Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Team550/Budrovich Crane Rental

 __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. JohnCD (talk) 17:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Team550/Budrovich Crane Rental


No evidence of any notability. Looks like copyvio off their promo material but i can't find source so maybe they have changed their website in the years this stale draft has been hanging around. Legacypac (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Legacypac,:
 * "No evidence of any notability"? I think the onus should be on the nominator to show evidence of non-notability. "i can't find source" is sort of that, but as a school or university examiner I couldn't give you marks because you haven't said how you searched.
 * "Looks like copyvio"? Copyright violations have objective tests, and you seem to err on the side of copyright hysteria.  Nevertheless, if you could present the points that makes you think it is a copyright violation, we would likely back it up.  However, you have to honestly think it is a copyright violation, "looks like" is pretty weak.
 * "promo material"? why the hell can't you just say: "Delete, promotional material"?  It doesn't matter if the topic could be notable, or if too many sentences are too closely paraphrased, if it is promotional, and it by a drive-by single edit account, in userspace, it is U5-able, and promotion is always deleted.  The external link is strong evidence of promotional intent.  It is so obvious that this is to be deleted as promotion, and yet you want to talk about notability, in the face of multiple RfCs of others telling you that WP:N doesn't apply in userspace.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:16, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately one Admin thinks anything tagged by a bot with a box that includes the word draft is not U5 eligible. I'm seeing pages I consider promotional occasionally being declined as not promotional. It reads like copyvio but I can't pin point it. A privately owned crane business is highly unlikely to be notable as there are several such businesses in every larger city. Legacypac (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I didn't know it was a declined speedy.  I would have accepted by either G11 or U5.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Suggesting pinging the CSD-decliner. This time User:Graeme Bartlett.  It would be nice for us all to be on the same page as to what the CSD standards are.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * No one has nominated this for a U5 delete, but in any case this would not be the right criterion because it is a genuine article draft. It does not fall into any of the WP:NOT categories. G11 was rejected by me because it does not contain promotional language, excessive peacock terms, or completely PR only content such as awards and recognition.  The only sus language is "most up to date cranes of their time", which would be easily edited off it it was an article. It may well have the intention to promote, but the writers intention here does not matter, it is what they wrote that is important. A promoter that can write a neutral, referenced article is doing the right thing. But not only is there no claim of notability, there is no claim of importance, as as an article this would quickly go the way of A7 delete. But as a draft, there seems to be no reason to delete, apart from it will never make an article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:17, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Graeme. Although I might have accepted, your interpretation of "genuine draft" is a reasonable call, and any admin or even editor in good standing may remove the tag.  Sometimes I feel knocked about around here and start to slip to the deletionist side of consensus.  I try to resist, knowing that the set of XfD nominators are overrepresented by deletionists.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. They have **three** cranes to rent so they are notable.
 * Delete. The editor also created Budrovich Crane Rental which was A7 deleted in February 2012. This draft was created just before that. It's over four years since the editor has been here. It seems downright ridiculous that the mainspace version can be deleted in a few minutes and no one cares but this version requires a much more ridiculous standard to get rid of it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:22, 22 April 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.