The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The only argument to keep is based largely on WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, but that's just an essay; AfD is free to delete an article if editors feel doing so would improve the encyclopedia, and they clearly feel so here. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thita Manitkul

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm bringing this to AfD not because the subject is not notable, but because the entire article has been almost exclusively edited only by a long-term sock-farming COI user (SPI). Despite clean-up efforts by several editors, the article has always been plagued by COI and POV issues, which will have to be re-written from scratch if a non-COI editor decides to pick up writing about the subject. Until then, the COI article should not exist on Wikipedia. Paul_012 (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article's clearly a mess as it is, but it doesn't seem to be at the WP:TNT point quite yet. I've seen plenty of stuff in mainspace in worse shape than this article that's been readily cleaned up by other editors, I fail to see how this article is tremendously worse off than any other just due to previous COI editing. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 23:33, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I respectfully disagree with User:Nathan2055. On the one hand, the subject is notable, but notability is only one criterion. On the other hand, this article is past the point where it can be fixed and is at the point where it needs to be blown up. Therefore:
Delete Robert McClenon (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This article may be an autobiography. One of the sockpuppets is User:Sukavich Rangsitpol s Daughter, and that is who the subject Thita Manitkul is. This is not in itself a reason to delete, just more of the case that it needs to be started over, not fixed. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:58, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm struggling to see what's unfixable about this. At this point, most of what's still a mess looks stylistic rather than structural, so I'm just not seeing how this is so irreparably awful as to require the WP:TNT treatment. Like Nathan2055, I've also seen a lot of stuff in mainspace that was in much worse shape than this survive AFD on core notability grounds. Can the delete proponents be more specific about what they see as the remaining problems, I mean besides the "copyvio" that was clearly Facebook copying our text rather than vice versa? I'm not fundamentally opposed to the TNT treatment, I'm just yet to be convinced of why it's necessary here. Bearcat (talk) 22:14, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The main problem I see is that the only person interested in editing this article is the sock-farming COI author. With no one else watching the article, even if it was cleaned up now it's wholly likely that the author will keep returning under new socks and turn the article back into a self-glorifying résumé. Deleting now would allow re-creations by socks to be G5'ed. If and when a neutral editor decides to write a proper article, at least then there will be someone maintaining it. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:10, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - She is not notable person in Thailand even me who live in Thailand doesn't know who she is. If the page can still keep I think I can crete my profile in Wikipedia too or other people around the world can do it. This page is edit by her family include bias and unreference message. The important is she is not important to has her own Wikipedia page. Ministerboy (talk) 00:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The Norwegian WP twin article have been stripped down to only two sources that might mention her, but they are in Thai so it has not been possible to check. All the other sources that was provided did not mention her name. This needs at least one reliable source proving that she actually have been an elected member of parliament. Whithout that the article does not seem notable. regards ^ツDyveldi ^{☯ prat} _{✉ post} 21:41, 5 November 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.