Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Aakheperure/Khaled Abol Naga draft

 __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  Merge User:Aakheperure/Khaled Abol Naga draft into Khaled Abol Naga (already done) and move User:Aakheperure/Tarek Naga draft to mainspace. The merge outcome for the first article was reached organically and implemented while this MfD was still open. The "move to mainspace" outcome was initiated boldly by today. Looking at the discussion as a whole, I would have closed this as "move to draftspace" in the absence of Ivan's bold move. In draftspace, an editor would be allowed to come along, improve the article, and move it to the mainspace. That's exactly what Ivan has done here. I've looked at the article, and this move is clearly good-faith. To be extra cautious given recent craziness about moving drafts to mainspace, I've added a note on the talk page mentioning the page's history and requesting it be moved back to userspace or draftspace if ever taken to AfD and found to be not sufficient. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 23:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Aakheperure/Khaled Abol Naga draft


Editor has not edited on Wikipedia since 2011. Does not want this moved to mainspace. See talk for reasons, However, since this is not going to mainspace it should be removed, Legacypac (talk) 07:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect the Khaled Abol Naga page as Khaled Abol Naga already exists. The draft is a clear violation of WP:UP. Per WP:STALEDRAFT and WP:OWN, I suggest we move the Tarek Naga page to draftspace. It seems notable but requires a lot of cleanup. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Remove delete as it seems like they were related, I didn't look in the right history. A history merge seems messy so a redirect seems sufficient. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:05, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - regrettable that this editor never returned, and maybe a sad commentary on our support for editors with disabilities. I think it may be worthwhile to hear from here. He adopted this user back in the day. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 19:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Expanding: Khaled Abol Naga seems to be a cut-and-paste copy of the mainspace article from an older revision, which Aakheperure was intending to work on, and since it got bumped to main space at some point there are contribs from other editors. This might require a messy history merge. On the other hand, Tarek Naga seems to have been a frequent target of a sockpuppeting editor who liked to cut-and-paste userspace drafts to main space to steal credit for them; it's already been histmerged at least twice. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * History merge the Khaled Abol Naga draft with Khaled Abol Naga per my comment above; move the Tarek Naga page to Draft:Tarek Naga per Ricky81682. I'm sympathetic to the desire of an impaired editor to create and work on articles in the way that works best for them, so long as that is in the best interests of Wikipedia (and it often is), but Wikipedia is a collaborative project and nobody owns pages, not even in their user space. They've evidently retired, and someone else should have a chance to work on these pages. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I should have made more clear - I'm very sympathetic to the editor's desire to edit in draft space given his visual impairment. I just bring the stale pages for appropriate action. Legacypac (talk) 21:09, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * And honestly I hope we can work on the draft and take it to mainspace. If the editor returns, I hope they appreciate that someone did look after the work, not just let it sit there ignored. :/ -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So ok to ignore the author's request not to move the draft? Legacypac (talk) 21:34, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not ignored, but considered, and in this case denied. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:OWN. They agreed to give up their total rights when they edited here under the GFDL. We've had editors come here, and someone changes their page or renames it and they start demanding retraction of their edits and deletions of everything and they're told, either you follow these rules or you're treated for the disruption you're causing. If not, we could delete it but I don't think that's ultimately productive and frankly I don't like the precedent of "this is content, Wikipedia can only have it if I get to decide what happens to it." -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, if the editor does return and wishes to edit using their process of downloading the article, editing offline, and then uploading their revised version, I think we can be sympathetic to that. As long as they're actively editing. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)


 * History merge the pre-23:40, 22 January 2011‎ versions of the draft to the mainspace article. Delete the subsequent draft versions.  Content forks, even in different namespaces, are a very bad idea and not allowed.
 * RE reasons for wanting to edit elsewhere for visual impairment reasons. Editing a copy elsewhere is always welcome, short term.  Usually about a week max, and it gets really complicated if you take longer than others' edits to the mainspace article.  Do not keep copies any longer than required, they are an attribution compliance hazard.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Still argue for the history merge of the older versions, but later versions do have worthwhile improvements. A careful repair of the forking is required, I am not sure how this is best done.
 * User:Aakheperure wrote in big on the top of the draft:
 * "Please do not move this draft without asking the author!
 * If you see this draft elsewhere in Wikipedia, please do not histmerge. Chances are it was taken from Aakheperure without his consent. Thank you. "
 * That explicit assertion of WP:OWNership should be repudiated. "By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL with ..." is not easily missed.  User:Obsidian Soul was wrong to defer to User:Aakheperure's assertion of ownership when he moved this page from mainsapce back to userspace.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * For those who don't know the history of this article. This was originally a planned draft by a new editor who was being pestered by another user who keeps moving his drafts from his userspace before they were finished. He asked for help from in IRC  for this. But he was already pretty angry and desperate by that time, so it was probably too late to stop him from completely giving up on Wikipedia.


 * Just because we don't own anything, doesn't mean it's totally alright to disrupt someone else's work process (especially given that User:Aakheperure was visually impaired and could not work directly on mainspace). People work in userspace so they can have more room for half-finished stuff without having to worry about edit conflicts. Asserting that that's WP:OWN is ridiculous. This was not a long-term "content fork" either. It was only one day-old before the disruptions started happening. He was planning to merge it properly when it was done. And as as far as I recall, this also happened to the rest of his drafts.


 * User:Aakheperure was a good editor and would have likely contributed more if this had not happened. It has nothing to do with WP:OWN, more with basic editing etiquette. That said, given that he seems to be gone for good, a Merge seems to be the only option, as the draft is still in better shape than the mainspace article.-- O BSIDIAN  †  S OUL  02:06, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge The mainspace page is currently suffering from a lack of references, which the draft page seems to have more that can help it. Deletion is not the only tool in the chest.  If the editor has departed the WikiVerse in protesst, then they've effectively given up their exclusive editing right to a page. Hasteur (talk) 13:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Ideally, I think this should be merged into the mainspace page. If other editors decide that this should not be merged into the main page because of the original editor's objections, then this should still be kept. At the very most, it could be blanked. Please reread WP:STALE: it says that stale drafts should only be deleted as a last resort if "problematic even if blanked," which is not remotely true here.Fagles (talk) 13:54, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge Khaled Abol Naga to existing mainspace article. Anyone having a vague idea of a history merge will know that a history merge is not possible here, because of parallel histories. Merge is appropriate as the draft has plenty of refs compared to just one in the mainspace article. And Keep Tarek Naga draft. 103.6.159.83 (talk) 06:28, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 103.6.159.83 (talk) 06:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Don't keep these drafts as that helps no one. I'm happy with a merge. Legacypac (talk) 06:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge Khaled Abol Naga along the lines indicated in WP:PV, though I'm not convinced a histmerge is impossible (just that the result would be confusing and as such, probably inadvisable). The mainspace article wasn't edited at all during the active period this draft was edited; the result would be that all the added text would then appear to be removed by the first edit in May 2011. If we just go with the -type fix, I'm not such a big fan of leaving the history in userspace. The instructions at PV provide an alternate option that might be considered (keeping the history in a subpage that redirects to the article itself), but I think we should leave that for the admins who monitor WP:REPAIR. Draftify Tarek Naga draft, for now anyway. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 22:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Move Tarek Naga draft to main space and leave a redirect in case does return, however unlikely that is. I've done some cleanup and I think the article is sufficiently referenced for mainspace. It does need some more work, but we have far worse biographies in article space. I'll also point out that the "please don't move this page" notice was actually added by  . Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:37, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As for the Khaled Abol Naga draft, I agree with Mendaliv that a history merge wouldn't be terribly messy, since all of Aakheperure's edits to the draft fall into a period where there were no significant edits to the mainspace article. There would just be one edit on 12 May 2011 that looks like a mass-reversion, but that's not terrible. That makes attribution simple if anyone decides to use Aakheperure's content from the draft. The two more recent edits could be left attached to the draft page, which would become a redirect to the article, in case the editor ever returns to look for it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:00, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree. A history merge is desirable, significant edits in two histories is worse that what sounds likes only a mildly messy history merge.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how a histmerge is appropriate as I have never seen it done wherever parallel revisions arise. I have already done the text-merge and added the copied template on the article talk page Anyway, let us ping Graham87 and Jenks24 for expert advise. 103.6.159.82 (talk) 10:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I have now performed the merge of User:Aakheperure/Khaled Abol Naga draft to Khaled Abol Naga. The userpage was converted to a redirect and copied was added to article talk page. 103.6.159.82 (talk) 10:36, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the merge and the use of the copied template are completely adequate in this case. I only merge parallel histories in cases of extreme desperation; this one doesn't fall in that category. Graham 87 13:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Concur. The parallel histories would unfortunately make a mess of a histmerge in this case. Jenks24 (talk) 16:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, I still don't see how a histmerge would be messy at all in this case, but this solution seems to work. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:29, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Screw it. This has been open for two months, and idle for most of that time. We already worked out a solution to the Khaled Abol Naga page, so now I've WP:BOLDly moved the Tarek Naga draft to main space. Someone please close this, and if anyone has an issue with this being in article space, they can take it to AfD. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2016 (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.