Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Linda Joan Allan

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. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:43, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Linda Joan Allan

Draft:Linda Joan Allan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:35, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I moved this to draftspace from the mainspace way back in June 2015. Since then, no work has been done on it whatsoever. There's not enough information here to figure out the intended subject. Google searches turn up nothing. If I hadn't moved it to draftspace in an attempt to save a possible work-in-progress it would have been speedy deleted as per A7, so it seems proper to delete it at this point. ~ Rob^Talk 05:24, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:35, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

• Apology accepted. There has subsequently been an RfC somewhere demonstrating broad disapproval of moving pages from mainspace to draftspace, unless authorised by AfD, or unless by the author. The page should have been allowed to be deleted per CSD#A7, or better, BLPPROD. Delete unless sources are provided. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @SmokeyJoe: Do you happen to have a link handy to that RfC? I've never seen that one. ~ Rob^Talk 15:23, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I was thinking of WT:Drafts. I may not be summarising that RfC well, it did not reveal a consensus, but I think draftifying as pseudo-deletion is a big problem, and that draftifying things that should be deleted is also a problem. Overall, I think draft space is not worth its keep. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
      • That RfC specifically targeted articles that were not speedy delete candidates. I support moving into draftspace in certain limited instances for much the same reason you support indefinitely keeping certain drafts; it reduces WP:BITE. ~ Rob^Talk 00:45, 15 May 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.