Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Miss Charm 2023

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: keep. This is sort of a pro forma close, considering that the draft was moved to mainspace while this MfD was in progress, but the consensus is clear. $Salvio giuliano$ 16:40, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Miss Charm 2023

Sounds like a blog post and is nonsense Wesoree (Talk) 15:28, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it's not nonsense now.
Why why was this draft deleted, this is not the main article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Earth (talk • contribs) 15:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:NDRAFT silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 22:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Valid draft with good sourcing. I don't see why this looks like a blog post, let alone nonsense, in the nominator's eyes. Glades12 (talk) 08:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - perfectly valid draft -- Whpq (talk) 15:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Having in mind its present state, and the number of sources it lists, this draft appears to be quite valid. Its not hard to imagine it as an article of certain quality. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 06:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A valid draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:37, 20 February 2023 (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.