Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Aponiatowski11/Regis Historical Society

 __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. JohnCD (talk) 08:30, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Aponiatowski11/Regis Historical Society


High school club started in 2009, than restarted in 2011. "At first, the Society had seven members, which by the last session of the first Society dwindled to three members, outside of the officers." Than they got busy and membership "rose to eight" plus 3 officers as seen in the detailed vote tallies table. This is a classic CSD U5, but User:Cryptic removed the tag so here we are at MfD. Legacypac (talk) 05:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as simply none of this suggests any actual solid notability. SwisterTwister   talk  05:33, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * SLAP Legacypac for continued recalcitrance in sloppy CSD tagging. Just because it should probably be deleted doesn't mean it should be shoehorned into a CSD speedy criterion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a brief mention in Regis High School (New York City) already. I don't know that it deserves anything more than that. —Cryptic 06:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm going to suggest a path of least resistance and that we move this to Regis Historical Society and make it into a redirect to Regis_High_School_(New_York_City).. Keep a redirect so the user could tag along if they come back and want to. Content isn't created or destroyed, it's just transformed and into a plausible, albeit probably quite useless, redirect. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be beautiful and would make me so happy. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:10, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad we can agree on something. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:03, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note placed at Talk:Regis_High_School_(New_York_City), to let them know. This userspace draft, I am sure, is overly large, but it may well be worth smerging.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is no need for the first move, userspace-to-mainspace redirects are OK. No harm though, it may even assist search algorithms or something.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm suggesting the move so that we have a redirect in mainspace which someone can search and if the editor returns, they (or anyone else) will be able to work on their full content in the future via the edit history on the mainspace pre-redirect page, better than just having it redirect and the content be stored locally at this page for a later move. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:03, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. I am happy with that. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The move/redirect is a good solution and very respectful, though the material itself belongs on Facebook. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 12:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. without a move or redirect. There is no conceivable potential for an article, and probably no appropriate mention of this utterly trivial content in the school article. We shouldn't be trying to rescue minuscule things like this.  DGG ( talk ) 02:15, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Given Bmclaughlin9's "No. It might merit a one-line mention. Wikipedia is not Facebook. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2016 (UTC)" at the article talk page, and DGG's opinion, it is clear that Legacypac's nomination is good.  Thank you Ricky for the WP:PRESERVE solution idea, which is I think what we should do if in doubt.  I must say however, that moving the history to behind a redirect in mainspace can be erring on overcompensating to preservers, as it would be introducing trivial clutter into mainspace histories.  Better, if in doubt between useless and only probably useless, to leave the clutter in userspace behind a userspace redirect (redirect to relevant article, or blank with summary linking to the article).  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:11, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank-you SmokeyJoe. Legacypac (talk) 14:47, 1 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.