Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Push and Shove (song)

Draft:Push and Shove (song)

Draft:Push and Shove (song) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Two year old non-AFC draft that was already covered by Push and Shove (song) when it was already created in 2012. Seems unnecessary to have another draft. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

• Ignore and let G13 take its course, or redirect, or contribute ideas for agreeable CSD#D* criteria. It is less unnecessary than this MfD nomination. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:42, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

There can't be a G13 since it's a non-AFC draft. There is no current consensus for CSD#D criteria so can we deal with the pages as they are now? If that passes, then I'm on board with you. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Again, to reiterate, there is no G13 for non-AFC drafts so if left alone, it'll remain in draftspace until it's taken to MFD again (which could as soon as tomorrow or six months from now or in a decade). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:30, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Obviously, the process problem should be fixed. Either modify G13 to include all draftspace drafts, or apply the AfC template. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

That's great and all but your !vote is to ignore it until and unless someone comes up with a G13-type thing for draftspace? Is there a discussion about a CSD#D criteria I haven't seen? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:07, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

• Delete as redundant since we're already here, and both of you, please calm down. Ricky81682, SmokeyJoe's right that a redirect would have immediately fixed this, and wouldn't have required extra effort from anyone else (namely me, and SmokeyJoe, and NA1K, and anybody who comments here after me, and whoever ends up closing this). SmokeyJoe, Ricky81682's right that no speedy deletion criterion that covers this draft, and those that would come closest have exemptions specifically carved out for this sort of page.
  Yes, new speedy criteria would be ideal and I think they're warranted, but all the proposals along these lines have gone down in flames because they were poorly framed, poorly championed, or both. If you're both serious about making a new criterion happen, I'd suggest working on it together somewhere other than WT:CSD. That page is still dominated by the last couple failed tries, and there's little hope for a new proposal at this time unless it's already in a more-or-less final form, with probable opposing arguments anticipated and answered. (The most obvious one: why is deletion necessary, instead of blanking or redirecting?) —Cryptic 09:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
• Delete What needs to be ignored is SmokeyJoe's "vote", rather than the draft. 103.6.159.91 (talk) 10:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)