Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Aniket Gupta

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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. Primefac (talk) 20:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Aniket Gupta

 * – (View MfD)

The article was created by a sockfarm for promotional purposes. Most of the sources are standings pages or YouTube videos and a search didn't result in sources that show notability. --  Dane talk  01:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * keep It may or may not be possible to find sources that establish notability, but notability is explicitly not at issue for a draft at MfD. Standings pages are certainly not enough, as I advised the user who turned out to be a sock (on the draft talk page). But that doesn't mean that nothing better is out there, and the standings pages show sufficiently high results that it is not unlikely that such sources could be found. I expedct to ask for help from the relevant wikiproject(s). DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Hey, in six months the drafts go for G13, and in its present state, there is a 0% chance that it would be accepted if submitted. This could easily just be deleted on January 21, 2021 instead of on July 28, 2020. There's not much of a difference. 🐔 Chicdat Chicken Database 10:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * delete yet another in the long list of TOU violations. We aren't an indefinite holding ground for shitty paid for spam. Praxidicae (talk) 14:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Draft contains work by volunteer editor. When I think of it that way, I say keep. Lightburst (talk) 17:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The draft was created by a large sockfarm and only majorly edited by a sockfarm that is suspected of paid editing? --  Dane talk  18:09, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Socks are people too. We tend to dismiss any articles where a COI exists and we depreciate sock involved projects. I look at the research instead of the researcher. I did not study this particular one because it is a draft. Maybe someone will pick it up. Lightburst (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Note that the draft says . If we had an SNG for karate, that would probably establish notability, and it is supported by two sources. But there is no such SNG (yet) and as it stand this does not pass the GNG, but I haven't sesarched for additional sources, much less searched for non-English sources, which could well exist.  If this were any of several other sports, documented competition at an international level would establish notability. It is clear that the editors who worked on this draft were all, in fact, socks of one editor, and have been blocked. But "paid editing" seems sheer speculation, and this doesn't seem particularly promotional to me -- several of the key facts are supported by sources. Creation by an editor later blocked for socking is not a valid reason for deletion. If no one picks this up and works on it it will no doubt be deleted under G13, but someone might choose to work it, and the subject might turn out to be notable. What is the policy-based reason for deletion, please? I see none. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - We don't need crud created by sockpuppets or poppetsuckers. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per Robert McClenon, with a slight addendum that I'm somewhat bewildered by Lightburst's reasoning for keeping this.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I discussed this article and Karate Association of Darbhanga at WT:WPMA. In my opinion neither one shows topic notability.  It should be noted that there is a notability standard for martial artists at WP:MANOTE and that a world ranking of 150th would not meet it.  There's a lack of sources to show that WP:GNG is met and he has never qualified for the adult world championships.  Even competing at a world championship is not considered notable in the martial arts.  For example, the last WKF world championship had almost 900 competitors and they don't all automatically become WP notable. Papaursa (talk) 01:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Socks are not people, but mirror images of people. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Not voting here, as I'm not really interested in politics related articles, but technically this would qualify under G5. Ghinga7 (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Struck my comment as this observation was incorrect; It was made before the sock was blocked. Ghinga7 (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2020 (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.