Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse

 __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:  redirect to Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

a page already exists at Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. I have merged the refs from this draft and improved the main article. GreaterPonce665 (TALK) 19:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the mainspace page. SK2242 (talk) 22:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the article. By the way, if a draft is accepted by an AFC reviewer, the acceptance script moves the draft into article space, and, as is the usual case with moves, it leaves a redirect behind.  So there should be tens of thousands of redirects from draft space to article space, and that is all right.  If someone is looking for the draft, they probably want to see the article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * History merge . Possibly unintentionally, possibly with justification, User:GreaterPonce665 is requesting deletion of the record of required attributions of the long and many-authored draft in favour of the new page that he started yesterday.  This is either a violation of copyright policy, or bad form.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I consider the use of the word "already" to be a lie, as it implies from the perspective of the draft that the article already existed, when the draft long pre-existed the article. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Let me rephrase. I created the article without knowing that this draft existed {Let me change already to now; also I had the draft in my sandbox/offline text editor for sometime}. When added the merge template to the article page, I came to know of the draft and I copied over some of the content (of course didn't copy it as is!) and the references. The reason I nominated this draft for deletion, was that I didn't see any reason for it to exist. As far as I see, it is already merged. Also, I do not believe the mainspace article that I created has any copyvio concerns. What do you mean by bad form? Thanks.  GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 06:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi GreaterPonce665. The hypothetical concern is that you are feeding a disorder, have found someone else's draft, have copy-pasted into a fresh page, and will get the full credit for writing a great page real quick.
 * Possibly this is justified. Maybe the draft was so bad, and you restarted it completely, WP:TNT-style.  If so, you should say so.
 * However, did you take any of the creative content from the draft when merging? This does not include the reference list, but does include any wording or description.  If so, then you have to preserve the authorship information for that material.  The standard way of doing this is to have the whole page history in the one page history.  There are messy ways of doing it with a broken history.  You have made a second page, which means it is messy.  If you delete the old page, you just hide the mess, and possibly break the attribution rules.  What you should have done is WP:Moved the draft to mainspace.  Unless I am missing something.
 * "Bad form", I guess means that you have done something in a way that is definitely not the preferred way of doing it, even if it doesn't actually break a real rule.
 * Copying within Wikipedia is what I am talking about. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, As I have said before, I didn't know that this draft existed. If you would like to verify my claim, you' should check the first draft of my article in my sandbox (link); you may run similarity check if necessary. When Robert McClenon added the merge template, I checked the draft, saw it was declined for copyviol reasons and decided to integrate some of the useful references into newly created article. I did all this in my sandbox first and then copied it to main page (Link) and I did explain in the edit summary that some of the references were taken from the draft (Link). As you insinuate, I did not simply copy-paste the draft text (Also did you notice the draft is written by someone with COI, the person works at TRAC! Why would I encourage that?). I would ask you to compare this draft with the mainspace article and you'd see that they are nothing alike. I feel that I have done the best I could given circumstances and all I'm hearing is I messed up the order; what could I have done differently? Thanks. GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 17:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * User:GreaterPonce665, there are occurrences of “merge” and “copy” in the edit history. Can you explain what was copied or merged from where. There was the draft, but there also seems to have been your userspace draft. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If you cared to read my previous comment you will notice that the first draft mentioned is copied from my sandbox (link), whereas the declined draft is specifically mentioned as the declined draft in later edit. In regards to what was copied in each of those edits is available in edit history, nothing is secret! Thanks. GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 17:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect. Content forked draft.  Confusing history, but no reason to delete. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2021 (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.