Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Ramin Namdar (composer)

 __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. ✗ plicit  11:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Ramin Namdar (composer)

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

This is a series of hoaxes by an xwiki vanity spammer, which has been deleted multiple times at AFD and elsewhere. Despite the rather bold claims, Namdar is not a notable composer, actor or producer and did not receive production credits when he was 8 (as claimed in the many articles in mainspace that the socks edited that have nothing to do with Namdar). It's time to put an end to this insanity and delete it entirely from WP.

Also if anyone needs another reason not to trust IMDB, just take a look at this dumpster fire.

See also: Articles for deletion/Ramin Namdar (composer), Ramin Namdar etc... PRAXIDICAE💕 15:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, per WP:NMFD, "Drafts are not subject to article deletion criteria like "no context," "no indication of importance," or "not in English" so creators may have time to e.g. establish context or notability, translate, and make other adjustments and improvements" We don't delete drafts just because of notability. You'd be trying to delete half of all AfC submissions if that were the case. Just let it get G13'd or rejected by an AfC reviewer (3/4 of these drafts aren't even submitted for review). — Mcguy15  (talk, contribs) 16:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * They're literal hoaxes by a banned spammer. This undoubtedly qualifies. Draft space isn't an area to let hoaxes and blatant falsehoods wait to die a slow death, especially considering this individual keeps creating them. The lack of english sources are irrelevant, it's a blatant hoax, which you'd know if you bothered to actually read my nomination or the drafts. PRAXIDICAE💕  17:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) I don't know why you're insinuating, with mild hostility, that I never read your nomination, I read it multiple times. Also that I didn't read the drafts? They're each a sentence each. 2) The article creator was not blocked at the time of the writing of my !vote.
 * I will change my vote to delete since the article's creator is now blocked, but I don't retract my original point, since your nom states "Namdar is not a notable composer, actor or producer", which has nothing to do with hoaxes. — Mcguy15  (talk, contribs) 18:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The first line of my nomination literally says This is a series of hoaxes...but go on with the bad takes. :) PRAXIDICAE💕  18:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You can say anything you want, my point was, you need to prove something is a hoax / unnotable / whatever to argue for its deletion. — Mcguy15  (talk, contribs) 19:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If it would make you feel better, I'd gladly tag them all for speedy deletion as hoaxes, because that's what they are. PRAXIDICAE💕  17:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete All for the following reasons:
 * The two BLPs are tendentious resubmissions where the topic (the person) was found by AFD to be non-notable and the submitter is attempting to game the titles.
 * The third and fourth were created by a now-banned editor. They are not G5 because the editor was not yet blocked, but we should use common sense that submissions by liars are likely to contain lies.
 * I think that this addresses the concerns of User:Mcguy15. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:47, 24 April 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.