Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:PJKs shirt/Southmoor Primary School

 __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. The relevant part of WP:FAKEARTICLE says that "Short term hosting of potentially valid articles and other reasonable content under development or in active use is usually acceptable" (my emphasis), but this has been untouched for over three years, and per our normal usage on primary schools is not a potentially valid article. JohnCD (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

User:PJKs shirt/Southmoor Primary School


This page was originally nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/User:PJKs shirt/Southmoor Primary School, which was rightly speedily closed due to being the wrong forum. This is a WP:STALEDRAFT from an SPA whose only visible contributions are to userspace; this page has not been edited since November 2008 except for minor wiki markup and category edits, plus the aforementioned AfD. The user has also not edited since that time. I considered WP:ABANDON, but this draft doesn't appear to stand a chance as a standalone article in mainspace. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:STALEDRAFT. Achowat (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per above.  And apologies for accidentally originally bringing this deletion request to the wrong pew. As I mentioned at the above-indicated AfD, I had initially lodged the original deletion request in the wrong place. Somehow, it came up in my general search. I asked at that AfD that the deletion request be moved to Mfd, as it did not belong at AfD.  I appreciate that after the mis-placed AfD was properly closed, nom has now nominated the text at issue for deletion here.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: Stale draft that could not exist as an article if mainspaced  Purpleback pack  89  ≈≈≈≈  20:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no part of WP:USERSPACE that says that a user must be active and must actively edit their drafts in order to keep them, only the suggestion (per above) that keeping drafts around for a long time isn't a great idea. In the meantime, is there any reason not to assume (per WP:AGF, for example) that the user will never return? And what happens then? They find the draft that they started deleted because they chose to step away for a long time. There is WP:NORUSH for the simple reason that editors are volunteers who have lives outside of wikipedia to which they need to pay attention also. There is no harm in keeping this page.
 * In any case, this sets an dangerous and outrageously arbitrary precedent that, if a user hasn't edited in a while, his/her userspace can be subject to deletion for no other reason than just that. If this were applied more generally, with the consequence being that editors have to keep active in order to maintain the safety of their drafts, this would have a deleterious effect on the userbase.
 * This MfD seems to be more about saving face when Epeefleche's indiscriminate approach to nominating schools for deletion has, by his own admission, tripped up (again). He was conducting a "general search" for articles to nominate for deletion which frankly suggests a crusade. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 21:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The bigger issue I have with this draft is that there is little hope, if any, that this topic will ever meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Achowat (talk) 14:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * How do you know? &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 07:35, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Because there's no indication in that article or in any reliable source indicating notability. Achowat (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. While this user has no mainspace edits, and has not edited for years, this page is completely harmless - no spam, no promotion, nothing.  It is already tagged noindex.  Nothing good is achieved by its deletion.  Leave it be.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Question - What would happen if someone else created a real article about the school? Would this stale draft be deleted then? Personally I can see no reason to keep it. It's not really a draft, is it? It's a link to the unfortunate and rather dismal school website. Thats it. I can't understand why anyone would want to keep it. Fmph (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right in that there is not much positive value in the content, but I think there is less negative value.
 * WP:GNG or WP:ORG should not be applied to userspace. These guidelines apply to the question of whether a stand alone article should exist on the specific subject, they do not apply to the question of whether the material should be covered at all.  I think primary / elementary schools rarely get their own article, but they do frequently get a mention on a location article and in lists.  This school currently has one red link on a list.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:26, 11 February 2012 (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.