Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Bbik/Golubac


 * 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The result of the discussion was withdrawn by nominator. Joe 22:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Bbik/Golubac
Per WP:USER. The page had not been edited since October 2007. It appears to be a userfied version of Golubac. -- Rockfang (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep -- That page is an out of the way place where I was working on an article, which got carried away and spread into several articles, two of which do not yet exist in mainspace (Unquestionable notability was/is still in the precess of being clearly established, among other things.). It has not been touched for a while because I was getting worn out, so once I declared the original article presentable, I moved on to another topic (which I do not yet consider to be fully completed either), and then ran out of free time entirely.  It also provides the history of the article(s), as new user that I was, I copied the "final" version of the major section to mainspace, rather than moving the page.  Moving it wouldn't really have worked anyhow, as the other only semi-related parts are very intertwined into the main part.  While the biggest remaining part is an old version of Golubac, that is not all that is there, nor was the intent to have it be a repository to save a certain version.  It was to give me something to work with to try and improve that article in one go, rather than tons of little edits and frequent reverting because information was confusing.  As I mentioned, that didn't work out quite as planned.  I seem to have more time lately, though, and have been thinking of coming back here more often, and finishing up the projects I started before would be at the top of my list of things to do.  If blanking the Golubac section until I do get to it, to avoid any unintentional POV-type issues, would solve any potential problems caused by leaving the page around, then I'd be ok with that.  But the page itself should not be deleted, at least not yet. -Bbik ★ 01:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NOTIMELIMIT and no violation of user space. — Ched (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI, WP:NOTIMELIMIT is an essay that applies to mainspace according to its first line and not userspace.--Rockfang (talk) 18:54, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, with regards to your comment of "...no violation of user space", the part of WP:USER I was referring to is the "Copies of other pages" section.--Rockfang (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And in response to that reference I offered to delete that copied section until I get to it again. Shall I do that, and solve the whole issue that fast?  Or is there still another problem beyond that, which I have overlooked? -Bbik ★ 20:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. User knows what he is doing.  If there is a problem, can it be overcome with Template:NOINDEX?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Withdraw as nominator. The page's editor's reasoning makes sense.  I probably should have just left a message on his talk page first asking him about the status of the nominated page.--Rockfang (talk) 18:46, 16 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.