Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:AnkhMorpork/Palestinian incitement

 __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  delete. MER-C 09:38, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

User:AnkhMorpork/Palestinian incitement


Copied and pasted content from Palestinian incitement, a deleted article (Articles for deletion/Palestinian incitement). Page has never been edited except to remove unnecessary categories in 2012 so it is unlikely to be submitted as a rewritten article. WP:STALEDRAFT Liz  Read! Talk! 15:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello there, Liz. I'm afraid that what you claim is quite wrong. I began working on this article in my sandbox before Palestinian incitement, a deleted article was created. That article underwent several changes before it was finally deleted but much of the preexisting content in my subpages was included in it. I copied one of its final versions to my subpages with the intent of using it to construct an acceptable article about a topic, I'm sure you will agree, is worthy of analysis and discussion. Seeing as my work entail deadlines while my editing does not, my editing has unfortunately born the brunt of my busy workload and is in abeyance. However, it remains my intent to resume my Wikipedia activity at a propitious time, at which point, no doubt, I will continue to work on this article. I hope that you withdraw your deletion request. ' Ankh '. Morpork  19:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If much of your page was included in an article that was deleted, I wouldn't use that as a recommendation. While the subject might warrant an article (although I wouldn't use the loaded word "incitement"), according to WP:STALEDRAFT, a draft article can not linger on, indefinitely, in user space until the editor decides the time is right to start working on it. I saw no edits done by you on this page since you created it in 2012. Liz  Read! Talk! 20:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I might add that it would need a very substantial amount of work, research and reformulating to avoid the strong impression that this is something straight off the hasbara boiler-plate, an attack page on one party in a dispute. You might note that the Oslo II Agreement (Art.xxii) has an undertaking by both sides to abstain from incitement, and reciprocal hostile propaganda. (a) You fail to note that incitement is both a keyword usually restricted in the Western media (reporting a meme that is mentioned every other day by Israeli spokesman on anything regarding Palestinians and peace) to what Palestinians say, whereas similar utterances from Israeli figures (numerous) are not branded with the same term, though Israeli law has, if infrequently, taken rabbis to trial for the kind of incitement reflexely attributed to Palestinians. It will never pass Wikipedia's NPOV unless you reframe it as 'Incitement in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict'.Nishidani (talk) 20:43, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello there, Nishidani. What serendipity chancing across you at this obscure corner of Wikipedia. Thank you, Liz and Nishidani, for your input. I am sure you both appreciate that material on a subpage and in my sandbox isn't a completed draft, let alone a completed article, and therefore, highlighting its blemishes - and alas, there are many - could be perceived as disputatious nitpicking. Fortunately, I am not a petty chap, and rather welcome your advice. As Liz notes, the pre-draft has lain dormant for a while, and could do with a dusting and a licking into shape. I hereby invite both of you to come and romp with me in my sandbox, and who knows, together, we might be able to build a jolly good sandcastle. ' Ankh '. Morpork  23:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * While I await for you to read my invitation and reply, and judging by Nishidani's propensity to follow me around, I anticipate unbridled enthusiasm at this proposed joint venture, I have removed the content from my subpage. RSVP. ' Ankh '. Morpork  23:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No. I don't follow anyone around, and never have. I can't recall how I got here: either because I have deletion pages on my watchlist, or because your own page is there. It's a simple as that (there is a simple reason for not tracking anyone: there are so many bad editors about that what little life I have left in me would be burnt up fixing their numerous messes, whose reordering I blindly trust to the general community). I only handle stuff that comes up on my watchlist. I don't think it proper to work on articles in a sandbox, as opposed to collecting material there. This is esp true of attack articles like this which have no apparent interest in NPOV. One should write them off-line, and when their acquire a semblance of quality and neutrality, introduce them for comment on a workpage.Nishidani (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * AnkhMorpork, what's going on here? Are you trying to rehabilitate a deleted article or write your own? --BDD (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the content has been deleted but could be easily replaced with a quick undo. I'm not sure that this page serves a purpose that is useful to Wikipedia and its coverage of Middle East conflict. Liz  Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 20:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Functionally, regardless of intentions, it serves to retain an attack page on Palestinians, void of any trace of WP:NPOV, on wikipedia without going through the due process of collegial review.Nishidani (talk) 06:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Especially with AnkhMorpork removing most of the content, I'm not sure what the purpose of this page will be going forward. --BDD (talk) 17:35, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. It was a copy of a mainspace page, which is acceptable only for short term drafting. When the article was deleted, it became a technical copyright violation, as the authors are not recorded anywhere. If the page has any worthwhile purpose, it should be deleted, and a request for userfication of the deleted article made. If the page has no ongoing justification, it should be deleted. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:57, 4 April 2014 (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.