Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conspiracy Series (Special Edition)

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. Article was virtually identical to the previously deleted version under a different title. WP:G4'd, salted, user warned not to recreate it. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:39, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy Series (Special Edition)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NWEB and undersourced in tone which probably will fail the WP:GNG. Sheldybett (talk) 05:28, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Pinging @RoySmith: is this substantially similar enough to the article previously deleted and salted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conspiracy Series by Shane Dawson to warrant G4 speedy deletion? Bakazaka (talk) 05:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nope, only the article with the same name only apply. This excludes soft delete, substantially different namespace and you would be ineligible to tag for G4. Sheldybett (talk) 06:28, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sheldybett, please review the first sentence of WP:G4, specifically the "having any title" part. Bakazaka (talk) 06:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:32, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:32, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which means that applies to sufficiently identical copies, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion.[2] It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). So this will unlikely will apply to G4. Sheldybett (talk) 06:38, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input, but I'll leave that judgment call to someone who can compare this page to the deleted page from the deletion discussion that closed four days ago. Bakazaka (talk) 06:55, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Bakazaka In my opinion, G4 exists exactly because of cases like this. User:Coasterdude1 created this three times: United Shane Dawson Conspiracy Series, Conspiracy Series by Shane Dawson and this despite getting deleted once by A7, and once by AfD which also salted the title, so the user created this title (Special Edition part does not even exist) to circumvent the salting. He was also warned on his talk page not only for this but for disruptive editing on FBI (TV series). G4 delete this and BLOCK the user creator. He is obviously here to just spam with article about a not yet notable show and is possibly paid for that. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.