DRAFT ARTICLE SUBMISSION ON WIKIPEDIA

That's how draft article submission is "supposed" to work on Wikipedia. However, it's extremely common for drafted articles to be cut off at the metaphoric pass by a stalking abusive admin for any arbitrary reason including personal bias, morning power trip after cereal, or their dog Rover just died. They have a posted rule on Wikipedia forbidding biting new editors for this very reason, but almost nobody polices Wikipedia's abusive admins. So the rule is extremly rarely enforced.

Next is a real Wikipedian example of a typical abusive situation upon a draft article submission. Another editor, the talented RandyKnotts, spent much more effort on his draft article only to have it instantly annihilated upon submission by a disgusting-behaving admin Jimfbleak. Remember, he's the same admin who will block an editor that hasn't even logged in for years to make sure their corpse stays unequivocally dead forever. He's a big fan of capital punishment from the encyclopedia he patrols obsessively.

The subject of the draft article submitted by RandyKnotts to Teahouse certainly seemed to be plenty notable. There were oodles of good secondary sources with their own independent fact-checking and verification systems. The subject had publications which included a famous independent video game, software, famous artwork, and a notable series of in-depth interviews with dozens of the world's most famous video game designers, artists, and musicians. He's also notable for creating the first ever published video game to be made using the popular image editing software Gimp, a historic milestone which has been written about by many different people in reliable secondary sources, in multiple languages, and in many countries around the world.

The draft article submitted by RandyKnotts contained 46 references, 24 of which were independent of the subject. Based on Wikipedia guidelines, this draft article should have been reviewed, approved, and immediately moved into the mainspace. Even if the reviewing Teahouse admin for some reason thought there was an issue with it like tone or structure, the Teahouse admin should have denied it with the stated reason, and given the editor and any other interested editors a chance to improve the draft and fix the cited issues. There's no doubt that an equal opportunity to improve the draft article for up to six months should have been the worst case scenario for RandyKnotts' draft article.

Well, that's not what happened because... abuse. The draft article submitted to Teahouse had been cut off by a notorious admin and killed ruthlessly. It had likely taken many hours of skilled research and writing. Then a brute Jim F. Bleak who was unauthorized by Teahouse, swooped in like a vulture and used his admin power to delete the draft article completely. Gone forever with one disastrous button click and a grin.

Next page: Indecency on Wikipedia