Draft:Sphere Matchers (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

Draft:Bobik Platz (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

Draft was speedly deleted under G3 criteria, when G3: Blatant hoax didn't apply because the company and the supposed video game in development is real. Unfortunately though, the IGN links on the references on both draft articles are dead links and I couldn't find anything beside the FANDOM page about both company and the game they developed. Also, the first page hasn't been submitted yet and full create-protection is unnecessary for the latter case. 36.74.42.66 (talk) 14:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also: WP:DRV#Bobik Platz, Sphere Matchers and SM Billiards on Simple English Wikipedia

• Just need some source to show it meets WP:V. My sense is that it is a hoax, but if you can provide a RS, I'd agree with a restoration. Hobit (talk) 15:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, no, V is a much higher bar than not-G3-able, especially in draft space. I don't really think we need anything to overcome G3 other than a good-faith assertion that it's real. Jclemens (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hobit Here's the reliable source [1], besides IGN which articles about the aforementioned subject are noindexed from Google or just dead links. 36.74.42.66 (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    That link goes to an unrelated article. Is that the link you meant to go to?

    @Jclemens: As mentioned below, I'm fairly sure I've run into this before and it was concluded this was likely a hoax. I can't find the discussion and it's not impossible I'm confusing it with something else. I'd rather we have some meaningful evidence it exists before we restore. @Bbb23: I don't think you were notified of this DRV so thought I'd loop you in as the deleting admin. Hobit (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hobit: Well, this page I got so far is the best I can find on Google besides FANDOM wiki about the aforementioned company and links to deleted pages on Simple English Wikipedia. 36.74.40.153 (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Overturn and Restore Draft:Sphere Matchers. The Fandom page is sufficient to establish that it is not a hoaxan obvious hoax. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I looked at this a while ago. I think it's just part of the same hoax. Hobit (talk) 12:05, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Robert McClenon I responded to @Slywriter's G3 report I would agree with the deleting editors view that Draft:Sphere Matchers appeared to be an 'obvious hoax' because the draft article used this ridiculous graphic as the main image, and both sources were 404 dead links. I will look into the other article and comment in due course. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok so it's the fanon wiki on fandom which titles itself "Welcome to the Fanon Wiki, the official encyclopedia dedicated to everything fiction, including fan-fiction, roleplay, and stories!". If the draft was talking about it as some notable fan fiction (I don't see it is) then not a hoax, if it's presenting it as a real product then I guess it's arguable if it's a hoax or not, but the draft would certainly be misleading. -- 81.100.164.154 (talk) 20:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Need more information on Bobik Platz. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft:Bobik Platz was deleted and salted by Nick Moyes. WP:G5 was involved but no master was specified (the speedy tag was unorthodox). Nick also salted Bobik Platz.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:37, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - If they created a Fandom link as part of a hoax, that is an elaborate hoax extending beyond Wikipedia, and does not seem to be what G3 was meant to deal with. At this point, it looks like Send to XFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I G3'ed after seeing an AN report and my own investigation showed the sources were faked on Wikipedia. If said sources ever existed, surely someone caring about this article could show through archive.org that the IGN articles are real, but I won't be holding my breath. (90% sure I checked at the time, but need an admin to provide the links) Simple also deleted it as a hoax. There is no indication anywhere on the net that EA is planning to distribute. That fandom has zero standards should not legitimize a hoax. Slywriter (talk) 18:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive344#Draft:Sphere_Matchers was the AN. Also interesting that IP knows what links were in a deleted article and despite responding here has not addressed the complete BS link they gave above. Slywriter (talk) 19:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  From what I understand, the IPs that edited in the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Angelmunoz50/Archive were from Spain, whereas the IPs involved here are from Indonesia.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I disagree with @Slywriter: salting the page about the company who created Sphere Matchers, in the case of any information about the aforementioned company appears in the foreseeable future and I also @Trade: to assess the accusations of me being a sockpuppet of User:LiliaMiller2002 LTA. 36.74.40.153 (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - A different article on Simple wiki was deleted (QD A4, the same as our CSD A7), and the game was claimed to be by the same game author [2] Google shows "SM Billiards is an upcoming cue sports simulation video game and a spin-off to Sphere Matchers, developed by Bobik Platz and published by EA Sports." but I'm not an admin on Simple, so can't see who wrote it. This could be a larger troll. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:22, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also this: [3] RFD (AFD) for Bobik Platz by User:180.252.25.15, which geolocates to EXACTLY the same place as our friend 36.74.42.66 above. Make of it what you will. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse deletion. Archive.org shows that both supposed references in the deleted draft were 404 on exactly the access-date listed in the deleted draft. I think that's strong evidence that they were never valid and that it's a hoax. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse deletion per oddities and David Eppstein. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse deletion it appears on a FANDOM wiki for fan fiction, has some non existent links to IGN, for a game supposedly being published by EA next year, and no one else on the internet is talking about it. What am I missing? 81.100.164.154 (talk) 20:50, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Literal hoax, which is a big L for me for putting into Wikipedia and Wikidata because doing so is WP:POINTy and my IQ level is like a MOAB Glue. 36.74.40.153 (talk) 22:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I've now looked back at my actions on salting Draft:Bobby Platz. I appear to have responded on the 'note to admins' on the CSD template notice about repeated recreation, rather than confirming a history of repeat deletions myself. That was wrong of me. I also preemptively salted Bobby Platz based on that note, and appreciate that both were done without proper cause. My apologies. That said, I am unconvinced there is anything genuine whatsoever about either article, and found the three IP addresses in this matter - both here and on Simple Wikipedia - all geolocating to the exact same spot in Indonesia. I am OK with unsalting both pages (which I have just done). However, I feel deletion was justified, and feel close monitoring will be essential to ensure WP:V is met, using sources that are WP:RS. I think we need to see some genuine sources presented here (that actually work) before restoring any of this content back into Draftspace. That includes the purported website of Bobik Platz, as linked from the draft page. For a company alleged to have 152 employees, the website link does not work, nor are there any Google results available for this so-called company, other than a mention on a user-generated site. I shall keep both pages permanently on my Watchlist. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I would be amazed if the website link ever worked, since .platz isn't a valid TLD --81.100.164.154 (talk) 21:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two different people, including me, have tagged the OP IP as a proxy, in a nest of proxies, plus some others, with likely LTA connections, so while salting might be a little out of process, I would endorse keeping them salted. This will be more evident shortly. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 21:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As stated above, I had just unsalted them for my failure of due process. But we can see how it pans out. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that I believe this is a confession of its a hoax - Special:Diff/1102591053. Regardless, I'll double-check deletion logs before requesting salt in the future. Though perhaps a discussion warranted there about Admin discretion for Hoaxes, cross-wiki abuse or otherwise purely disruptive. Slywriter (talk) 21:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• They can be salted so that only autoconfirmed editors can create the draft, which is less problematic but would solve the current issue. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 21:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Princep Shah of Nepal (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

Was closed (very reasonably and agreeably) with not much discussion, no arguments to keep, I think everyone missed that she passes WP:ANYBIO on the basis of her Nansen Refugee Award I'd like to work on the article CT55555 (talk) 14:24, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Please note that the closer is agreeable to this request. Link. CT55555 (talk) 14:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore I interpret the close as a WP:SOFTDELETE (except with a redirect rather than a deletion), which means that the deletion can be WP:REFUNDed upon any good-faith request, and we've had such a request here. The original close wasn't wrong (thus this is not an "overturn"), but is no longer relevant. --ais523 15:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. I see it the same way. I think the policy forces me to ask here, but it seems non-controversial, I'd be surprised if anyone finds this disagreeable. CT55555 (talk) 15:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore per ais523. Hobit (talk) 15:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore as per discussion, with the understanding that the requester will update the article by adding the award that establishes notability both to the text of the article and as a reference. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I commit to doing that quickly, that is my exact plan. I assume someone will move to draft and once there I will update. Or if this results in it moving to the main space, I will quickly update. CT55555 (talk) 21:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore - Not sure if I really need to comment here given my blessing on my tp but nonetheless as the AFD closer I have no objections to this being restored given the award notability etc. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:29, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]