Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:John J. Bulten/John F. Ashton

 __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 no consensus to delete. Anyone who thinks that this would survive an AfD is welcome to move it to main space. Note previous AfD and DRV. JohnCD (talk) 09:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

User:John J. Bulten/John F. Ashton


No activity on this user subpage. No longer needed and never going to turn into a Wikipedia article. jps (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no deadline at Wikipedia, and the argument that this topic won't return to article space appears to be "I don't want the topic to return to mainspace" circular reasoning.  There is a long history with this article, and I specifically argued that the userfication should come without a deadline.  Unscintillating (talk) 13:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This is clearly a WP:FAKEARTICLE that has no shot in hell of making it into the encyclopedia since there are no sources that are reliable establishing biographical notability. Putting it on a user page is a cynical way of keeping content that not suitable for this project. jps (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete abandoned draft of a WP:BLP. User has not edited at all (let alone this draft) in over a year, this can be considered as equivalent to CSD G13. Guy (Help!) 13:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * G13 is for AfC, so that doesn't apply. There is no deadline at Wikipedia.  There was an a case at MfD of a draft seven-years old being kept.  No deadline is also the current consensus at draftspace for non-AfC articles.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * What are your criteria by which you claim abandonment? If you can make a case that the draft is abandoned, it can be moved to Abandoned Drafts or draftspace.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Move to article space. Satisfies current notability criteria (e.g. elected fellow of royal society for eminence in chemistry profession; top-level academic positions far above average faculty level; nutrition books are widely-reviewed; played the major role in creating I6D which is a significant and well-known work to the field of creationism) and has been significantly cleaned up (particularly refuses to endorse fringe viewpoint). Cesiumfrog (talk) 23:03, 17 April 2014 (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.