Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Polysophia/Magic Trick (2011 film)

 __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: Keep. — xaosflux  Talk 14:40, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Polysophia/Magic Trick (2011 film)

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

U5 ineligible, 2 sentence stub of user that last edited in 2012. Sennecaster ( Chat ) 00:54, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not a good deletion rationale.  There are no time limes.  Nothing wrong with this userpage.  This sort of policing of others' userspace is unwelcoming to returning editors and is a net negative to the project.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:59, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Do not move to draftspace. Use of draftspace is optional.  WP:DUD. Moves to draftspace would mean the routine slow deletion of old users userspace, which would lock in the Self-fulfilling prophecy of their non-return. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:18, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to Draft Space - We do not need to keep time capsules for departed users just in case they come back. If someone wants to add references, it can be reviewed.  (Well, reviewed has two meanings, reviewed by a film critic and reviewed by an AFC editor.  Both are applicable.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Please reread WP:STALE and the RfCs which led to it. Trying an end-run deletion-via-draftspace is certainly not in the spirit of WP:STALE. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 22:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure Rob is not seeking deletion by moving it to draftspace but is rather trying to legitimately promote them to mainspace as decent articles that would survive AfD. I certainly am not and I would ask that you strike the last sentence. Sennecaster  ( Chat ) 13:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Disagree. The only difference between a draft in userspace and a draft in draftspace is the latter can be deleted. There was, in the earliest days of the draftspace idea, some notion that it would be useful for collaboration. That people would stumble upon other people's drafts, and after enough people did so it might be improved enough to move to mainspace. But apart from a few unusual cases and concerted efforts to do that, it doesn't happen. It's only ever used collaboratively by people who start out working together and are all active. It is, putting it as mildly as possible, unrealistic that an unsourced stub moved to draftspace will be stumbled upon by someone, improved, and moved to mainspace -- no more probable than the same thing happening in userspace, because the people primarily stumbling across such drafts are the people interested in patrolling the part of Wikipedia that's not indexed and hard to find. I work with an awful lot of new users, and there was a time that I encouraged people to use draftspace (and even used it myself on occasion). But an effort by a small number of users 3-6 years ago to make deletion of drafts as easy as possible eroded its value and made it, effectively, a trap for new users who don't know better. That can be beneficial when those new users are paid editors or otherwise creating harmful content, but G13 doesn't discriminate and the other CSD categories cover the worst stuff anyway. So unless I'm talking to someone who has a COI, I'd be telling them to avoid draftspace and to use userspace instead. Before the automatic countdown, a couple users would just move drafts to mainspace that have no business being in mainspace just so they'd qualify for AfD. Then there was a push to do that in userspace, too. After the countdown, there came the moving from userspace to draftspace to make it qualify for G13, or just going in an submitting other people's drafts to AfC regardless of readiness to make them qualify for G13. This was all roundly rejected, but it still happens from time to time. It would be fair to say some of us are a little sensitized to efforts to delete userspace content in ways that aren't explicitly permitted by policy/precedent. I do have a hard time believing that someone who's been around for as long as Robert could think that moving an unsourced stub from userspace to draftspace would think that's the best way to make the page survive. More likely is "make someone do something with it, or get rid of it," which isn't a position that isn't in the spirit of our policies on the matter. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 15:06, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:TIND. No good reason for those who are/were here to build an encyclopedia to be subject to userspace policing in this situation. —  csc -1 17:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - if it doesn't qualify for CSD, there's almost never a reason to mess with other people's userspace. Not seeing a reason here. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 22:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Rhododendrites and Arccosecant. Per WP:STALE, "let it be". Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:13, 15 October 2021 (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.