Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Randall Goodden

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. ✗plicit 12:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Randall Goodden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

Summary

Blatant advert, will never pass WP:GNG or any more specific notability guideline. Rejected autobiographical draft with duplication. Delete and salt all variants, Consider doing the same in Main space

Background

This rejected draft has issues so substantial that it cannot proceed. It is the re-creation of material once slimmed down in the now deleted Draft:Randall Lee Goodden, a draft which was much improved on this lengthy and duplicated autobiographical ramble, yet still had no basis for acceptance at AFC.

The Autobiographer has documented his career, and has never succeeded in showing that he passes any Wikipedia notability threshold. It has been a successful career, and, while personally notable to those who have worked with him, and to his family, he is WP:ROTM in any Wikipedia sense, and suffering from the same difficulties that almost all autobiographers suffer here.

This instance of the draft has been here before. The deletion log shows two entries:

• 13 years ago:G12: Blatant copyright infringement (deleted by C.Fred)
• 13 years ago:G12: Blatant copyright infringement (deleted by Cireland)

There have been multiple uploaded files, here and on Commons, in breach of copyright, now deleted or with deletion in progress, pending either OTRS (there or here), but he has not appeared to listen when copyright rules have been explained to him. Indeed, all attempts by many editors to offer advice and guidance have been difficult. At one point he both stated (by prepending his name to his signature) that he is Randall Goodden, and later insisted that he was not. There is a tl;dr set of conversations on my talk page and on his documenting this, and that he is WP:NOTHERE by his own direct comment. There are tl;dr conversations everywhere with forum shopping, editor shopping, even requesting admin contact from "US Admins" for reasons which are perplexing and raise red flags in my mind

Indeed, this nomination is becoming tl;dr, for which I apologise, and will stop.

[MW software attributes this draft to me. This is because a redirect I created was overwritten. I will place the notification correctly at User talk:A Flaneur.] Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^{Talk to me} 07:56, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This is borderline G11-level spam IMO, but since we are here, let's get rid of this. JavaHurricane 08:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - More than enough editor time and effort has been wasted dealing with this self-promotion. This isn't going to become an article. Whpq (talk) 12:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this reads like a resume in prose. Needs a complete rewrite and even then I haven't seen much beyond local coverage. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:28, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete:
  • • The duplication of this overly long draft autobiography indicates that the author is not even making a reasonable effort to submit a plausible draft, but is only trying to overwhelm the reviewers.
    • The only real issue may be whether to delete this draft or to sanction the author, but this is a content forum.

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The nominator, User:Timtrent, wonders why the submitter wants US admins. That is because this is an autobiography of a product liability lawyer, and product liability cases are tried by juries in the United States but are handled differently in other nations. Just as product liability lawyers try to confuse the jury, the submitter is trying to confuse the reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Robert McClenon I think 'Lawyer' is probably the only title he hasn't stated in the intro. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^{Talk to me} 15:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • User:Timtrent - Well, in ancient Greece, philosophers sometimes tried to confuse the jury. He may be trying to confuse us, and we do not seem to be confused. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, But note that it is currently terrible. However, I am not convinced that it is entirely irretrievably terrible. Randall Goodden looks likely notable. A Flaneur (talk · contribs) looks too inexperienced with Wikipedia for creating the article unassisted. Most of the references look unsuitable, but I would like to run through them to see if any are worthy. The draft is most certainly not suitable for mainspace. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:33, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t read them all, it’s exhausting. Nearly everything is by him, not about him. This is almost good, but it is not independent of him.

Delete. WP:TNT. I could possibly be restarted with sources that are independent and cover him, not that I think it likely. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as functionally G11, though I can see where SmokeyJoe is coming from. I don't think there's any usable information in its current state, though, so even if the subject is notable it's better off recreated. Vaticidalprophet 09:51, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete same reasons as above.🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 17:15, 27 April 2021 (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.