Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:RaiBlocks

 __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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:38, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:RaiBlocks


Has been deleted twice at AfD in the past year, does not seem like much has changed since then. Links to previous AfDs: SeraphWiki (talk) 07:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Articles_for_deletion/RaiBlocks_(2nd_nomination)
 * Articles_for_deletion/RaiBlocks

It was last reviewed in december 2017, thus this nomination for deletion is premature.Egaoblai (talk) 12:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete The article has been deleted twice in AfD in the past seven months, and the draft does not show any signs of becoming article material any time soon. That the draft was reviewed in December only shows that there is no sign of notability yet; for a draft that's normally not an issue, but in this case it just shows that no, this cannot be an article. Maybe in the future, but that future is clearly not here. --bonadea contributions talk 15:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I should add that I always search independently for sources before nominating a draft to MfD. I won't nominate new drafts because it would be bitey, but an article that has been deleted twice and recently declined should be deleted, and the draft should not be resubmitted until proper sources become available. Some are declined twice on the same day and there don't seem to be sources for notability, if editors can find sources the deletion should be contested, if not we should clear these drafts out of the backlog - it isn't a good use of reviewers time to have the same deleted articles and drafts come back again and again when sourcing isn't available.SeraphWiki (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I just found out drafts should not be submitted to MfD for notability, but my reading is that this is for drafts in draftspace. For drafts that are submitted repeatedly as ready for publication with no indication that the editor has any intention of following the advice of reviewers, I think deletion should be an option before anything as drastic as this proposal Village_pump_(proposals) is implemented. SeraphWiki (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as unsuitable for article space. SeraphWiki some misguided individuals would have you think that we don't consider notability at MfD or on Drafts but that is either pure stupidity or willful ignorance. Reality is Drafts are given more leeway and time to establish notability than mainspace pages but we do regularly consider notability at MfD as one factor. Legacypac (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Literally everyone but Legacypac in the well-participated RfC agreed that MfD is not for evaluating notability. It may be relevant if there are other drivers for deletion. Here, there is no evaluation of notability called for as that was already done at AfD. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per the clear result of Articles_for_deletion/RaiBlocks_(2nd_nomination). There is no scope for this topic if it is not even worth a mention at Cryptocurrency.  WP:UNDUE. WP:NOTPROMOTION —SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:24, 9 January 2018 (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.