Original Article

Bold text The great butterfly migration takes place in the fall/winter time. It starts in

Nomination Criteria

G1 Patent nonsense. Pages consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This does not include poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, poorly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases.

Deletion Options

Deletion Option
rationale Count Percent
Agree with rationale to speedy delete. 12 18.8
Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but deletable by other criteria. 44 68.8
Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but this is a case where IAR applies. 1 1.6
Disagree with speedy deletion (should be PRODDED, sent to AFD, or kept.) 7 10.9

Survey Comments

Deletion Option
Common rationale Count
G2 8
A1 7

Balloonman's analysis

This article looks like a clear cut case where the author was working on it in the mainspace when it was deleted. If that is the case then it is a prime example of how CSD can cause just as much, if not more damage to Wikipedia than the worst vandal.

But let's pretend that is not the case, and this was how the article was left. G1 is clearly not the valid rationale as it does make sense. A1 is not really an option because it is about the "great butterfly migration." A3, however, might be a viable option because there is no meaningful content.

The best option, however, would be G2. The "bold text" at the start indicates somebody new to the project who doesn't know what they are doing. G2 is a way to delete the article without prejudice in a manner that is the least bity.