Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Glen Loates

 __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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Glen Loates


Repeatedly declined at AfC for notability and tone Legacypac (talk) 01:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notability does not apply in draftspace. Tone is an article problem, not a draft problem. Resubmission at AfC is not at disruptive levels. A2soup (talk) 07:10, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Submitted 3 times so far. "Comment: Not satisfying our simplest standards and notability cannot be inherited from others; as an artist, what establishes notability is either museum collections or major art reviews. User:SwisterTwister talk 04:18, 1 March 2017 is part of the feedback. If Wikipedia standards don't apply to draft space, why even have AfC process or MfD. Draft space can be a place to store fake articles and junk indefinately. Legacypac (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The decline rationale you quote describes why the draft was not promoted to mainspace. If the reviewer intended it as an argument for draft deletion, they would have brought the draft here themselves, as they sometimes do. The AfC process is to assess whether the draft meets "Wikipedia standards", and MfD is used to delete a great number of things besides drafts - it existed long before draftspace did. I would ask the question back in reverse: If Wikipedia standards do apply to draft space, why have drafts at all? A2soup (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The decline reason is to explain why the page was declined. If the AfC reviewer immediately sought deletion the user would not see the reason for decline. After a reasonable time, the page is considered abandoned and should be deleted. Legacypac (talk) 18:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * What is this reasonable time in your opinion? This was discussed a great deal last year, and the most common answer seemed to around 1 year with no manual edits, with some people arguing for as short as 6 months and some arguing against the whole principle of deleting for staleness. A2soup (talk) 22:31, 15 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability is only a reason for deletion of an article, and tone is not a reason for deletion of anything anywhere. VQuakr (talk) 08:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NMFD, A2soup, and VQuakr. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:35, 20 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.