Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Apokryltaros/The Beast Legion

 __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The result of the discussion was  Withdrawn by nominator Since the nominator has withdrawn and nobody has argued for deletion I am closing this now as no action. HighInBC 01:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Apokryltaros/The Beast Legion


Article userified after Articles for deletion/The Beast Legion but last edited in November 2012. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is this page being put up for deletion? I thought articles in my sandbox were not to be deleted unless I explicitly wanted it deleted.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Within reason, yes. I think User:Ricky81682 has a problem with userpages containing the userspace draft tag due to the auto-categorizing that it does.  I think he is an extreme immediatist, going well beyond even An unfinished house is a real problem, which advocates keeping unready things in userspace.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I screwed up here. I check the editor's activity as well as the page's and I didn't realize that this is an active user. I'll withdraw the nomination. My view is that if the user and the page hasn't been edited in years, if there's a chance it could become a page, I'll move it to draftspace to get some eyes on it (the more eyes, the more likely we'll find someone interested in helping out on it), blank it if there's little or no chance or list it at MFD to get others views. If the user is still here and just hasn't edited it, then it's wrong for me to bother them. Nevertheless, this was userified in 2012 here and yet hasn't changed. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If the user is active, he might be offended. If the user is inactive, and comes back after a long break, to find their userspaces pages deleted through perfunctory MfDs, won't the offense be worse.  Enough to dissuade them from returning at all?  There is evidence around of old Wikipedians strongly offended by the modern style.  I really think that clearing old desks is more harmful than helpful.
 * Sifting old drafts, and feeding promising things into DraftSpace is probably net productive on multiple fronts. Even if old drafts end up being auto-deleted per WP:CSD#G13, the auto deletion process provides carefully worded messages, and a simple method of restoration (Requests for undeletion/G13).  In constrast, the MfD nominations can be perfunctory tending nasty.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:42, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * comment: Not so much offended as terrified. I haven't edited the draft since 2012 as I've been keeping it as a "timecapsule" of sorts.  The page was originally deleted as being nonnotable, and I'm saving it and waiting until the topic becomes notable again before resubmitting it as a page.--Mr Fink (talk) 13:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If you bury (blank) your timecapsules, they are much less likely to be interfered with. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
 * In the alternative, you can request an undelete of the prior version, just a red link to the page available. The point is just because it's in your userspace doesn't mean it's your page that can be used to store articles that have been deleted forever. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Consider tagging Inactive userpage blanked.  Not inappropriate.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:58, 1 October 2015 (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.