Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Miley Cyrus/Comments


 * 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 Rename as archive to Talk:Miley Cyrus/Archive Comments deleting the redirect per housekeeping. As observed below, this is a standard feature of some project banners and the discussion here shows that deleting isn't really an option and a history merger seems to be overkill. Interested parties may follow-up if there is a standard way of handling this pages. Tikiwont (talk) 09:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Miley Cyrus/Comments
Seems to be a useless /page that has no stated purpose. -- seresin ( ¡? )  04:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete. Having been active around the Miley Cyrus article at the time, I can't for the life of me remember its original purpose. Whatever the case, I do not believe that it is of any use now.  bibliomaniac 1  5  04:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Blank or something. It's a standard /Comments page used in many WikiProject banners - Click on the "[show]" link next to the table of contents near the Disney project info to see the text. For an example of a more up-to-date comments page, see Talk:Niccolò Paganini/Comments. Comments subpages are meant to be like mini-peer reviews. Vlanking it will probably have the same effect as deleting it. Or the page could be updated. Graham 87 06:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a standard part of a several project banners and documents the historical progression of the article. Deletion would result in historical material about the editing of the article to be lost to regular editors. - Mgm|(talk) 12:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Mgm's comment is less than convincing to me. Seems pointless. &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 14:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I suppose merging into the article's archival history wouldn't be so terrible. But, the page can't stay as it is. Subpages aren't for fragments of discourse. &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 13:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge or archive somewhere - this is no longer needed, but worth keeping for historical reasons. Graham87's suggestion might be the best, actually - blanking the page will preserve the history, while effectively removing this text from view. Terraxos (talk) 01:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Talk:Miley Cyrus if its open presence bothers you. Deleting random user interactions could conceivable cause annoyance, and provides no benefit.  Even if Bibliomaniac15 can't remember it, it may turn out to have a use for someone.  In fact, the purpose of recording devices such as this, or logs, is to allow the person to let go of the memory without having to worry about its importance.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath (talk) 20:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, transcluded as part of a WikiProject banner. ViperSnake151 23:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Would it be acceptable for the edit history to be merged into the main Talk: page, and delete this one? There's no reason to fragment discussion like this. seresin ( ¡? )  04:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:51, 15 February 2009 (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.