Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ruud Koot/Method engineering/Software configuration management

 __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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 11:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Ruud Koot/Method engineering/Software configuration management


Cut-and-paste fork of an old version of Software configuration management. No work on it since it was forked. It was forked by an experienced editor for a new editor to work on the draft, but that new editor doesn't even know of its existence, most likely, and they didn't edit after 2006. This has attribution issues and WP:NOTESSAY applies. ~ Rob 13 Talk 22:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:UP. Old unused forks should be speediable? —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ideally, yes, but I've given up on getting new CSD criteria through. Even when they're obviously reasonable, the opposition is intense. ~ Rob 13 Talk 23:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP#COPIES. What about G6? Could it be used to apply in this situation? Getting consensus for that might be easier than a new criterion. VQuakr (talk) 03:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * CSD criteria are supposed to be objective. Using G6 as a catch-all undermines the principle. Allowing admins discretion to delete others userpages “per G6” is not accountable. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2017 (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.