deletion has a chilling effect on editors who are trying to create new articles. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)