Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Islamic Entertainment Box

 __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:  Speedy deleted by Athaenara, G11. (non-admin closure) SD0001 (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Islamic Entertainment Box


Promotion for a YouTube channel ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO6stTdGm0ezhnjYlJ-2b7g ) with one video that has 16,120 views and everything else combined about 500 views. Self-promotion that'll never meet notability criteria, even in draft space I think that's not allowed. (unless I'm mistaken) - Alexis Jazz 19:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Also see "I don't know why this picture is banned but I'm writing to let you know that this logo is NOT widely used and whoever you are reading this I, the writer am the owner of the YouTube channel 'Islamic Entertainment Box' if you still do not believe me check the YouTube channel please I beg you I need this wiki article finished as soon as possible and don't tell me without images because it doesn't make any sense, Yours sincerely Bilawi Wahid". - Alexis Jazz 19:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Tagged WP:CSD. A non-notable promotional topic with zero acceptable sources is squarely G11-eligible.  Even if notable due to completely unexpected quality sources elsewhere, the content is entirely un-reusable and should be deleted, with WP:TNT applying.  You do not edit unsourced promotion to make it acceptable, you write new material from acceptable sources.
 * Virtually no draft that is not G11 or G12 eligible is bad enough for MfD deletion. Start with CSD criteria, then use AfC options, when reviewing drafts.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - There are, in my opinion, at least two reasons for deletion of drafts. The first is drafts that are close to G11 or G4.  The second is drafts that are tendentiously resubmitted and not getting any better.  This does not fall into the second class, but that has to be mentioned.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:00, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - If it is eligible for G11, it is also eligible for MFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:00, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No, please to not encourage people to not follow logical efficient process. If it is G11-eligible, tag it G11.  Save MfD for things requiring discussion, such as a G11 rejected tagging.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:11, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not fully familiar with WP deletion dealings. I do remember WP does not delete drafts easily, so I figured a DR (or XFD as you call it) was the better option. - Alexis Jazz 01:33, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thanks for managing some drafts.  No, we do not delete drafts readily, because they will usually be deleted by the WP:CSD process, created largely because individual drafts are worth less, either way, than the cost of an MfD discussion.  Nearly all offensively promotional drafts will be eligible for WP:CSD deletion.  If you are sure, use Twinkle to tag as G11.  If you are not sure, move on.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:43, 3 June 2019 (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.