Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Group of stale articles from Article Incubator

 __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 no consensus to delete en masse: individual articles may be renominated. JohnCD (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Group of stale articles from Article Incubator


According to Article_Incubator, [c]ontent intended for mainspace should not be kept forever on subpages, ... These articles have not been edited for over 12 months. Should be deleted per WP:STALEDRAFT. Illia Connell (talk) 01:16, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Article Incubator/List of important publications in sociology. This landed here after a strange series of moves following an AfD, but the content of the original article was restored and became part of Bibliography of sociology. RockMagnetist (talk) 01:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, just Advent Christian Church (Eau Gallie, Florida). I relized after I moved it that I was not supposed to do so until after the discussion. However, I propose for just this article that it is moved to Eau Gallie Historic District & expanded to include several buildings from that area. As a group, these buildings would be notable. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 03:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Great that you want to adopt the article. I would still delete the AI subpage (Article Incubator/Advent Christian Church (Eau Gallie, Florida)}, that is now just a redirect.  Regards, Illia Connell (talk) 04:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment attempted to move "iTablet" into mainspace via a copy-and-paste move (it was subsequently speedily deleted). Perhaps he would like to adopt it?  -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. (Except for the Advent Christian Church (Eau Gallie, Florida) one, which has already been moved.) These are all pages that have either no edits at all or no substantial edits since they were incubated. They have all been left lying around for a long time, many of them for two or three years. Editors have had plenty of opportunity to work on them, and haven't done so. At least one of them qualifies for speedy deletion, but we may as well let this discussion run its course. (It is an unfortunate fact that, despite the best intentions of the people who created the article incubator, its main use in practice has been as a way of keeping unsuitable articles that nobody is actually willing to work on. The substantial majority of all the articles that have ever been incubated have either been left lying around for ages and eventually deleted, or are still lying around with no significant editing, or even none at all. Only a minority have actually been worked on.) JamesBWatson (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Relist individually The rules for multiple nominations are that only related articles should be included in a single nomination. The relative rescuability of these articles is different, and they need to be considered as individuals.  It is peoplei nterested in a subject who normally join a discussion, not people interested in "miscellaneous." DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Relist individually - DGG is right. Either most articles will not be discussed or there will be a confusing mess. Bad either way. RockMagnetist (talk) 23:45, 15 May 2013 (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.