Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Theornamentalist/Shinese

 __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: Merge and Redirect. — xaosflux  Talk 17:13, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

User:Theornamentalist/Shinese

 * (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America1000 01:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America1000 01:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Old draft userified here after Articles for deletion/Shinese (3rd nomination) with no serious improvements after five years. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. AfD found that it does not warrant a stand alone article (WP:N / WP:GNG), but the content is real, verifiable, and should be merged somewhere.  There are a few dog breed potential targets.  There are no time limits.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:04, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Does the fact that the prior AFD closed in delete and not merge count for anything? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I reviewed the entire AfD, yes, of course it counts, for what it is worth, in detail. The AfD demonstrates a consensus that the content does not warrant a stand alone article, but it completely failed to address the WP:BEFORE issue of a merge. Nothing in the AfD to my reading speaks strongly against merging to some article that lists dog crossbreeds.  The AfD was not closed "not merge".  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Dog crossbreed. No good reason to delete, do not blank or redirect before merging.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The three AfDs and DRV collectively are all a mess of process, and in the end the deletion came with some mention of merge and redirect to the crossbreed article (then called List of dog hybrids), but people were focuses an the fairly complex cases establishing that the sources, which unquestionable satisfy WP:V, didn't satisfy WP:N. Note that WP:N is not a deletion reason if there is a merge target.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you want it kept or merged and redirected? And yes, I see that you personally don't approve of the end result of all the prior discussions but does that mean we need more and more discussions (presuming you want this kept) than those just because it's in userspace now? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually I want it merged. I definitely approve of the end result of prior discussions in that they found consensus that the topic is not suitable as a standalone article, but I disagree as overreach on the conclusion that the material can not be used anywhere, as the rationale, the GNG, speaks only to the question of a standalone article.  It then follows that a userfied version is inappropriate, it should be promptly merged.  If rejected from merging, then delete.  I wish I could have merged it already, but doing that during an XfD tends to be very strongly unappreciated.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:21, 5 July 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.