Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Desperate Journey/Temp/Temp

 __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. Salvio giuliano 10:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Desperate Journey/Temp/Temp

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

I was just clued into the existence of these subpages marked "Temp" that no one would ever come across while editing the articles they concern. I assume that this one is no longer needed but don't see a relevant CSD criteria that would cover its deletion. So, I'm starting this MFD to weigh in on this particular page but also see if there is a general opinion on what to do with these Temp pages, most of which are from at least 8 years ago (or older). I guess it was a common practice back then to put questionable content on a subpage but when no editors know that it even exists, I don't think it serves any purpose to help improve the article. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 08:26, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as incomprehensible/no obvious use. (I know that’s not a SD rationale but I don’t think my assessment is controversial) Dronebogus (talk) 08:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Not incomprehensible at all. Did you read through the edit history of  from the time, at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Bzuk&target=Bzuk&dir=prev&offset=20140712?
 * — SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. It is part of the edit history of Desperate Journey, and it is properly linked from Talk:Desperate Journey.  “Temp” was not the best title.  The subpaging of major rewrites, as opposed to dumping it on the talk page, was common.  “Temp” refers to it being used for a short time, not due to it being intended for deletion.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: This is an attribution issue, and SmokeyJoe has nicely summarized the situation. We don't delete edit histories of the pagespace an editor rewrote to prevent deletion while eliminating copyvios. I agree the naming is not ideal, but after this closes we can have a proper move discussion. Perhaps we might request a history merge instead. In any event, I suggest User:Liz withdraw the nom so we can move towards that. BusterD (talk) 09:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Looks like it's needed for attribution. —Alalch E. 12:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Dronebogus. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 15:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep:FWiW Bzuk Read the rationale of why this was created and why it should remain, albeit re-titled as the original article was deleted twice. (talk) 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per SmokeyJoe. The naming at least is easy enough to fix.--⛵ WaltClipper - (talk)  14:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per SmokeyJoe. This may need to be retitled, but deletion would be inappropriate. L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 22:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks for "schooling" me. I withdraw this nomination. But because there are some editors who have voted "Delete", this can't be closed as a Speedy Keep. I'm very glad I tested this out with one nomination before I went any further. I will say that there are hundreds of these Temp pages and they all have their own story so it's not a cookie cutter situation. Sometimes, they are just old "To Do" lists. Thanks for considering this nomination. Liz Read! Talk! 03:39, 17 March 2023 (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.