Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ktfield/Mark Wilkinson (2nd nomination)

 __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 delete. JohnCD (talk) 10:13, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Ktfield/Mark Wilkinson


This is a userspace draft created by an account that has not edited since August 2010. WP:STALEDRAFT says "Userspace ... should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles..." In February 2013, when the draft had been untouched by its owner for two and a half years, I nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ktfield/Mark Wilkinson. However, an editor called Kate Field, presumably the same person as Ktfield, asked about the deletion on my talk page, so I withdrew the nomination to allow her a chance to edit it. However, that post to my talk page is still the only edit the account has ever made, and the userspace draft is untouched. After just short of three years, it is clear that this page is not "under development or in active use" (Quoted again from WP:STALEDRAFT), and, whatever may have been the editor's original intention, the page is effectively serving no purpose other than "indefinitely hosting a page that looks like an article".

It is perhaps worth mentioning that the page is a draft version of an article Mark Wilkinson (director), created by the same user, and that she posted on the article's talk page, asking for it to be deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:46, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts mainspace Does no one look for sources when making MfD nominations?  I did one search on [Mark Wilkinson Dischord] and found a nytimes review and a newenglandfilm.com review on the first page of hits.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my insufficiently-considered question. Had there not already been a response, I would have redacted the comment, not just striken it.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I looked for sources before nominating. I have also now repeated your search. The newenglandfilm.com link is still there, and it gives two passing mentions of Mark Wilkinson. The nytimes.com one has gone from the first page of hits, but searching further I found one. It is three sentences long. Neither of them can by any stretch of the imaginaiton be considered to be substantial coverage. I have answered your query as to whether I looked for sources. Perhaps you can likewise answer the following: do you actually read sources before putting them forward, or do you just see that something is there and not look any further? JamesBWatson (talk) 12:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This search places newenglandfilm.com third and nytimes.com tenth. I have not examined the sources, but for the record here I am reproducing the snippets in their entirety.


 * 3. Review of the film "Dischord", written and directed by Mark Wilkinson
 * www.newenglandfilm.com/news/archives/01july/dischord.htm - Cached
 * Jul 1, 2001 ... With "Dischord," writer/director Mark Wilkinson mines the familial landscape and unearths a rough-hewn gem. "Dischord" centers on the ...


 * 10. FILM IN REVIEW; 'Dischord' - New York Times
 * www.nytimes.com/2003/02/28/.../film-in-review-dischord.html - Cached
 * Feb 28, 2003 ... Dischord, which was written, directed, produced and edited by Mark Wilkinson, was shot in less than three weeks on a very low budget, ...
 * Unscintillating (talk) 23:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Further comment: I forgot to mention in the nomination that the page is a complete mess, and would need a major rewrite if it were to be used as an article. For example, all the references refer not to Mark Wilkinson, but to a completely different person, suggesting that the page was made by copy-pasting a page about someone else, followed by a very incomplete job of editing it to make it about Mark Wilkinson. Likewise, apart from the IMDb link, the external links are not about Wilkinsion. Much of the rest of the content of the article is dubious, and none of it is sourced. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "Complete mess" is not any policy, guideline, or essay of which I know. I saw paragraphs of unreferenced potential WP:OR, but that is easily enough fixed by removing it.  I didn't notice that those three references weren't useful.  I've changed my !vote.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - It appears to be an incomplete draft for somebody of borderline notability. If notable, we would be better served with starting an article from scratch.  This draft appears to contain material copied from Mark Wilkinsons' bio page from his web site. -- Whpq (talk) 22:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete If marked as a stale draft, it's just going to remain—well, stale. Userfying would be fine with me if anyone is willing to adopt, but otherwise, delete per WP:STALEDRAFT. --BDD (talk) 20:22, 30 July 2013 (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.