Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Jauhar Kanpuri

 __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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 01:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Jauhar Kanpuri


Delete. Completely unsourced and highly advertorial draft about a writer with no particularly clear WP:AUTHOR pass. Creator repeatedly tried to move the page into mainspace themself, without actually submitting it for AFC review first -- and an editor with the username "Jauharkanpuri" was also involved in those attempts, a clear conflict of interest which also opens the possibility that the original creator had one too (note, frex, that both editors have used the edit summary "this is article" to justify the page moves.) And then once WP:SALT and move-protection were applied to prevent him/them from moving the draft yet again, he/they simply abandoned the page rather than actually attempting to improve it. If this were actually in mainspace it could be speedied under both A7 and G11, so there's not much point in hanging onto it in draft form -- if an article about him can be justified and written and sourced properly, then that can be done from scratch without needing to start from this base. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 16 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.
 * completely promotional in style. Unsourced except to the subjects promotional own website. If not G11-able, it is very close. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Bearcat, you have written on the page: "Creator is hereby advised that they do not have the right to bypass the AFC review stage by moving the page into articlespace themselves."
 * For good or bad, your statement is not correct. No editor, new or experienced, is required to use AfC or DraftSpace.  I tried to get a discussion going at Wikipedia_talk:Drafts/Archive_5.  Unfortunately, without some rules drafted to say otherwise, if a draft author doesn't like your reviewing, he can choose to go straight to mainspace.  You might then choose to seek deletion via CSD or AfD.  However, the author may also G7 the draft, abandon their account, start a new one, and go to mainspace hoping that you never know.  There is no stopping that.
 * The discussion is needed. I think that AfC reviewers should, when disapproving of submitted drafts, post clear and simple reasons why the draft would be promptly deleted if put in mainspace, what if anything can be done to fix it, and admit to the author that they can ignore the advice and move it anyway.
 * However, I think it would be better to get rid of DraftSpace entirely, and to implement minimum requirements being being able and allowed to write new articles. (Similar to Autoconfirmed article creation trial). New editors should be encouraged to improve existing content first.  They should introduce redlinks into mainspace in preparation for a new needed topic, and to not introduce an orphan article without connecting it to anything else.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:05, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom, highly promotional. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:38, 21 October 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.