Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Shine Private Basic School

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. ✗plicit 14:56, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Shine Private Basic School

Too soon. A quick search found me absolutely no sources, only listings on Itch.io and YouTube. Fails the general notability guideline and video game notability guideline. ✶Antrotherkus✶^✶talk✶ 21:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, pinging @Armend XD. ✶Antrotherkus✶^✶talk✶ 21:56, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because we're here and this is completely hopeless with no chance of ever being accepted, but generally there is no point in nominating drafts at MfD for notability concerns. That's why we have G13. Also see WP:NMFD SK2242 (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity, and it is not obvious that this draft is hopeless, or that it has no chance of improvement. If we delete this draft because we are here, we will send an unintended signal that we will review and delete useless drafts. See Leave useless drafts alone, because the review of drafts to delete them ahead of their expiration date will be an intensive use of volunteer time. Do we, the editors at MFD, really want to review 20 or 30 dead-end drafts every seven days? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:38, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Its a brand new with no coverage. Now its on Mfd is should be gotten rid of. scope_creep^Talk 13:29, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 14:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: “WP:TOOSOON” is a reason to put it in draftspace, not to remove it from draftspace. Keep per WP:NDRAFT. Existing AfC processes serve, let them play out. This draft has not been REJECTED, and it has not been tendentiously resubmitted, and no deletion reason from WP:NOT is suggested, so it is unworthy for listing at MfD. MfD is not for the curation of all of the worst drafts. nominating this here defeats one of the mains purposes of draftspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's a draft. If it's not abusive, created by a sock, tendentiously being resubmitted (more than twice as in this case), in violation of the BLP policy, or otherwise causing problems, then a draft is a draft regardless of notability. Rusalkii (talk) 19:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per SmokeyJoe, even though it seems unlikely this will turn into a mainspace article anytime soon. Martinp (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Initially wanted to vote full keep per above and because the whole situation was borderline WP:BITEy, as mentioned in WP:NDRAFT. I certainly wouldn't be happy if one of my drafts ended up at MfD when I didn't get a chance to demonstrate notability. That being said, ArmendXD has since moved the article to mainspace twice, which is starting to appear borderline tendatious. I'm giving them leeway since they're a young editor new to Wikipedia, which is why I'm not voting delete, but I certainly don't want to see this draft appear in MfD again after it's been potentially closed as keep. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 06:56, 12 March 2025 (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.