Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Tropical Storm Octave (2019)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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: keep. (non-admin closure) JavaHurricane 06:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Not notable and will never be notable, not good written without many reliable sources (see Meteorological History and Impacts). As per WikiProject Tropical cyclones article guidelines, weak, non-landfalling, random storms do not warrant an article. Destroyeraa (talk) 17:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Strong keep As per Wikipedia:Drafts#Deleting_a_draft which says:
Drafts are not subject to article deletion criteria like "no context" or no indication of notability so creators may have time to establish notability and make other improvements. Drafts may be nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (MfD), but not solely because the draft fails to show that the notability guidelines are satisfied.
notability, or perceived lack of notability, is not a valid reason for deletion of a draft. Nor would a WikiPproject standard finally decide the matter in any case. Such a local consensus would not Trump the WP:GNG if the was independent reliable coverage of a non-landfalling storm. But in any case there is no reason to stop a good-faith editor for working on a draft in an attempt to create a valid article, which includes an attempt to demonstrate notability. Trying to delete this at the draft stage seems a version of ownership of the topic, and a violation of WP:BITE. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note that Destroyeraa, in this edit taged another such draft for speedy deletion, and I explained the above policies on User talk:Destroyeraa before the above nomination was made. Well, here we are, and lets see if consensus agrees with me or not. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Keep - And the reason for deletion is .??? Robert McClenon (talk) 05:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: read above. Destroyeraa (talk) 16:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep while I agree Octave 19 doesn't merit an article, I don't see how it merits deleting a damn draft. YE Pacific Hurricane 01:57, 2 July 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.