Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Khooper802/sandbox
- 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 . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
User:Khooper802/sandbox[edit]
This draft will never be a candidate for article space, and has no references. On third reading, I noticed the last sentence, which states that the study was fictitious. Since the fact that the study was fictitious is buried at the end, this has the quality of a hoax. It isn't quite blatant enough for WP:G3, but it has no hope for being an article. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete as uncovered hoax Legacypac (talk) 23:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a hoax; as I read it, it is about a fake news story, [1]. I do not see it translating into an article, but there is also no reason to jump to delete a draft that was created 2 days ago - see WP:BITE. So, keep and give the author a chance to learn our rules and develop the draft. VQuakr (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Created by VOA user (now indef blocked) in their own userspace. Content is at best a personal commentary. I don't see it ever becoming an article; even if it could be rewritten and sourced, nothing of this version of the page could be retained. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Unsourced, could be construed as attack page. VOA indeffed author. Has it been checked for CopyVio? L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 02:14, 14 February 2018 (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.