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: delete. No consensus for salting, but it's clear that this draft needs harsher discipline than G13 would provide. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:33, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Luca Stricagnoli[edit]

Declined six times and rejected twice over the past year and a half. Repeatedly re-submitted with no substantial improvement. The last resubmission involved just tweaking a few words here and there. Still highly promotional and no evidence of sources that meet WP:NMUSICBIO. The previous discussion found that it didn't meet the level of contentious resubmission (I assume tendentious is what the closer meant to say), but with another couple of submissions since then, and no substantial improvement, it does now. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:22, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I hate to be that guy, but I'm not really seeing anything that says we should accelerate the deletion. Let it sit and wait out the G13 clock then speedy it as soon as the clock strikes midnight. Doug Mehus T·C 19:45, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - After this third rejection, it doesn't need immediate deleting now unless the author decides to work on it yet again without discussing it. It needed rejection. If the author works on it other than discussing it at the Teahouse, the Sword of Damocles can fall. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm just not convinced this person has a chance of meeting notability for WP:MUSICBIO. Had over 1.5 years to demonstrate it, and can't even show WP:THREE sources. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF Then let G13 wait it out. There's no policy- or evidence-based deletion rationale for expediting this. If there were, speedy deletion is always available. WP:GNG does not apply to Draft: namespace as editors like SmokeyJoe and Rhododendrites remind us. --Doug Mehus T·C 21:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, it's the tendentious resubmitting without improvement that is why this is up for MFD. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tendentious resubmission? I ask the nominator to show the diff. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Diff. Resubmission without improvement. Declined and rejected. Delete. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. By constantly tweaking the draft and resubmitting, the clock is reset every time and it will never qualify for G13. That's gaming the system. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt both Luca Stricagnoli and Draft:Luca Stricagnoli at Autoconfirmed level per P199. I see what you mean; the IP editor just comes in every 5-6 months, changes the biography section from "Luca" to "Stricagnoli" or vice versa. No prejudice against a neutral, non-admin editor trying again. Doug Mehus T·C 02:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-autoconfirmed editors can't create articles in the main space anyway; there's no point salting that. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 22:12, 1 February 2020 (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.