Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Barbara Rosemary Grant

Draft:Barbara Rosemary Grant[edit]

Subject is already covered under Peter and Rosemary Grant. As they worked together, it seems unlikely that there would be much to add to a separate article that couldn't be added to their joint article. Snowman304|talk 18:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: WP:Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. Curbon7 (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Peter and Rosemary Grant or Merge into Peter and Rosemary Grant. After two cursory reviews, it is not obvious to me whether the draft contains any information that is not in the existing article. If it does, that information should be merged into the article, and then the draft title should be redirected to the article. If there is no new information in this draft, the draft should be redirected to the article. Drafts are not deleted because an article exists. Nominating a draft for deletion because an article exists is a common good-faith error, so Speedy Redirection has been established to deal with these situations. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this one is not so obvious an accidental content fork. Refer to Talk:Peter and Rosemary Grant as that’s the appropriate place to decide. Do not mandate a redirect from MfD. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep unless drafts suffer from severe issues like hoaxes, copyvios, vandalism or promotion (in which case they would have probably been speedied anyway), nominating them for deletion is a waste of time. Just wait 6 months until they get automatically deleted. Air on White (talk) 23:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but the creator should consider and address the input provided above. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]