Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Centre, Nova Scotia

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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:  keep. ✗ plicit  14:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Centre, Nova Scotia

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

This draft has sat for over a year with no substantial edits, and my WP:BEFORE search found no evidence of significant coverage to establish notability. Template:Promising draft cannot be used to postpone deletion indefinitely. –dlthewave ☎ 04:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The place is listed here in the Canadian Geographical Names Database. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What is the criteria for inclusion in CGNDB? Many countries have geographic databases that cover all named places, no matter how insignificant they may be, and simply being listed in them isn't usually sufficient to establish notability. –dlthewave ☎ 06:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Mainspace. : I WP:DRAFTOBJECT to User:Dlthewave’s draftification of the article.  Consider merging to the municipality.  SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 16:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete/do not mainspace Being in a database of place names is not a basis for notability or an article. I am highly concerned by these non-notable neighborhoods having articles. There is a short Front Centre Road mass-produced into Front Centre, Nova Scotia, a short Back Centre Road mass-produced into Back Centre, Nova Scotia, and then there's this. Sure, these are "communities" just like my neighbors on my block form a community, but they fall under WP:GEOLAND2 of subdivisions and neighborhoods. Being in a database of names (the Canadian version of GNIS) is NOT legal recognition, and there should not be articles for single streets without more substantive coverage. Reywas92Talk 18:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This is a mainspace issue. The page was in mainspace before dlthewave draftified it. If it needed deletion, it should not have been draftified. AfD is the right forum, MfD is not. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep in draft space to allow SmokeyJoe to move it back to article space. If moved to article space, nominator can nominate for AFD, and notability will be considered.  The sequence of draftify followed by MFD is not the way to deal with articles with notability issues.  Either AFD or draft, but not both.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * What is the proper procedure if the article was draftified over a year ago and no improvement effort has been made since then? How should I go about nominating it for deletion at that point? –dlthewave ☎ 04:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To do nothing. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - notability does not apply to draft space -- Whpq (talk) 05:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per above rationales and per WP:NDRAFT.--🌈WaltCip - (talk)  14:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NDRAFT covers this situation specifically:
 * Both of these will generally be uncontroversial MfDs, and are the major indicated use case for draft deletion discussions.
 * Looking at the article history, the Promising Draft template and minor edits are preventing G13 from kicking in, so MfD is appropriate here. The other three drafts that I nominated have minor edits that were made explicitly to delay G13, again with no effort to develop an article. –dlthewave ☎ 16:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Looking at the article history, the Promising Draft template and minor edits are preventing G13 from kicking in, so MfD is appropriate here. The other three drafts that I nominated have minor edits that were made explicitly to delay G13, again with no effort to develop an article. –dlthewave ☎ 16:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Put back in mainspace: And take this to Articles for deletion instead. If that is not done, then Keep in draftspace as notability does not apply to drafts. silvia  (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4)  (inquire within)  01:39, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * How long would you support keeping the article in draftspace if it is not improved? –dlthewave ☎ 02:21, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Indefinitely, until either moved to mainspace or deleted under G13. If the outcome of this discussion is to keep in draftspace, and an editor feels that it's not substantially improved but it is not G13 eligible by way of inactivity, then it may be nominated at MfD once again. silvia  (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4)  (inquire within)  02:27, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ... an editor feels that it's not substantially improved but it is not G13 eligible by way of inactivity" I feel like this is where we are now, actually. It's been in draft space for over a year now without substantial editing activity but the G13 clock keeps getting pushed back by minor edits. –dlthewave ☎ 13:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough reason to disagree with me but WP:BLUDGEONING this point isn't really necessary silvia  (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4)  (inquire within)  15:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep instead of moving to mainspace as suggested (I agree with the notion of "mainspace issue"), as that would mean AfD, which doesn't seem to provide any added benefit compared to keeping the draft. —Alalch E. 03:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep "I don't think this is notable" isn't by itself a good reason to delete something in draft space.  Hut 8.5  19:02, 10 January 2023 (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.