Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Saringkan Promsupa

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: speedy keep. This draft's content has now been copied and pasted to Saringkan Promsupa. For legal reasons, this draft can no longer be deleted so long as the article exists, which it will for the foreseeable future, as it does not qualify for speedy deletion. I have requested a histmerge. Hopefully, that will be successful and this title will not exist shortly. Otherwise, a note of the c&p move will need to be left on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 00:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Saringkan Promsupa

Recreation of a page deleted by discussion just two months ago.. Fails WP:FOOTY Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Saringkarn_Promsupa recreated and deleted in mainspace since. Legacypac (talk) 02:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Why not G4? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnecessary and per nom. Hhkohh (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per GiantSnowman. Hhkohh (talk) 11:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - a non-notable article has been moved to draft space so that it can be worked on until it is notable? Why delete? Giant Snowman 10:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and properly re-assess for AfC in time. This draft is much more substantial than the speedied version from March and the AfDed version from last July, so G4 does not apply. (Note: This draft was not moved from Mainspace; it has never been there.) The FourFourTwo reference covers him in-depth,[1] and there has been lots of coverage of his potential transfer since the previous AfD;[2][3][4][5] the currently available coverage might just satisfy the GNG. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep stop bullying drafter editors. Egaoblai (talk) 08:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

that is a very unfair accusation. This topic was just assessed on notability grounds. It can't overcome not meeting WP:FOOTY which is one of the widest most permissive SNG we have. Legacypac (talk) 09:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral for now. Maybe he will sign with a fully professional team. Maybe there will be evidence that he played for a fully professional team. It isn't the same as the deleted article: A reviewing admin declined the G4. I don't really see a good case either way. User:SmokeyJoe? Do you have an opinion? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I have never engaged anywhere on WP:ATHLETE including NFOOTY debates. Mainspace contains many GNG-failing stubs. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note:The CSD template was removed by me, not an admin. From what I remember, the deleted version was a one-sentence stub. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: #Groan. User:Puan555 has now copy/pasted the draft into Saringkan Promsupa. Unless there's a CSD criteria that applies to the now-mainspace article (I don't think there is), this MfD will probably need to be closed, a histmerge performed, and the discussion re-opened as an AfD. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2018 (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.