Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/subpage of User:Basil

 __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. — ξ xplicit  00:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Вasil/Tools/T2
Disused and mistakenly categorized user page of apparently inactive user. Bsherr (talk) 00:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Appears to be an out-of-date copy of this page.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 00:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to WikiProject Alabama/Assessment. It is not a copy of the page, but is the preceding draft version of it.  While not necessary, redirection represents good-practice with respect to copyrights.   may well WP:CSDG7/U1 it, but there was nothing wrong with making the draft and it is best to let users manage their own userspace.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:41, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate on the connection between redirects and copyright? Thanks. --Bsherr (talk) 22:34, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The connection is a bit tenuous. The active page should have some attribution to its earliest draft versions, general.  This doesn't strictly apply here, because it is entirely the same author of the draft as of the first version of the active page.  But it should be left to that author as to whether he wants the full edit history kept intact.  That history is available if the draft is converted to a redirect.  If the history is not wanted, the author can have it deleted, but in the absence of good reasonas otherwise, that's the prerogative of the author.  I agree that the page shouldn't be left live.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why redirect and not just blank the page, then? --Bsherr (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I would blank the page if the idea went nowhere, but might yet have purpose (db-u1 if worthless). I would redirect any draft to the active page so that anyone watching or discovering the draft can see easily what came of the idea.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. No need for a redirect as there are no copyright concerns and it is unlikely that anyone will be looking for a three-year-old draft from an inactive editor. --RL0919 (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2010 (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.