Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Bennett W. Golub, CRO

 __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: keep. Will also move the draft to the more appropriate title as suggested. RL0919 (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Bennett W. Golub, CRO


The version here is a copy and paste move to main space from an unknown source (subsequently moved to draft). A later version was recreated in main space and deleted for G11. The subject may have possibilities if the Wiki Ed authors of the recreation can be persuaded to write from NPOV and source from independent sources rather his company and its PR. —teb728 t c 17:33, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe restore the recreation over this draft, and salt the main space title . —teb728 t c 17:52, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Whatever else is done, Move this to Bennett Golub. We don't need need his job title.  I would move this myself, except that the rename will gum up the MFD.
 * Question - Has this been repeatedly resubmitted? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - Whatever you do, please do not leave a draft in draft space when a mainspace title is salted. That results in the spammers repeatedly resubmitting the blocked draft, and just wastes the time of the reviewers until they get the draft deleted.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Just rename in draft space to fix the obvious problem with title. Then keep and let AfC handle it as usually. No need to send every new POV-draft to MfD. Only created twice in main encyclopedia, no need for salting or other heavy-handed measures. jni (delete)...just not interested 10:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The reason I nominated it here is that the history was lost in a copy-and-past move, and there is no obvious source for a history merge. To my mind that may make it a copyvio. The reason I suggested salting was only to focus Wiki Ed team that created both versions to work on the draft; they repeatedly rejected pleas to do so when the recreation was nominated for G11. —teb728 t c 19:39, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi all - I thought I'd give a little context as far as the people creating this draft. Long story short, these are students creating it for a class assignment so rest easy that these aren't spammers. The students had previously tried moving this live to Bennett W. Golub, CRO, where it was moved to draftspace for obvious reasons. It just isn't ready to be moved live. I left the students a laundry list of things that needed to be fixed before it could be moved live here, but it looks like one of the other students in the class moved it live, where it was deleted under G11. I'll go ahead and leave notes for the other students on their talk pages to check the notes I left on the one student's page, so hopefully this will prevent it from being moved live again before it's ready. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:06, 17 December 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.