Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:WhoaSami/Visual Diplomacy Engagement Office

 __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 no consensus to delete. – xeno talk 16:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

User:WhoaSami/Visual Diplomacy Engagement Office
this is obviously a self promotional spam article and hsould be deleted quickly, Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:FAKEARTICLE.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 20:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as spam. User:Diplomaticon/Officeofinnovativeengagement is much the same and should be deleted also. MER-C 00:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as spammy - but give it the time to be developed by the time this ends... Skier Dude  ( talk  04:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article is in userspace, not in the main article space. This is exactly where drafts should go.  If it is still overtly promotional when and if someone tries to promote it to the main space, it could legitimately be deleted. Tim Pierce (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. There is a draft tag on it, and it is in the User space. The Fake Article policy only applies if the page is going to e there indefinitely. Let the user sort it out first, before we think about deleting it. -- Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count ) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 16:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have advised this user on IRC but they did not appear to be canvassing for !votes so I do not believe that my opinion here is compromised. I think MfD is a bit harsh this time, the user does have a COI but they should be welcome to draft some text and request article creation on their behalf as an expert editor. When the article is proposed, the question of notability and sources can be questioned. In practice I suspect that the content of this potential article may be merged into a parent article but this is not a rationale to delete a userspace page which does not appear to be blatant advertising, personal attack or any other clear breach of the WP:USER guidelines.
 * For those who may not be that familiar with WP:USER, the guidance there specifically allows drafts in userspace where the user may be concerned about their own COI. Under common allowable uses of userspace it includes "Drafts, especially where you want discussion or other users' opinions first, for example due to conflict of interest or major proposed changes." Fæ (talk) 16:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Definitely not ready for article space yet, and may never be,, but far too early to be making such an assessment. This is what user space is for.-- SPhilbrick  T  17:06, 26 August 2010 (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.