Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Celai West

 __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:  no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [express] || 06:51, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Celai West

 * – (View MfD)

I have very serious BLP concerns about an article that describes a twelve-year-old girl as a "fashion mogul and CEO", and asserts that she "discovered her love of modeling" at the age of three. I think this should be deleted and salted in both draft and article spaces. BD2412 T 19:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)  BD2412  T 19:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment and delete  My first reaction was "this is a minor, why not speedy" but it looks like this person may be a public figure.  Reaching out to the primary author,, is probably an important step here.  If this person is not a public figure or doesn't have a chance of passing WP:Notability, speedy delete, preferably via db-author if the author will consent to it.  If this person is a public figure and is arguably notable, make sure WP:BLP is strictly enforced even while a draft. Also, if it's purpose is determined to be "to promote the subject" then speedy-delete on those grounds.  The "link wall" of multiple links to different URLs for the same book and a bunch of URLs from sources that look like "in-industry" or otherwise "not suitable for assessing notability" screams "spam" to me but until I go through all the references and determine that this person is not notable, I'm not willing to tag it as spam just yet.  If someone else reviews the sources before I do and determines that the page is WP:TNT-material or the subject is not notable and tags it as db-spam, I will probably thank them.  As far as salting, if the person is notable, then leave draft unsalted, otherwise absolutely yes. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  19:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)  In light of sock-puppetry, WP:TNT/delete without prejudice of an established editor with demonstrated familiarity with Wikipedia's notability guidelines, BLP policy, and other policies and guidelines creating a draft on the same topic, provided that notability is demonstrated within the first few days after such a draft is created.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  00:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)  Update - RELIST for 7 days to allow editors to look at the draft and excise non-useful remnants of the banned editor's work or at least rewrite them in different words.   has already made a lot of headway in that direction.  Once that is done, revision-delete all edits by the banned editor, as a way to implement WP:DENY.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  16:36, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep While I have my concerns about the author's editing, I do think the subject of the article is a notable public figure. The draft will require extensive cleanup, which I am willing to do, but have been waiting until it is in mainspace, as I am currently doing in another of the author's creations here. Abbas Kwarbai has taken a disliking to me and gets upset if I 'interfere' with drafts that they are working on by making improvements or drawing their attention to issues. On the other hand, it may require cleanup in draftspace if it is ever to become a mainspace article - it has already been draftified once. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:03, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * My cleanup is now completed, removing fifteen references that were unreliable, not independent, didn't support what was written or duplicate, as well as substantially copy editing it. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:26, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Well, I have been searching an article to write for notable person but still I don't know why some editor think I have close connection or anything which isn't in accordance to Wikipedia. has been long following my articles sometimes I got upset and sometimes I feel glad when he use his hot cat. It has became very unfortunate that one unknown editor took an article with notability Draft:Celai West to draft saying that most of references are primary source which is typical lie. I'm very sure I know most of United States newspapers that are secondary independent reliable sources but making argument with him is exhaust of time because he isn't from US. Beside that this girl is a celebrity and public figure which I'm very sure will be notable to be on Wikipedia. I exhaust my time to write this article but because the unknown editor has bad mission about me, he end up taking to draft in order to upset me. If he is really here to expand Wikipedia, he should have either correct the mistake I made or nominate for the page deletion instead of taking it draft. It become like some editors doesn't want me to create article, and I must fulfill my promise of creating 200 articles before the end of 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbas Kwarbai (talk • contribs) 21:44, 11 November 2020 (UTC)  Formatted, no change to content. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  22:06, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * As the editor that draftified it, would you like to respond? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 22:59, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - This is a child star. Child stars present a difficult time for Wikipedia, and we have a guideline about them, the BLP guidelines for minors, which is not the same as deleting deleting BLPs of minors who are questionably notable.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:22, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - the author has been confirmed as a sock and blocked. Could be speedily deleted as written by a blocked user.  Velella  Velella Talk 00:14, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Invoking db-banned isn't going to be enough since the page has been significantly edited by other editors. However, if they all give the nod to "db-author" then "db|reason=all major legitimate authors want it deleted" would be within the spirit of the Deletion policy, even if WP:IAR has to be invoked.  Besides, MFD would be a more "solid" delete outcome.  Also, as long as one legitimate editor objects after knowing about the page's history, then by definition "speedy" is not the way to go about deleting this.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  00:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * While I broadly support the use of G5 for block evasion (and have just tagged Shirley Ze Yu - another article Kwarbai created - as such), to delete the Celai West draft despite me having already almost comprehensively rewritten it, on the basis that it was first created by a now blocked user seems to me to be WP:GRAVEDANCING. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic's notability seems to be established, and Curb Safe Charmer has turned it into a decent, NPOV article, so it shouldn't matter that the original creator is now blocked. Lennart97 (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:TNT if the subject is notable, someone will write an article about it sooner or later. Also, since the creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry and they were very likely involved in undisclosed paid editing, we can deal with this one under G5 if user agrees to have their edits ignored. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 12:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * See my 'disagree' comment above, and also note that TNT says 'If you can repair the article in a timely manner, then you've neatly refuted that the article is irreparable.' I think I have already done that. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:22, 17 November 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.