Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graffiki
 | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2016 April 4. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. If the creator, who has been inactive since 2011, wants it back, we can still talk about a re-userfication. Sandstein 14:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Graffiki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable entertainer found in user draft space. Users claim GNG can not be tested at MfD so bringing here for discussion. I find he fails GNG but others might disagree. Legacypac (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment This probably could have been deleted as a stale draft in userspace, since the creator hasn't made any other edits since creating this in 2011. clpo13(talk) 23:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
- I think so too but experience says otherwise [1] Legacypac (talk) 23:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- Delete – Does not meet WP:BASIC, per source searches. North America1000 12:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- Userfy to User:Abstractmindzent/Graffiki, where it was located before Legacypac moved it to mainspace and promptly nominated it for AfD. Moving a draft to mainspace should reflect the mover's belief that the draft is ready for mainspace. Moving a draft to mainspace should not be done in order to accomplish deletion at AfD because the mover believes a deletion discussion at MfD would fail - such an action is a bad-faith move in order to execute an end run around the proper deletion process. Yet this was explicitly Legacypac's motive in his move summary: "move to mainspace to subject to AfD to test notability- claims at MfD that GNG does not apply are too annoying". See a previous discussion of moving drafts to mainspace when one does not believe they meet GNG here. Also, as it turns out, the claims that GNG does not apply in userspace are correct. A2soup (talk) 19:38, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
- These comments are misleading - the linked discussion was about a move during an MfD, which does not apply here as there was no MfD. We can indeed test the notability here. If it passes, great, if not, delete it. Legacypac (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- If it does not meet notability guidelines, the appropriate action is userfy it back to where it was. The suitability of userspace drafts is tested at MfD, not AfD. Moving a userspace draft to mainspace and then immediately AfDing it is 1) a bad-faith move, 2) a bureaucratic end-run around MfD, and 3) defeats the purpose of userspace drafts. How would you feel if you were on a long wikibreak and someone did this to your draft? Also, don't strike my ANI link - the discussion there is relevant as it contains discussion of whether you thought the page would pass GNG when you moved it, which you did not believe when you made this move. A2soup (talk) 02:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- After all this time, amd after they released the contribution under GNU, that is not relevent. What is relevent is - does this meet GNG - which you appear to say no. Sending it back to stale draft land under a nonactive acct accomplishes nothing. Legacypac (talk) 05:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- If it does not meet notability guidelines, the appropriate action is userfy it back to where it was. The suitability of userspace drafts is tested at MfD, not AfD. Moving a userspace draft to mainspace and then immediately AfDing it is 1) a bad-faith move, 2) a bureaucratic end-run around MfD, and 3) defeats the purpose of userspace drafts. How would you feel if you were on a long wikibreak and someone did this to your draft? Also, don't strike my ANI link - the discussion there is relevant as it contains discussion of whether you thought the page would pass GNG when you moved it, which you did not believe when you made this move. A2soup (talk) 02:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- These comments are misleading - the linked discussion was about a move during an MfD, which does not apply here as there was no MfD. We can indeed test the notability here. If it passes, great, if not, delete it. Legacypac (talk) 02:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- I should note that I would not oppose deleting this draft for promotional concerns at MfD. My !vote here reflects an opposition to the practice of moving pages that one does not believe to meet mainspace standards from userspace to mainspace in order to accomplish deletion via AfD rather than MfD. A2soup (talk) 21:23, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as searches also found nothing better and there's simply nothing convincing here. SwisterTwister talk 05:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
- 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.