Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dsp13/List of deaths reported in Who's Who 1914


 * 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 debate was Keep - Editor has made it clear they use it for good (at any rate not bad) purpose. Also, an AfD userfied it. Just another sandbox, it appears :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 14:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Dsp13/List of deaths reported in Who's Who 1914
Nearly a year-old userfied article, which has had no significant improvement on the issues for which it was deleted, which is required to keep deleted articles in userspace. Wikipedia is not a webhost. seresin ( ¡? ) 01:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - How's that go ... use it or lose it? A userfied article untouched for a year should be deleted. -- Suntag  ☼  03:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It wasn't untouched for a year. It was edited in the past few months. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  20:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The article was moved to userspace per the article's AfD. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  20:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The purpose of userfication after an article is deleted from the mainspace is so that the editor in whose userspace it is stored may edit the article, with the intent to move it back into the mainspace once the concerns for which it was deleted are addressed. Two edits &mdash; one typo fix and a unicode conversion &mdash; in one year clearly isn't fixing the problems for which it was deleted from the mainspace. It is no longer being fixed, just hosted. seresin ( ¡? ) 21:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * True. However, there is nothing that prevents an editor from being able to keep an article in userspace, tweak and build it over time, and publishing it when they feel it's ready. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  23:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep if possible. The purpose of the page was to estimate what proportion of historical characters in Who's Who had a wikipedia page, & vice versa, and compare the sets qualitatively (by comparing the list with the intersection of subcats of Category:British people with Category:1914 deaths). I'd like to be able to return to the page after a year or so to track changes over the longer term. Who's Who is a standard biographical dictionary for this period; though over-inclusive (so that I'm not envisaging a wikipedia page for each individual in the list), it seems to me useful to have a handle on the kind of people who are over/under-represented in Who's Who compared to wikipedia. (For this sort of analysis from matches between wikipedia and ODNB, see my user page). Dsp13 (talk) 23:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've updated links on the page, and will also be using to update some death dates on pages linked to. Thanks seresin, suntag & julian for collectively prompting the activity ;) Dsp13 (talk) 13:39, 15 September 2008 (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.