Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Oregon 971

 __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. ‑Scottywong | [gossip] || 06:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Oregon 971

 * – (View MfD)

There is no published proposal for such a highway that I can find. The only connection between the state of Oregon and the number "971" is that it is an area code in use in the state.  Imzadi 1979  →   23:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - appears to be a hoax -- Whpq (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Neutral - Doesn't need deleting yet. Hasn't been submitted and isn't a nuisance.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per editor 's rationale against deletion. It's a sub-stub, but it's not necessarily a hoax. When patrolling Draft: namespace, which is not indexed, I find it's helpful not to bite the newcomers so, unless there's blatant copyright infringement or an unambiguous corporate promotionalism, I just mark the page as reviewed, and leave it for natural processes as coprolite biodegrades. No need to waste a week at MfD. Doug Mehus T · C  02:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It isn't biting a newcomer to delete a hoax. -- Whpq (talk) 11:23, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:BITE is an essay on editor relations, particularly, with new and new-ish editors. WP:COMMONSENSE suggests it can apply to any namespace. I loathe the term hoax; calling all unsourced or fictitious information as a hoax is either over-stating it or mildly fallacious. If the information is factually incorrect, then we should recommend deletion based on that factual inaccuracy. Doug Mehus T · C  12:22, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, as a deliberate hoax it is against a basic content guideline. It is in no way worth saving, especially if it is carelessly submitted.  Sounder Bruce  04:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - This appears to be a hoax.  Dough   4872   16:48, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hold off a speedy deletion as db-hoax until the creating editor responds here. Maybe more of a Wikipedia is not for things made up one day case but this is useless and should be deleted if it turns out as made up.  J 947 &thinsp;(c) , at  18:24, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep It's kind of weird that everyone's parroting everyone in saying it's a hoax with zero proof of that. If this is indeed a hoax it's probably the most innocent, random, non-debasing one I've ever seen. Do people really think someone woke up one day and said, "you know what would be funny is to create a draft about a fictional highway in Oregon, that'll show em". I think it's much more likely that the person either a) has the number wrong b) has some insight to an otherwise unpublished proposal (think city planning committees) c) heard it through some unreliable source (local talk radio, debbie in accounting, jane at the library). Either way, I think the editors intention was innocent (or at least we should presume WP:GOODFAITH) and as such proposing a CSD/MfD on this is much more likely to discourage a new person from posting again compared to incubating, correcting and guiding in AfC. Sulfurboy (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was starting to feel pretty alone in this MfD until you and came around. I agree; it's hardly a hoax. J947 describes it better as, "Wikipedia is not for things made up one day." As such, I think this can wait for natural processes. ;-) Doug Mehus  T · C  01:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * State departments of transportation rarely just create a new state highway one day without notice-and-comment periods or the like. There would be some indication in the news that ODOT was contemplating some change, and there isn't. It's quite a coincidence that this proposed highway's proposed number matches the area code for that region of the state. It really does look like "something someone made up one day", and if the creator has some source for it, that person should step forward to offer it. I wouldn't call it a hoax, but it does not look legitimate, and I've seen editors preemptively move drafts to main space just often enough to know that illegitimate content doesn't need incubation, it warrants deletion.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you mean you've seen New Page Patrollers or AfC reviewers move illegitimate content into the Main: namespace? Or, are you just referring to insistent page creating editors who are move warring? At any rate, I would hope our NPPs and AfC reviewers aren't moving content to Main: namespace that fails WP:GNG. ;-) Doug Mehus T · C  02:19, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I've seen a number of fake highway articles created in my time here, so yes,, it's been done. Given the level of bureaucracy with state highways, there would be some discussion in the media about this, with or without the exact number. (I find it very coincidental that the number given in the draft is the same as the telephone area code for the region, especially since the highest number in use in the state is 569.) And yes, , I've seen drafts that have been pushed over to the main space because someone thought they looked legitimate, trying to assume good faith and all.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:30, 26 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. On Imzadi1979's talk page, the creator of the page doesn't seem interested in proving that it's legitimate or disproving that it's a hoax.  "Oregon State can make it however they want. I find this as an unnecessary comment," in reference to the same comment as the deletion rationale here. –Fredddie™ 03:36, 2 March 2020 (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.