Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:The blank page

 __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:  no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [gossip] || 18:37, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The blank page

 * – (View MfD)

(Note: I want to also nominate Wikipedia talk:The blank page, but Twinkle doesn’t let me do nominations with multiple pages.)

I see no purpose in keeping this page. Here is why:
 * It has a not a lot of links from other pages.
 * Despite that, this page is susceptible to vandalism from non-autoconfirmed users, and we have to semi-protect it.
 * The page might not even be considered “blank” because of the humor template at the top, which probably doesn’t need to be there.
 * We already have an intentionally blank page, see Special:BlankPage.
 * That page has none of the issues of this page. It can’t be edited by normal means.

Therefore, soft redirect to Special:BlankPage or delete. (Push to talk) 14:11, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to Intentionally blank page to match the real article by the same name, but keep page 100% blank except for a Wikipedia-humor category and maintenance categories. Fully protect the page and add an editnotice or HTML comments for administrators instructing them to NOT add anything visible to the page.  Then put the humor tag and links to Intentionally blank page and Special:BlankPage at the top of the talk page, and use the rest of the talk page for "fully protected edit requests" which of course will all be rejected after a period of hopefully-humorous discussion. Example edit request:  "Please add This page intentionally left blank" followed by "serious looking but 100% fake" arguments over whether it should be in white-font-on-white-background, arguments if it should be in an HTML comment, etc., followed by the inevitable "not done" with a suitably humorous-but-straight-faced reason for rejection. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  16:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant to Special:BlankPage. I struggle to see the meta-humor in keeping a page that is identical except for the letter casing and the godforsaken humour tag.--WaltCip- (talk)  18:53, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Blank. No reason to delete when blanking will fix it. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:58, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Well played sir, well played. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  21:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * In contrast, Deleted page should be deleted. It is an oxymoron.  A deleted page's existence means it's deletion log is not presented.  If a page is deleted, one should see a meaningful log entry.  If a page is blank, one should know to check the history.  For The blank page, the explanation would go well in the penultimate version, as well as on the talk page.  However, Move to Blank page, per WP:THE, and because Wikipedia has multiple blank pages. If articles were welcome in titles, it should have been A blank page.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Blank, i.e. keep. It is humorous, which means it does not have to be completely logically sound (i.e. the only blank page) or redirect to another actual blank page that is not a joke. If vandalism is really that big of an issue, then extended-confirmed or fully-protect it. - — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep   scope_creep Talk  18:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Special:BlankPage, which has legitimate uses for scripts/gadgets. -  F ASTILY   00:19, 26 November 2020 (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.