Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Mahendran Rajamani

 __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 keep. Per WP:NMFD (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of Godric On leave 09:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Mahendran Rajamani


AfC submission on a non-notable director. Legacypac (talk) 20:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and avoid similar nominations in the future. Plausible topic, draft created just yesterday, WP:NMFD. VQuakr (talk) 01:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * There is fairly wide support in AfC for sending unsuitable topics directly to deletion. Reduces the backlog. The creator gets 7 days to prove suitablility. Don’t reference NMFD which was a non-credable creation based on a very selective reading of poorly worded RfC. Legacypac (talk) 03:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No, there is support for pursuing deletion of drafts that are being resubmitted disruptively. There is no support for bombarding MfD with unnecessary noms such as this. If you think a criterion similar to A7 should apply to drafts, propose a change to existing policy at WT:CSD. Re NMFD, feel free to pursue a newer consensus at WT:N. You were the sole dissenting vote in the previous RfC, which makes your disdain for the existing and very clear consensus decidedly unconvincing. VQuakr (talk) 03:49, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry but your personal attacks against me are inappropriate. The question was framed in a motherhood and apple pie way and the close did not record all the “excepts”. Throwing up NMFD to protect all sorts of crap has been rejected over and over by highly respected editors and is therefore disruptive. Kindly avoid your patronizing non-productive protection of non-notable crap. Legacypac (talk) 06:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep WP:SK#1. WP:NMFD directly applies to this sort of nomination. The failure of AfC reviewers to review and improve their processing efficiency is not justification to swamp MfD with their endless borderline notable drafts. See the history of WP:N/N for the hopelessness of a forum for questioning notability. The nominator must cite something from WP:NOT, otherwise, it can be kept for six months inactivity. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:13, 8 November 2017 (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.