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The result of the discussion was keep, nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Previously deleted article --Osm agha (talk) 00:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, at least for now. I'd like to hear User:Jim Fitzgerald's take on the page first. If he should elect not to comment, I still favor keeping the page because it is a legitimate userspace draft that has been edited within the last six months. Its creator is an active user who last edited just a couple of days ago. (Note: While it is true that WP:Articles for deletion/Ayala Abukasis was closed as "delete" back in 2008, this draft was not created until August 2009.) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• comment: The page was created six months ago and has not been edited by User:Jim Fitzgerald since that time. According to WP:UP#COPIES, Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion. Osm agha (talk) 10:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Unless the creator comes and gives some reason for having it (other than long-term archival, of course). Doesn't seem to be getting edited, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 17:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The case of Ayala Abukasis is, first of all, is part of the Israel-Gaza conflict, as she was a victim of Palestinian Qassam rocket attack. At the same time, she was the last Israeli victim before seize-fire agreed between parties to the conflict. Also it was one of very few cases when rabbi agreed to end the life support measures which kept the victim's body functioning. The article is still under development and needs improvement. I hope I will have time to add more details to the article this weekend.-- Jim Fitzgerald ^post 18:31, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• It appears to me that a history merge (merging the deleted page history of Ayala Abukasis to the userspace draft) is needed here. The content of the draft largely duplicates the content of the deleted article, so it appears to have been a cut-and-paste move (see Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen). Oh, and keep per Jim Fitzgerald's comment. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 02:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  I carried out the history merge. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 18:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per User:Jim Fitzgerald. This is a proper use of userspace. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  comment: The point here is that Ayala Abukasis is notable for one event (her death), which was the reason for deleting the article. Jim Fitzgerald can keep the page only if he wants to prove that Ayla was notable for another event (this means other than her death incident). Otherwise, keeping this page would be useless and would be just a way to escape from the rules in Wikipedia:Notability (people) Osm agha (talk) 15:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Since this is not a biography of a living person, we can afford to be more eventualist. Userfication is not a permanent alternative to deletion, but six months is not too much time. When it comes to userfied articles, I think we ought generally to defer to the editor's discretion as long as the topic is not undisputably inappropriate and the editor intends, in good faith, to work with the userfied draft. I will add ((Userfiedpage)) to the article to indicate its status. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (changing from delete) - Well, the creator has came back and gave a good reason. We know the page isn't just stangnating, which I believe was the main concern, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 18:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep just for now. Since the notability is so very marginal, if the author can't establish it soon, then we shouldn't keep this around forever in userspace. Gigs (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep No BLP issues, no charge of indefinite archiving. Proper use of userspace. Notability is not a requirement in userspace. Sans a reson for deletion, default to Keep. Collect (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks user:Black Falcon for merging histories. After this huge support, I believe User:Jim Fitzgerald deserves a chance to improve the article. I changed my mind to keep. Good luck everyone Osm agha (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2010 (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.