Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Anubha Sourya

 __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. Persistently submitted by undisclosed paid editor, time to move on. Alex Shih (talk) 16:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Anubha Sourya


Declined 5 times already and submitted to AfC again. If this is undersourced and not notable like I think it is it's time to delete by discussion. Legacypac (talk) 02:57, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Was it substantially improved between submissions? SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Working this new list. User:JJMC89_bot/report/AfC_decline_counts of the most declined submissions starting with the ones that are pending review yet again. Legacypac (talk) 03:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This shows that the author is trying to interact and the decline template is confusing to her, and she thinks the bid blue submit button is the way to communicate. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed that the template wording is confusing. This has been discussed elsewhere recently, and I hope this can serve as a useful example for proposing a change of wording on the template. I've moved the talk posts to the draft talk page and tried to engage with the draft creator, but no reply received yet. TMGtalk 11:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - "Page must be published as soon as possible." is typical of undisclosed paid editing. Ask the author about conflict of interest.  Robert McClenon (talk) 10:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - Agree that this has all the markings of paid editing, but deleting this draft doesn't seem to the right path here. Based on the history of declined drafts without improvement and promotional submissions, blocking this editor should be considered instead.--MadeYourReadThis (talk) 11:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. I spot-checked a few references.  Most are not WP:RS.  Times of India is certainly a WP:RS, but it's a passing mention.  We've wasted enough time on this.  -- RoySmith (talk) 15:03, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have taken this to COIN, but they don't do well with drafts. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 16 June 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.