Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Collage

 __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 Delete. — xaosflux  Talk 02:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Collage


Stale Draft redundent to existing article Legacypac (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Stale draft, nothing to merge to the mainspace article, nothing worth keeping here. Violates WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Looks like it was more a editing test than an intent to create a whole article. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, but we can't do redundant drafts as WP:G6 (housekeeping) or something? It seems a waste of resources to bring this to MfD. Assuming the letter of WP:CSD doesn't allow that already, I suspect the community might support adding a general criterion analogous to WP:A10. VQuakr (talk) 00:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't think it'd fall under G6 as it's presently understood. I could see lumping word-for-word copy-paste deletions under G6, considering that's currently the remedy for cut-and-paste moves. I would support a "D1" criterion, written as an analogue to A10 (plus a reasonable amount of time). —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 00:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of tweaking G6; that would apply everywhere rather than just taking care of draft space and has the bonus of not adding any more CSD alphanumerics. VQuakr (talk) 02:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * WT:CSD links this page. VQuakr (talk) 04:47, 25 March 2016 (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.