Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Famous Dex (2nd nomination)

 __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The result of the discussion was: Keep, withdrawn by nominator, WP:SK. (non-admin closure) —  Godsy (TALK CONT ) 09:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Famous Dex


I was the first one who created the Famous Dex article in the first place, but the draft doesn't seem to match the right requirements to recreate Famous Dex on Wikipedia. WP:Spoiler happens to get in its way. DBrown SPS (talk) 11:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator: Error in misunderstanding. Also, I have been accused of sock puppetry for the second time. DBrown SPS (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Draft space is where a topic can be cultivated, with references found and text written, before the subject is notable. If this was brought into mainspace today I would vote delete, much like the result at Articles for deletion/Famous Dex a couple of months ago. I don't see any connection to WP:SPOILER, so that guideline doesn't apply. Binksternet (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Quite frankly, the nomination doesn't make a lick of sense. -- Whpq (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nominator claims to have created the article, which was created by, who has also created Draft:Famous Dex (2) for some reason. If the draft does not meet requirements to create an article, the author has a set period of time to correct that -- which is what the draft method is for. I see no policy/guideline based reason to delete now. What WP:Spoiler has to do with this is anyone's guess. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 19:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: Smitty8808, the creator of both articles, has been blocked as part of a rather extensive sock farm. I don't see any blocked or banned editors listed in the check user findings though. As a result, I don't see this going as a creation of a blocked user for a speedy delete. Additionally, I have requested a merge of the two drafts. The second draft is a bit more fleshed out, but I do not yet see a viable article. If anyone can come up with an explanation for the strange socking, I'd appreciate a good theory. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:13, 14 November 2016 (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.