Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nandhagopan V


 * 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 deleted by per G5. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 03:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Nandhagopan V

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

complete and total spam that is largely unsourced (because sources for the statements here don't exist) about a non-notable musician and created by an obvious sock. Also worth noting that if we removed all the unsourced nonsense here, not even just the spam, we'd be left with a blank page because there are no sources that support a single statement here. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per nomination. Obvious spam. Should have been a PROD IMO. SPF121188  (talk this way) (contribs) 17:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, India,  and Kerala. Shellwood (talk) 17:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * CU note ✅ socking: sock creates the draft, master moves it to article space. This should have been an easy CSD, but here we are.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete under both G11 and G5. -- ferret (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The G11 tagging was declined and it is not eligible for a G5 as it was not creating by a ban evading editor (both the sockmaster and sockpuppet were just blocked today). Liz Read! Talk! 18:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It was created as a block evasion, see the original blocked sock per . was created to aggressively promote this person, the second account who created it was in violation of said block, and apparently had a sleeper to do their work for them. And we're all aware the G11 was declined, that's why we're having this pointless discussion, since I think most of us can agree it is unambiguously promotional. PRAXIDICAE🌈  18:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It's G5. It's a verbatim copy of the draft by Nandhu41095 (the older previously blocked account from 2021). -- ferret (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Agree with both Liz and PRAXIDICAE🌈 for the reasoning here.--IndyNotes (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete  as per nom and Ponyo. Imperfect Boy (talk) 09:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Procedural note: I wasn't aware of the blocked Nandhu41095 account, which puts this squarely in G5 territory; I've speedy deleted it accordingly.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:27, 24 August 2022 (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.