Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Markand Adhikari

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: keep. Nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet; the whole thing seems rather suspicious. Procedurally closing. (non-admin closure) Tol | talk | contribs 00:52, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Markand Adhikari

The editor of the draft seems new to Wikipedia, as the style of creation is below amateur. This draft can possibly a Conflict of interest as the same happened to me before deleting the mainspace article Markand Adhikari , where I disclosed my concern. Nirupammathur (talk) 16:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aditi Bansal Dhar do not remove the Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion notice. If you have a justification, kindly put your point here or contest for non-deletion of your draft. Nirupammathur (talk) 16:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Pppery I am new to Wikipedia as I am not familiar with the Wikipedia logs and tags. The reason for removing Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion is only because Markand Adhikari is a well-known personality and I do believe that's why Nirupammathur has created this page. There are no personal emotions attached to it. The concern is to get the reason for deletion only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditi Bansal Dhar (talk • contribs) 18:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I generally favor allowing Drafts to exist unless there are clear problems like violations of copyright or BLP violations because they often are later improved. I don't think the removal of the deletion tag should be held against this draft as the nominator did the same thing once. Chalk it up to new editors not knowing the deletion process well. I'd like to know why Nirupammathur created a version of this article and then later requested it to be deleted, was it because of this COI on your part? This makes things more complicated than a usual deletion discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The nominator has not stated a reason why a draft should be deleted. Any conflict of interest and any quality issues can be and should be dealt with in draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Liz Glad to connect with experts like you. As I already mentioned, I am not very much familiar with Wikipedia yet, I am trying to learn new things here. I have seen multiple pages which gets deleted yesterday like Ankur Warikoo I want to understand what exactly the issue is for deletion.
Delete : Hi @Liz: I do not want to get into WP:OUTING, but this creation is a part of a paid syndicate. My reason for deleting the main article was the same. There was a WP:COI where later while deleting the article I mentioned, how these agencies dupe people in by paying a heavy sum to create an article about their client. This happened with me, and Aditi Bansal Dhar is a part of the same syndicate because I know her professionally, revealing it for the sake of this matter, sorry if I've not followed WP:OUTING. You can see her ambagious editing, where see tried to create the article again and again and make it to the mainspace, this is because the client's put pressure on them that they anyhow wan't it in the mainspace and not in the draftspace. Please look into this very closely and you'll get the bits of everything I've mentioned. Nirupammathur (talk) 04:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nirupammathur, I'm no expert on detecting or verifying that paid editing is going on, our resident admin specialist these days seems to be MER-C, you might have a word with them about this if you want someone to look into something like a "syndicate". That's goes beyond my Wikipedia experience. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Thank you for the mention. MER-C please look into this. Nirupammathur (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep deleting a draft because it isn't very good defeats the point of draft space - it's intended as a space for poor quality articles to be improved without having to be ready for mainspace. Hut 8.5 07:46, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Liz User:Muboshgu User:Melcous The allegations put are absolutely baseless. I think the Wikipedia page for Markand Adhikari is important and he deserves to be on Wikipedia. He is a Media Baron with almost 40 years of experience and has revolutionized the Media Industry, sorry if I've not followed WP:OUTING. Again with folded hands, it's a humble request to everyone at Wikipedia to consider our request to make the Markaad Adhikaris page live again. He coming on Wikipedia will help younger people a lot and would also help them to understand his journey and can also, influence a lot of people to follow his path. His path has always been working hard and also, working on the truth. I would request you to please check the google presence of Mr. Markand Adhikari. Please suggest the changes and let us know how we can get Markand Adhikari's Wikipedia live again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditi Bansal Dhar (talk • contribs) 10:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet and there are no non-keep !votes, can this be speedily kept? -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 10:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tamzin: Looking at WP:SKCRIT I don't think so as neither the sockmaster nor the puppet were blocked at the time of the nomination and the nom has given a justification for their nomination even if it isn't a valid one. Maybe there could be a WP:SNOWCLOSE though? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mm, good point on SKCRIT. I'd misread the blocking timeline. Seems borderline SNOWable to me, but I don't do enough MfDs to be comfortable making that NAC myself. P.S., @Oshwah: sock below. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 16:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Aditi Bansal Dhar runs the paid syndicate while forcing some Wikipedians to create article for her and her ‘PR and Marketing’ company’s clients in Wikipedia Mainspace, by offering them a huge sum. This draft also belongs to one of her clients. If anybody need any proof (Mails and Whatsapp Chats) , I can mail them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:1188:352e:91de:ce08:e2a3:aac7 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- If you have private evidence (like emails of whatsapp messages) that link this article to undisclosed paid editing follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#Reporting undisclosed paid editors and email it to the address in that section. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete – This does look fishy. If someone is making them do an article for them, this is very highly violating WP:PAID. If they are notable, then there is no evidence proving it, hence violating WP:NOTNOTABLE and WP:BLP. Also this article is likely created by a sockpuppet of the user, hence would violate WP:SOCK --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 04:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:UPE is not a reason deletion, check WP:DEL and it’s talk page. WP:SOCK is not a reason for deletion short of when WP:G5 applies. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Plausibly notable. Sourced. The threshold required for draftspace is very very low. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close - Nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Close - Fruit of the poisoned tree.--WaltCip-(talk) 22:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.