Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Innoz


 * 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 Speedy delete via WP:G5 as a suspected sockpuppet of User:Morning277. I have also salted the entries to hopefully prevent further re-creation. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Innoz

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is the third article on the topic. The first was speedily deleted as advertising, and the second as a creation of a group of undisclosed paid editors working for the publicists Wiki-PR (deletion log). SPI reports about the group were closed by without investigation, who wrote that "You cannot use editing the same article or topic area as evidence"  Shortly afterward,  created stubs to replace the articles which had been speedily deleted. &mdash; rybec   06:17, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator: the contributor of these articles has now been blocked as a sock-puppet of "Morning277". As this nomination was essentially an attempt to have the WP:CSD criteria applied to the work of an editor in good standing, it should be unnecessary now. &mdash; rybec   00:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are also articles created by CitizenNeutral to replace deleted articles posted by the same group:


 * , an account used by the group, posted a draft on the topic; later an article was posted and delted (deletion log)
 * , an account used by the group, posted a draft on the topic; later an article was posted and delted (deletion log)




 * has had only minor changes by editors other than CitizenNeutral


 * Was also posted at simple:BillFloat; see Chenzw's comment at notice board there




 * Sublimeharmony draft


 * has had one minor change since CitizenNeutral stopped work on it




 * changes since CitizenNeutral stopped work on it consist of replacing "Sept" with "Sep" in the body of the article, maintenance tags, persondata, defaultsort and categories --no meaningful changes to the body of the article


 * see also deletion log for Volusion
 * see also deletion log for Volusion


 * see also deletion log for
 * see also deletion log for


 * minor changes by another editor
 * minor changes by another editor


 * another editor corrected "lead" to "led"
 * another editor corrected "lead" to "led"


 * changes by other editors consist of changing a category and adjusting white space
 * changes by other editors consist of changing a category and adjusting white space


 * others' only change has been a bot changing a link target from "American" to "United States"
 * others' only change has been a bot changing a link target from "American" to "United States"




 * category added by other editor
 * category added by other editor


 * several changes by other editors such as changing "Sept" to "Sep" in citations and adding persondata but no visible changes to the body
 * several changes by other editors such as changing "Sept" to "Sep" in citations and adding persondata but no visible changes to the body


 * This one hadn't been deleted from here before, only from the Simple English Wikipedia, simple:Wayne Tamarelli.


 * other editors changed "Sept" to "Sep" and added persondata
 * other editors changed "Sept" to "Sep" and added persondata

&mdash; rybec


 * These should all probably be speedy deleted with CSD G5: Creation by a banned or blocked user (disclaimer: other than WP:The duck test, I have no proof to back up this claim) . The references for the drafts and the articles created by  are the same. Given that some of these articles have been created multiple times, they should also be salted, although I recognize that may be an extreme solution. -    t  u coxn \ talk 09:25, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Rybec, I'm a bit confused by this AfD. Is the argument you are putting forward that they were created by a banned editor? If so, why did you change your view to believe that CitizenNeutral was a Wiki-PR account? In the past you explained CitizenNeutral's motivations in creating these, and you worked to some extent with CitizenNeutral in recreating these articles . Thus I'm wondering what has happened to change things so dramatically. - Bilby (talk) 11:45, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * When CitizenNeutral first began replacing the articles, I wrote: "@CitizenNeutral: hi, and welcome back. We may be at odds here: the earlier article was placed by a public relations firm, whose contributions I had been trying to get deleted. —rybec 22:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)"


 * CitizenNeutral then asked for "a master list" of my deletion requests. I responded: User:Rybec/CSD_log, User:Rybec/PROD_log and User:Rybec/sandbox. I didn't mention Long-term_abuse/Morning277, which listed articles that had been deleted without a request by me. CitizenNeutral later told me: "[...] I found Tamarelli and BillFloat on the list from Simple on the long-term abuse report you filed." Among CitizenNeutral's replacement articles, I only noticed one (which seems to have been deleted since) on a topic that hadn't been ascribed to the PR firm. Initially I wondered if the motivation for the restoration work might have been resentment over a bad interaction we had had earlier, or general questioning of my judgment. I had asked that other articles be deleted, and I did other things here, but CitizenNeutral didn't create replacements for those other articles, nor undo my other actions, instead focussing on the banned editors' topics. I've gotten the impression that the motivation may instead be a desire to help the PR firm. &mdash; rybec   16:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn, see above. &mdash; rybec   00:54, 27 January 2014 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.