Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Imagi-King/Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story




 * 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 keep. Tim Song (talk) 17:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Imagi-King/Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story
As an article, this was userfied at AfD, brought back and deleted at AfD2, brought back again, deleted G4 and salted. This userspace copy was nominated for deletion G4, and the nomination contested; I agreed on 22 March to decline the speedy and allow two weeks for it to be improved and taken to DRV, failing which I would bring it here. Nothing has been done; userspace is "not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content." JohnCD (talk) 13:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. The last remaining remnant (that I know of) of a very persistent effort to promote this non-notable short film by one of its cast members. I can't begin to tell you how glad I will be to see this gone, after the battles fought with the original author. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 15:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. There does not appear to be any realistic possibility that the film will suddenly become notable soon, so the page is not likely to become suitable for moving to the mainspace in the forseeable future. Nsk92 (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep My apologies, I've been busy and didn't get a chance to prep the DRV. Working on it now, for submission in the next two days. Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 00:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep 2 weeks is not "indefinite" and userspace does not require that everything be suitable for mainspace.  Per extensive discussions on other MfDs, 6 months appears to be a valid limit. Collect (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment DRV is now in progress . Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is nothing wrong with keeping an article that merely fails notability in userspace. If he wanted to, he could write a personal essay on editing there. Userspace pages should only be deleted in extreme cases; this isn't that. --GRuban (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the userspace draft is OK, however this user has been causing problems by posting it to mainspace so many times without any substantial improvement. There is a chance that the film will somehow gain notability in the future. Due to the persistence of Imagi-King I am pretty sure that if this was deleted it would reappear. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The differences between the article when it was listed for 1st Afd and then 2nd were considerable. Less substantial were the differences between the 2nd and 3rd, though arguably far more so in terms of establishing notability, as the links to Hot Press and TG4 were added in that period. Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - obviously attack pages in user space should be deleted, as should copyright violations and so on, but a draft article about a possibly non-notable film is ok. If after a few months there hasn't been much improvement, it can be deleted then. PhilKnight (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * keep this page is being used as part of a DRV and deletion at this time would involve a real annoyance. Further, 2 weeks isn't unreasonable.  If we need to block the user for moving the draft back into mainspace multiple times, do that.  Not a reason to delete a draft though. Hobit (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: it's not as if this has only had two weeks - it has had over six months, first userfied last August, and has been in and out of mainspace and through AfD ever since. It is now at DRV, and looks likely to be relisted for yet another AfD. If it is kept there, fine; if it is turned down for the third time, I think it will come under the clause in WP:UP that says userspace is "not intended to indefinitely archive... previously deleted content." JohnCD (talk) 10:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as the article's mainspace version has been restored and relisted at AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steamin' and Dreamin': The Grandmaster Cash Story (4th nomination)), so the userspace draft is no longer necessary. If the topic really is notable it will be kept at the new AfD. Alzarian16 (talk) 14:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And what if not? Since when do userspace drafts have to pass notability? --GRuban (talk) 18:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The trouble is that the userspace version has changed little in a fairly long time, so can hardly be classed as a draft any more. The only way it could possibly be of any use would be if the mainspace article was deleted and the film gained notability at a later date. Given the unlikelihood of this I can't really see what good keeping a userspace version of a deleted article would do. Alzarian16 (talk) 19:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Isn't that for the user to decide, rather than us? If he thinks it's not useful any more, he can ask for it to be deleted. We shouldn't make that decision for him. --GRuban (talk) 20:18, 18 April 2010 (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.