Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Dunkirk (2017 film)

 __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: Histmerge. with Dunkirk (2017 film) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Dunkirk (2017 film)


Dunkirk (2017 film) already exists and has been edited much more heavily than this draft. There is some parallel editing of the mainspace page and the draft page in the early months of 2016, so I am not sure if the page histories can be merged. Suggesting deletion but am open to other alternatives. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:35, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Misleading "already". Deserves a history merge.  If too messy, just redirect.   deserves the newpage credit.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Where is the guideline to say just to redirect? And new page credit should not be worried about because Wikipedia does not belong to anyone. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 11:01, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The first rule is to worry about required attribution. Contrary to your "before", the draft was there first. After the first rule, it goes kind of whatever. Why do you want to delete someone's edit history, the first edits on the topic? If you are wrong about required attribution, deletion hides the evidence. A safety "rule of thumb" is to redirect accidental content forks. Redirect the lesser to the better. Does it need a rule?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, I found this that shows copied and pasted it from the draft, but then the draft was abandoned. I was thinking that the draft was created but never actually used, but a second look at the page history proves me wrong. I'm fine with withdrawing the MfD but am not sure exactly if the page histories can be merged. I'll tag accordingly and see if an editor with a history-merge background can figure it out. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 11:37, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

I can't remember doing this, but according to the history, I must have come across the hidden message and gone from there. Fucked up. –Cognissonance (talk) 15:23, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Nah, it's all good. Dealing with page histories is one of the trickier parts of editing. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:36, 1 July 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.