Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:21, 14 February 2018

Draft:Bivariant theory

Draft:Bivariant theory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Abandoned draft up for G13 with promising draft note requesting MfD Math topic. Legacypac (talk) 02:54, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

• Keep: Not abandoned (merely unedited for awhile). The topic is also notable. -- Taku (talk) 03:07, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Really? Care to put your money where your mouth is? Oh wait we had this same redacted debate several months ago that resulted in sanctions on Taku. Hasteur (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    • What makes you think it is not notable? I should be able to find more references. -- Taku (talk) 02:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
• Delete: Misplaced Pages draft space is not supposed to be a permanent repository of half baked ideas. No objections to forcably redirecting (i.e. redirect and fully protect) to Chow_group#Variants, but I would wager the author of this draft (and the only Keep vote at this time) would procedurally object on a burecratic reason simply to be yet another time suck. Hasteur (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

He's been on my talk page violating his topic ban, deleting my comments and casting asperationsn against me about nominating another of his stale drafts for deletion.. Legacypac (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I will comment on the "behaviors" as opposed to the draftspace policies. It is this aggressive behavior that has to be stopped and in fact that was the whole point of the topic ban discussion. Hopefully, the third party can weight in. -- Taku (talk) 02:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

This draft was treated exactly like a bunch of other ones that fell stale tagged with this tag. I posted up a string of them that I would have otherwise G13'd in normal course.

An editor has marked this as a promising draft and requests that, should it go unedited for six months, G13 deletion be postponed, either by making a dummy/minor edit to the page, or by improving and submitting it for review. Last edited by Hasteur (talk | contribs) 6 years ago. (Update)

Legacypac (talk) 02:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I was not referring to the nomination of this draft. I was saying your seeming attempt to try to get me violate the topic ban (by increasing the temperature of the discussion or inviting me to respond to you); it is that behavior that needs to be stopped (not nomination). -- Taku (talk) 02:59, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

• Comment. I don't really know how MfD and draft space work very well, so I won't go with a straight "delete" or "keep" However, a quick look leads me to think that this is a notable topic. On the other hand, given that it hadn't been worked on in a couple years, it would certainly make me nervous to keep it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
• Is there no supertopic into which this could be merged? In theory, if merged into another article, it could be expanded there until there is enough material to justify breaking out into a topic of its own. On the other hand, if there is no notable topic of which it is a subtopic, I don't see how it can be notable. bd2412 T 03:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  I suppose this draft can be merged into Chow_group#Variants. The theory is rather complicated (for example, it has quite a long definition) and so I thought it's better to have a standalone article on the topic. -- Taku (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  This does look more like a thing-to-be-merged than a thing-to-be-erased. XOR'easter (talk) 17:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  @BD2412: And my wager regarding the burecratic objection paid off in spades. Again it's the same Taku M.O. of looking for the tiniest wedge and use that to derail the MFD from any objective improvement on the subject. Hasteur (talk) 05:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)