Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Aniket Gupta: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:47, 27 July 2020

Draft:Aniket Gupta

The article was created by a sockfarm for promotional purposes. Most of the sources are standings pages or YouTube videos and a search didn't result in sources that show notability. -- Dane ^talk 01:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

keep It may or may not be possible to find sources that establish notability, but notability is explicitly not at issue for a draft at MfD. Standings pages are certainly not enough, as I advised the user who turned out to be a sock (on the draft talk page). But that doesn't mean that nothing better is out there, and the standings pages show sufficiently high results that it is not unlikely that such sources could be found. I expedct to ask for help from the relevant wikiproject(s). DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hey, in six months the drafts go for G13, and in its present state, there is a 0% chance that it would be accepted if submitted. This could easily just be deleted on January 21, 2021 instead of on July 28, 2020. There's not much of a difference. 🐔 Chic dat ^ChickenDatabase 10:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete yet another in the long list of TOU violations. We aren't an indefinite holding ground for shitty paid for spam. Praxidicae (talk) 14:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Draft contains work by volunteer editor. When I think of it that way, I say keep. Lightburst (talk) 17:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightburst: The draft was created by a large sockfarm and only majorly edited by a sockfarm that is suspected of paid editing? -- Dane ^talk 18:09, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Socks are people too. We tend to dismiss any articles where a COI exists and we depreciate sock involved projects. I look at the research instead of the researcher. I did not study this particular one because it is a draft. Maybe someone will pick it up. Lightburst (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that the draft says Karate Athlete from the state of Delhi who competes internationally for India. If we had an SNG for karate, that would probably establish notability, and it is supported by two sources. But there is no such SNG (yet) and as it stand this does not pass the GNG, but I haven't sesarched for additional sources, much less searched for non-English sources, which could well exist. If this were any of several other sports, documented competition at an international level would establish notability. It is clear that the editors who worked on this draft were all, in fact, socks of one editor, and have been blocked. But "paid editing" seems sheer speculation, and this doesn't seem particularly promotional to me -- several of the key facts are supported by sources. Creation by an editor later blocked for socking is not a valid reason for deletion. If no one picks this up and works on it it will no doubt be deleted under G13, but someone might choose to work it, and the subject might turn out to be notable. What is the policy-based reason for deletion, please? I see none. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We don't need crud created by sockpuppets or poppetsuckers. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Robert McClenon, with a slight addendum that I'm somewhat bewildered by Lightburst's reasoning for keeping this.--WaltCip-(BLM!Resist The Orange One) 12:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I discussed this article and Karate Association of Darbhanga at WT:WPMA#Karate Association of Darbhanga. In my opinion neither one shows topic notability. It should be noted that there is a notability standard for martial artists at WP:MANOTE#Martial artists and that a world ranking of 150th would not meet it. There's a lack of sources to show that WP:GNG is met and he has never qualified for the adult world championships. Even competing at a world championship is not considered notable in the martial arts. For example, the last WKF world championship had almost 900 competitors and they don't all automatically become WP notable. Papaursa (talk) 01:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Socks are not people, but mirror images of people. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not voting here, as I'm not really interested in politics related articles, but technically this would qualify under G5. Ghinga7 (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 *'''Delete''' I discussed this article and [[Karate Association of Darbhanga]] at [[WT:WPMA#Karate Association of Darbhanga]].  In my opinion neither one shows topic notability.  It should be noted that there is a notability standard for martial artists at [[WP:MANOTE#Martial artists]] and that a world ranking of 150th would not meet it.  There's a lack of sources to show that [[WP:GNG]] is met and he has never qualified for the adult world championships.  Even competing at a world championship is not considered notable in the martial arts.  For example, the last WKF world championship had almost 900 competitors and they don't all automatically become WP notable. [[User:Papaursa|Papaursa]] ([[User talk:Papaursa|talk]]) 01:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 *'''Comment''' - Socks are not people, but mirror images of people.  [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 00:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
+*'''Comment''' Not voting here, as I'm not really interested in politics related articles, but technically this would qualify under [[Wikipedia:CSD G5|G5]].  [[User:Ghinga7|Ghinga7]] ([[User talk:Ghinga7|talk]]) 22:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)