Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of family and consumer science

 __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. — xaosflux  Talk 19:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of family and consumer science


After 12 years, one would expect that this would either be finished enough to be placed in mainspace (where it resided for its first 5 years or so), or deleted. The actual state of it, with three articles in one section and a lot of empty sections otherwise, indicates that it is time to abandon and delete this one. Fram (talk) 09:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * DeleteNot providing any information for readers or editors.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete another halfbaked idea from the same source as all these useless portals. Legacypac (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please stop personalizing MfD discussions against someone you're casting in an "enemy" role. It's tedious and uncivil.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - I don't think it is half-baked because I am not sure it ever went into the fire. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Has had more than enough time to become a valid article, but it has not been improved to an acceptable state. —  python coder    (talk &#124; contribs) 20:36, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This is not a deletion rationale; see WP:NOTBUILT, WP:IMPATIENT.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete because there is insufficient material on this interdisciplinary topic to ever form a proper outline article, and this appears unlikely to ever change.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  16:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Can someone please explain to me why we have speedy deletion criterion G13 if a draft is abandoned in the Draft: or User: namespaces, but if a user sequesters a draft in the Wikipedia: space, that user can have it kept forever?  This seems inconsistent.  UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:37, 27 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.