Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Debbie Sutcliffe

 __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. Most have already been deleted in previous discussions but, still, delete. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 23:30, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Debbie Sutcliffe


Is anyone ready to rework this into a neutral biography of a living person? If not, I submit that it should be deleted and salted to protect against multiple attempts at re-creation via sockpuppetry, which there already is by the blocked paid editor.

Please delete, and create-protect the title so that an admin can screen any future creations to determine whether they are by neutral editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I hope that adding these titles isn't considered a train wreck; these appear to be all cars on the same train. Copying any !votes already made.  Purpose of consolidation is to facilitate the create-protection, since we have evidence that re-creation via sockpuppetry is in the works.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:48, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Adding more titles by the same author, also requesting that all of them be create-protected, also known as salted. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. If someone is interested enough in the film they can start a new article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete the external links are an attempt at references. Since it came from mainspace we can definately assess notability here. If anyone does not like that, we could return it to main-space and AfD it I'm not seeing evidence of meeting ENT Legacypac (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. It would not survive AfD either. If someone is interested enough in the actor and can demonstrate notability they can start a new article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:34, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. KJP1 (talk) 18:45, 10 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. If someone is interested enough in the actor and can demonstrates notability they can start a new article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Personally, I think an appearance in Sharknado should be an automatic disqualifier. KJP1 (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. If someone is interested enough in the actor and can demonstrate notability, they can start a new article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete All if some proper editor wants to cover fine. Legacypac (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The community should get its act together with a coherent responds to the Terms of Use (ToU) violation of Undisclosed Paid Editing (UPE). I don't understand why the community doesn't.  See Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion.  As I said there, I don't think deletion is the answer.  It hides the evidence from editors, and requires the almost unattainable objectivity and support of CSD policy.  I propose that all UPE product get moved to a UPE product repository and blanked until (1) the author makes a satisfactory disclosure; or (2) another editor in good standing adopts responsibility for the content.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete all - None seem to be notable so they're all better off deleted. – Davey 2010 Talk 18:55, 12 March 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.