Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Image Events

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Move to draft. No objection to moving to draft here, and the article would likely be restored there by any admin upon request if this were deleted. There is no further need for this discussion. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image Events

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NEOLOGISM KDS4444 ^(talk) 14:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: nothing much on Google search, and even if the phrase were in common usage, it would be more suited to Wiktionary ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 14:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete more suitable for urban dictionary. Natureium (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. Notneo it is. L3X1 (distænt write) 16:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'll refrain from arguing for or against deletion, but do any of you think that this could be merged elsewhere, like maybe in a protest article? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if the consensus is for deletion, is it possible to move this to the student's userspace so they can work on out? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 23:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a merge target right now, but am totally fine with userfying it for the time being. @Dom Kaos, Natureium, and KDS4444: any objections with me moving it, thus basically terminating the AfD? L3X1 (distænt write) 02:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. KDS4444 ^(talk) 02:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Me too ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 10:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Natureium (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Shalor (Wiki Ed), would you be fine with moving this to draft space instead of a sandbox? I ask because I'm highly doubtful this will ever be mainspace ready and once the course is over it will just sit in the sandbox unless it is MfD'd. If we send it to draft it can be G13'd six months after the course is over if there is no progress (which given my interactions with WikiEd courses in the past, I suspect is highly likely). TonyBallioni (talk) 15:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Shalor (Wiki Ed), fixing my ping. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:47, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with that - I think that's a reasonable compromise. Also on a side note, I've contacted the professor for this course and asked that the students not move more work into the mainspace because there have been some NOTESSAY issues. I'm going to spend the next few hours/rest of the day looking at the rest of the work and potentially moving it back to their userspace or to the draftspace. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.