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. Nabla (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:IQ classification/Archive 1[edit]

Not an actual archive; this was created by an IP user with only the content "g". Glades12 (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question How did the nom find this? This seems like an odd thing to stumble upon. --Doug Mehus T·C 16:21, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Presumably by looking through a log of pages tagged for speedy. It was declined then brought here. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:34, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yep. Mainly out of boredom (which may seem odd, but whatever). Glades12 (talk) 16:37, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just G6 it - it's not an archive; it's a blank page. No need to bring it here. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:34, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as G6; there's a fake link from Talk:IQ classification so best we don't leave it around for seven days. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 04:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment G6 may or may not apply, but it's already been declined twice for speedy deletion, with the latter decline favouring MfD to play out. Thus, delete, not speedy delete, should be the outcome here. No prejudice, of course, to similar nominations being speedily deleted. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:54, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above rationale. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as crud. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:25, 29 January 2020 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.