- 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: delete . CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 02:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Draft:EverlyWell
Draftified twice, once after being told to use AFC, and declined twice. Resubmission is tendentious. Author is a known paid editor. Request that this title be Extended-Confirmed Protected in both draft space and article space. Robert McClenon ( talk) 02:41, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- I am nominating the three drafts by this paid editor separately because they have separate histories. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:50, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. Based in the content, this is obviously non notable promotion. Appeared on a shark tank?! DNA analysis to reveal food intolerances. Obvious fraudulent quackery. That aside, User:GSS has here also misused his page mover privilege. This was not justifiably draftification. It should have been sent to AfD. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 23:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Please see
WP:COIEDIT and
WP:PAY that state editors with COI should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly;.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 03:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Moving paid for articles to "draft" when they did not go through the proper processes IMO is perfectly fine.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email) 03:42, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- I've modified the wording at WP:COIEDIT and WP:DRAFTIFY to clarify this. I would ask User:GSS, for draftification edits such as this, to use a better edit summary such as one including a link to the section contained the previously given "advice", and a link to evidence of COI. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 05:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Moving paid for articles to "draft" when they did not go through the proper processes IMO is perfectly fine.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email) 03:42, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Please see
WP:COIEDIT and
WP:PAY that state editors with COI should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly;.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 03:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Was it a justified draftification? Comment at Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest#Must COI authors out their new page through AfC?. — SmokeyJoe ( talk) 13:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Mohamed Ouda has just recreated the EverlyWell article in mainspace. Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 21:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- It sound like a case of meatpuppetry so I have moved it back to draftspace.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 02:44, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
-
User:GSS,
Mohamed Ouda is far too established a Wikipedian for you to casually assume “meatpuppt” and unilaterally draftify. I think you should reverse that action and nominate it at AfD. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 03:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Mohamed Ouda's activities are very suspicious most likely undisclosed paid editing. We are already dicussing the notability of the subject here so I don't see any point to run a seprate discussion at the moment.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 03:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- I do. You are making a very serious allegation, and are seriously pushing the boundaries of
WP:DRAFTIFY. Your actions could even be called move warring. You should escalate or leave it to others. You should revert your page move and use either CSD or AfD. Your message at
User_talk:Mohamed_Ouda#Paid_editing is possibly good and sufficient, but my advice it to not to repeatedly draftify the same title. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 03:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Done, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EverlyWell. GSS ( talk| c| em) 04:05, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- I do. You are making a very serious allegation, and are seriously pushing the boundaries of
WP:DRAFTIFY. Your actions could even be called move warring. You should escalate or leave it to others. You should revert your page move and use either CSD or AfD. Your message at
User_talk:Mohamed_Ouda#Paid_editing is possibly good and sufficient, but my advice it to not to repeatedly draftify the same title. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 03:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Mohamed Ouda's activities are very suspicious most likely undisclosed paid editing. We are already dicussing the notability of the subject here so I don't see any point to run a seprate discussion at the moment.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 03:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
-
User:GSS,
Mohamed Ouda is far too established a Wikipedian for you to casually assume “meatpuppt” and unilaterally draftify. I think you should reverse that action and nominate it at AfD. —
SmokeyJoe (
talk) 03:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- It sound like a case of meatpuppetry so I have moved it back to draftspace.
GSS (
talk|
c|
em) 02:44, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Pro forma Delete as nominator. Commenting however that now that the article is also at AFD, the AFD can govern, and this MFD can be put on hold. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:08, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Silly Question for User:SmokeyJoe - What is fraudulent quackery? More importantly, what is non-fraudulent quackery? Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:10, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Comment for the record - This page was created in article space by Neerajmadhuria72014, who is a known paid editor, then draftified three times by GSS, moved twice back to article space by Neera. There is a separate copy of this page which is being subject to AFD. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Non-notable company, tendentiously recreated (now in mainspace and at AfD). Needs to be salted. Mini apolis 23:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- Comment - The AFD has been closed and the article deleted in mainspace. This MFD is ready for closure. Robert McClenon ( talk) 19:33, 23 January 2019 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.