Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Africa Policy Institute

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. RL0919 (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Africa Policy Institute[edit]

Article spam created by a user currently indef-blocked as an advertising-only account: Special:Contributions/Munenejohn. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also ~~this draft, which appears to be a copy of the first one~~these drafts, which appear to be copies of the first one:

Delete ~~both~~all of them. Each draft needs deleting without regard to the other. The first one is the work of a blocked editor. The second is being tendentiously resubmitted. Multiple almost identical drafts appear in addition to be an attempt to game the system. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The all-caps titled articles are almost direct copies of the draft that was created by a user blocked for not disclosing their paid affiliation, despite repeatedly being asked to respond on their talk page. They also repeatedly removed the {{undisclosed paid}} conflict of interest notice that was added to the top of the initial draft, no matter how many times they were told not to remove it. Relevant discussion: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Edits by User:Munenejohn – numbermaniac 02:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Poorly sourced spam in the original. Copies are the same content substantially without citing sources. • Gene93k (talk) 03:32, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all and any more found. Legacypac (talk) 04:13, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Munenejohn has been submitted. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The now-completed SPI confirms not only sock puppetry but also obvious self promotion. • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coincidentally (or perhaps not), it was recreated in mainspace today. —Cryptic 19:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll assume good faith coming from the editor's cleaning up the Peter Kagwanja article. (He has an article?!?!) That said, the new API article is nearly 100% based on primary sources. • Gene93k (talk) 20:24, 8 December 2018 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.