Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Featureworld
- 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 . Pretty clearly abandoned and non-notable. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Draft:Featureworld[edit]
self promotional draft. User name matches subject. question notability. Legacypac (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. No valid reason for deletion given in nomination. Notability does not apply to draft space. Article does not meet the criteria for G11 so the other reasons given in the nomination are non-applicable as well. Looks like it could qualify for G13 in a few months. VQuakr (talk) 07:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- It is SPAM. `Legacypac (talk) 07:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Created by someone with COI" is not synonymous with "spam" in a deletion context. VQuakr (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- A page that is purely promotional created by a writer seeking to promote their own work = SPAM. Notability is absolutely a valid test in such a situation. Further, nothing in your linked "reasons for deletion" says articles currently in Draft space are exempt from the deletion reasons I've articulated. I'll also add that the user in question is long since left the project. Legacypac (talk) 04:12, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
- "Created by someone with COI" is not synonymous with "spam" in a deletion context. VQuakr (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- It is SPAM. `Legacypac (talk) 07:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
- Welcome back Legacypac. Little has changed during your break. Notability is not, per se, a reason for deletion. However, for things like this, if you say "non-notable" (not "question notability, the onus is on you to offer an answer to that question), specifically failing WP:ORG, and "WP:NOTPROMOTION", then the nomination will be readily agreed to. It is, indeed, promotion of a non-notable organisation. Delete. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:36, 23 April 2017 (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.