Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Verastem Oncology

 __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 17:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Verastem Oncology


Paid editor, author of this draft, is now blocked for submitting directly to article space as Verastem Oncology. Little or no likelihood that a neutral draft will be submitted through AFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Why bother with this nomination? It could be deleted by WP:G11. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes,, but I have been told in the past that per bureaucracy (heh) persistently submitted drafts should be dealt with by MfD. Not sure if this draft alone really qualifies, but given the contribution history I was hesitant to delete the draft right away; so I left it to see if another admin thinks it's CSD material. Alex Shih (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I just came from the thing, and I'm dubious of the G11. Someone bolder than I will probably delete it, but I have my doubts.-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk)
 * It seemed pretty clear to me, using unsubstantiated terms such as "novel", "leading", "exclusively" and coming across overall as a company publicity brochure than an encyclopedia article. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, there's the rub-- such is amenable to editing, blah, blah. There are earlier versions that I won't bother looking through.-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. it just needs minor adjustment--it is not particularly  promotional. Drafts are in draft space so such issues can be fixed. I declined the speedy.  DGG ( talk ) 16:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Fruit of the poisioned tree. Hasteur (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Taken with the paid editor status of the author (and primary editor) the overlap with copyrighted content is enough for me to believe that WP:TNT is the best outcome for Wikipedia. Hasteur (talk) 21:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete-Per Hasteur and that it's non-notable. &#x222F; WBG converse 08:39, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG. I did some very minor work on it, though it likely still needs a lot more. Notability is not a concern here per WP:NMFD — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 14:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, a draft can be deleted if it is hopelessly not going to meet notability. per WP:NMFD -- Dloh cier ekim   (talk) 19:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Only after being "repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement." This draft has been submitted only once and not yet declined. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 17:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Good point. Perhaps they tagged for CSD in lieu of declining. You'd think that would be the first step.-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 19:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Whilst I appreciate everyones work on this article .... My firm belief is that neutral editors should create drafts/articles ... IMHO Paid Editing doesn't belong here so as such for that reason alone Delete. – Davey 2010 Talk 00:28, 22 September 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.