Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Captain-tucker/Emma Hunton

User:Captain-tucker/Emma Hunton
 __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:  Speedily deleted by  per CSD G7. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 21:12, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Stale draft by inactive user. Subject does not have an article and is not notable enough to have one. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 20:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete would have been swept up G13 in Draft space. Not notable enough to have a page even though this is a reasonable effort. Userspace is not a place to indefinitely host pages on non-notable topics. Legacypac (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delayed from G13 by bot edits to templates. Borderline notable, not offensively promotional, leave these things for the G13 deletion process. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Unless I'm mistaken, G13 doesn't apply outside of the draft space, unless the page is a declined AfC submission (which this isn't). —Compassionate727 (T·C) 21:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * it didn’t originally, but we fixed that a couple of years ago. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Does the relevant section of WP:CSD need to be updated to make this more clear, then? None of these articles have afc submission, and the criteria doesn't say that userspace draft makes it eligible. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 22:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I see, I see your point. Does the userspace draft make it an AfC page?  Why does it include the big blue “submit” button and attract AfC maintenance people?  A bit odd.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't tell if you speak sarcastically, but for the sake of this reply (and civility) I'll assume you aren't. The reason I differentiate between the aforesaid templates is that afc submission clearly indicates that someone's intention is to submit through AfC, whereas userspace draft does not. I create drafts of articles in my userspace and attach userspace draft on a semi-regular basis; I never submit them through AfC. Having a blue button is convenient, especially for new editors who might find the process of manually submitting an article to AfC to be confusing. As for how it attracts AfC maintenace people, it does so the same way any other page would, although I should note that, as far as I can tell, such drafts primarily receive attention when they are pending submissions, or when there's some other problem (e.g. they're in article categories). Furthermore, I should note that categories added by AFC submission very clearly pertain to AfC (e.g. Category:Pending AfC submissions), whereas Category:Userspace drafts is not labelled as falling within the scope of that project.
 * Personally, I don't understand why CSD G13 differentiates between drafts in the draftspace and drafts elsewhere in the first place; as far as I'm concerned, any draft anywhere that isn't being edited should be eligible. And because I don't understand that differentiation, I'm not going to try to "read between the lines" or use "common sense" to determine what exactly is and is not meant to be eligible. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 23:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I try very hard not to do sarcasm. I already asked for clarification at Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * .:::::I do not understand G13 to apply to userspace drafts not submitted to AfC. The expansion covered picked up non-afc Draft space pages. I'd favor a G13 that cleaned up userspace as well since there are thousands of problematic pagee there amd little patrolling. Legacypac (talk) 23:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Per the above and discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion, my !vote is to Keep but, as an editorial decision, blank with Inactive userpage blanked. Pages like this, the typical old, abandoned, forgetting, of dubious notability but no offensive content, should not be brought to MfD individually. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone, in the seven days, expresses an interest in taking over. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per SmokeyJoe. If of no potential and problematic even if blanked, seek deletion (from WP:STALE); possible potential and no problems after blanking.  —  Godsy (TALK CONT ) 03:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete As the original author of this page I have no problem with the page being deleted.Captain-tucker (talk) 08:54, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, I don't either; Delete per Captain-tucker. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 11:10, 26 April 2018 (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.