Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mlindstr/Timelapse

 __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. — xaosflux  Talk 17:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Mlindstr/Timelapse


Userspace draft from August 2006 that was later created (a month later) at Timelapse (video game) independently. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete ads nothing to the mainspace article. redundant. Legacypac (talk) 21:02, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the mainspace article is a better action because:
 * it doesn't require MfD
 * doesn't require an admin
 * takes the author to the proper place should he look it up
 * Doesn't require review, because if a mistake is made the mistake can be fixed by any editor
 * Doesn't hide bits of the user's contribution history.
 * --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:39, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Wholeheartedly agree, redirecting should be the standard action for drafts redundant to mainspace. A2soup (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Except I don't prefer the idea of people just randomly changing drafts in userspace without notice to the editor (blanking or redirects). I only do it if the mainspace version is actually the same editor (or just history merge it). If you actually believe that people's userspaces should be their own, it seems odd that you also want people to just unilaterally change other people's drafts without any notice or explanation or even admin review. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that is inherent bad faith on your part to ascribe a redirect to a superior page as "random". If someone were to make a random change to others' userpages, they should be warned and blocked if it continues, but in the absence of evidence of disruptive edits, it is WP:AGF to assume that the editor making the edit is doing it for a good reason.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Fine, if you think editors should have their work just redirected or blanked without notice to them, that's up to you. I find the idea of unilateral blanking or redirecting without any notice more disruptive to an editor's experience here than taking a page to MFD. What is the point of WP:UP which say you aren't supposed to have copies of mainspace articles if all you are going to do is make redirects out of them and then presume that editors who are deliberately copying mainspace articles aren't going to be interested in restoring it? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Abandoned userspace drafts that do not meet existing CSD criteria are harmless and can be safely ignored. 166.170.47.15 (talk) 10:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete entirely as there's only a portion of contents and there's nothing else particularly outstanding. SwisterTwister   talk  07:02, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant to mainspace article, there should be no duplicate entries of topics. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 23:59, 22 May 2016 (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.