Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Princess Marie Luise Charlotte of Hesse-Kassel

 __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 with history merge, as the original edits are claimed to be the source of translations that have been at least partially used to reincorporate this draft. — xaosflux  Talk 18:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Princess Marie Luise Charlotte of Hesse-Kassel


Recreation of a page that was deleted as the result of a deletion discussion: Articles for deletion/Princess Marie Luise Charlotte of Hesse-Kassel. The draft appears to be identical to the deleted version, with the removal of some trivial material about her ancestry. DrKiernan (talk) 20:39, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Someone please explain to me how this doesn't meet WP:G4?-- Laun  chba  ller  23:54, 11 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. This was moved to Draft space (after adding a reference) by, who evidently considers that it has possibilities, see User talk:DGG. JohnCD (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand that discussion. He has not added a reference: it's one of the two that was in the old deleted article. So the statement "Adding a ref to an unreferenced article" doesn't make any sense, when we're actually one reference down on the old version. DrKiernan (talk) 11:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


 * We very rarely apply G4 to a bona fide attempt to improve an article in draft space or user space. The vesions in the other language WPs have extensive addityional material, & if I can find more, I will. If not, I'll simply delete it. This is what draft is for.  DGG ( talk ) 02:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why you're trying to reinvent the wheel. The other language versions are merely translations of the old deleted version. The draft version is merely a duplicate of material from the old deleted version. Why put effort into translating the pages from other places when you can just drag it all out of the archives already made? This is a deliberate circumvention of policy: the contributors to the version you are trying to recreate (myself included) are no longer credited with the edits they made. If you are going to recreate that article then you should have undeleted the old version or merged the histories of the old version and the draft. A new draft should only be created if it is substantially different from the old version. The old history can only remain deleted if the new article is totally different from it. DrKiernan (talk) 07:31, 13 October 2014 (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.