Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism (2nd nomination)

 __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. If anyone wants it, I'm willing to restore to their userspace. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism


Delete as abandoned draft. This is draft content, which is what we have the draft namespace for, and in fact was properly started in the draft namespace. Had it remained there it would have just been speedily G13 deleted for passing the six-month time limit. Moving to a subpage in the project space should not allow it to bypass the abandoned draft process. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of conservatism was the last MfD. Legacypac (talk) 18:11, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete storing long abandoned drafts in a morbid wikiproject is not helpful. Goes against how we manage draftspace. Legacypac (talk) 21:09, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - On researching, it appears that this was part of a project of the mass creation of outlines which was a previous abandoned effort at some sort of magical structure for Wikipedia. That is, this is [Stepfather of Portals].  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That is about right, with the same champion and about the same pushback from the community that stopped it but did not completely erase it. A compulsive desire to organize the entirety of Wikipedia, an idea supported by many of the same pointe as for Portals. Pretty close to Groundhog Day ten years later. By the way this is one of MANY draft found here [] Legacypac (talk) 07:16, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete all per WP:G13 —  python coder    (talk &#124; contribs) 20:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * User:pythoncoder, WP:G13 most definitely does not and should not apply to WikiProject subpages. G13 was created due to the swathes of unwatched unowned uncared for newcomer generated content that WP:AfC, and the WP:Incubator before it, did not properly anticipate.  This is completely different to WikiProjects, which are the shared space of similarly interested established Wikipedians.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Historical work should be archived, not deleted.  If it was successful, it is important to keep the records.  If it was not successful, deletion hides the history and may doom future editors to repeat the mistake.  Neither is a good reason to delete.  Also, WikiProjects should manage their own subpages, MfD is not WP:WikiProject Management.
 * A better way forward is to archive WikiProject Outlines in favour of WikiProject Portals. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per SmokeyJoe. Moving pages to other namespaces so they are not treated as junk and deleted after an arbitrary amount of time is acceptable; WP:DUD. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 23:19, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I can't see any reason to keep pages like this (cluttering up wp) as a historical record. DexDor(talk) 11:14, 16 March 2019 (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.