Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Invest 92P (Typhoon)

 __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 by. ✗ plicit  14:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Invest 92P (Typhoon)

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Clearly unnotable weather event. The draft itself is also poorly written and does not cite any authoritative sources (e.g. Regional Specialized Meteorological Centres. CodingCyclone  please ping/my wreckage 01:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. other editors have pointed out that this is a hoax. ☢️Plutonical☢️  ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ  03:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as a hoax. Typhoons do not form in the area the author is claiming they do (title and infobox). Noah Talk 12:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete – Clearly a hoax. Even if it wasn't, this "draft" is completely unreadable. The draft space is for works in progress that will eventually become new articles in the near future. The draft space is NOT an indefinite incubator, nor is it a personal work space (this is what the userspace is for). I don't see this ever becoming a viable article. It should be deleted.  Light and Dark2000  🌀 (talk) 06:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's a draft, and it just got created a few days ago. Leave it alone.--WaltCip- (talk)  14:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - The title is a fake title, as "Invest 29P" is not a Typhoon. As well as this event does not pass any of the WP:NWeather guidelines.  That is why I urge  and  to reconsider their keep !votes.  It doesn't matter how long the draft is on Wikipedia.  The event along does not qualify to be mentioned on Wikipedia.  Also pointing out the creator has been warned multiple times about creating fake/hoax drafts including Draft:Tropical Invest 91P, which was deleted as "G3:blatant hoax".  Elijahandskip (talk) 14:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Warned multiple times by members of WP:WPTC. Shouldn't this be a WP:ANI issue if people in your guild feel that the editor is being disruptive? WaltCip- (talk)  15:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * They are on their “last straw” so to speak. There was a sockpuppet investigation into them that found nothing.   gave AeroMapper a final warning and there has been no edits past that.  Next step is ANI if their editing style does not change.  Elijahandskip (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as a hoax. —  csc -1 01:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - This draft is sufficiently nonsensical that is a hybrid between vandalism and a hoax. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:45, 23 January 2022 (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.