- 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The result of the discussion was: speedy withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Ysangkok (talk) 04:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Portal:Energy/Energy news (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
listing is old, and listing is no longer referenced from Portal:energy Ysangkok (talk) 17:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Keep. No requirement to delete as opposed to archive. No explanation as to why archiving is not good enough. No explanation of how the nominator is associated with the page or the portal of an associated WikiProject. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- @SmokeyJoe:. I don't think I am affiliated with this page or any WikiProject. I don't have any opinion about archiving, I didn't know that was what was done to unused pages. --Ysangkok (talk) 21:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- The page has a huge edit history. It was clearly used. This means it should not be deleted, but it can happily be archived, including archiving by redirection. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Weak Keep - This looks like another case of an editor looking at old stuff and looking for things to propose for deletion. User:Ysangkok - Are you ragpicking? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.