Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Sprunki

Draft:Sprunki

Tendentiously resubmitted draft after being rejected twice - not just declined. ObserveOwl (talk) 15:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable, and poorly written.

fanfanboy (block_talk) 15:14, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing approaching reliable sources applied or found in a reasonable BEFORE. The use of multiple accounts appears as coordination. BusterD (talk) 15:21, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not jump to accusations of bad faith actions here. The scratch game is/was very popular especially among younger kids. Fans(?) probably stumbled onto the draft and thought "OH ME! ME! ME!!! I WANNA HELP!!!" and started making additions they thought would make the draft worthy of becoming an article. That said, I agree that the draft has no place as an article on the wiki. fanfanboy (block_talk) 16:14, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No accusations at all. I've described what I'm seeing. BusterD (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, guess I may have somewhat misunderstood what you meant. fanfanboy (block_talk) 18:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, Robert McClenon in his statement below talks about coordination, but he makes it sound much more collegial than I: a fan club of ultras. Coordination might not be planned or malicious, but here we are. BusterD (talk) 00:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is fair, I didn't consider unintentional coordination being a possibility. fanfanboy (block_talk) 14:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to imply an organized fan club. Fan clubs can have varying degrees of organization and coordination. On the Internet, nobody knows whether a fan club is a leaderless group. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: for clarification, my nomination statement was referring to this resubmission before it was reverted. My source search didn't turn up anything of value either. ObserveOwl (talk) 15:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but notability and writing quality are not the main issues here. Tendentious resubmission is the issue. The right time to discuss a draft is after it is declined. The almost right time to discuss a draft is after it is rejected once. Resubmitting a rejected draft is evidence that the proponents either are clueless (the good-faith assumption) and do not know how to collaborate, or are not trying to collaborate. Sometimes I would recommend sanctions against the editor, but this draft appears to be the work of a fan club of ultras, and the straightforward action is to delete the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Resubmitted after being rejected twice, AND not just declined. How worse can you possibly get? Also, do not edit the draft anymore, not even after I discussed about content farms and their disgusting Sprunki content. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mainly because of the disruptive resubmissions which waste the time of AfC reviewers as well as of the enthusiasts who keep editing the draft. But it is also relevant that there is no way this could become an article at this point; I have searched for sources and there is nothing reliable anywhere. A GScholar search gave a number of search hits, which only shows the huge problem of unmoderated comments sections being indexed and searchable. --bonadea contributions talk 13:09, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: due to being rejected twice. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 16:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable and would be a spawning ground for vandalism _{i have a feeling we are going to have to give this the BFDI treatment because of all the young kids wanting to make an article on it and not taking no for an answer} localBluepikmin (whistle the pikmin) 16:48, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Being rejected twice, instead of just declined, tells a lot by itself. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 13:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think Draft:Incredibox - Sprunki and Draft:SPrUnKI incredibox should also be deleted. There's 30+ other drafts about Sprunki related topics, but those two are about the game itself and so should be covered by this MfD discussion. --bonadea contributions talk 04:39, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion of these drafts, These ones haven't been resubmitted as much as the other drafts on the subject. -Samoht27 (talk) 15:38, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soft Delete, I'm normally very liberal in keeping drafts, but something resubmitted repeatedly? That's not good, I doubt this is going to be notable any time soon. It's an extremely popular game on Scratch, a children-aimed programming website. It's extremely popular for a project from this site, but similar to the situation on Battle for Dream Island, popularity, especially on the internet, does not guarantee notability. Now, drafts are not checked for notability or sanity, so I would normally say to left the draft run its course. But I have a feeling that's not gonna happen, due to other users constantly resubmitting subpar versions of the draft. -Samoht27 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]