Wikipedia:Indef blocked userpages

Current Policy
User pages in this category are for users who have been indefinitely blocked and now only exist temporarily, usually to provide information to the users or allow them a suitable period of time to contest blocking.

Pages in this category are tagged with one of several indefinite block templates, or added directly using  to avoid feeding trolls or discouraging newcomers.

Intro
This seems like censorship, I mean, why delete user pages? '''It isn't to save space on the server, because the log is still there, It even gives them recognition because it makes them seem important enough to be considered a threat, and it doesn't seem to do anything else important, I mean, sockpuppets get their own pages! why don't these people?'''
 * Potentially harmful usernames should be deleted.
 * Examples: User: HEY LOOK IT'S JIMBO WALES PHONE NUMBER GIVE HIM A RING 510-8675-309 LOL
 * Attack pages should be deleted.
 * Examples: User:Aardvark has more sockpuppets than most admins have brain cells,
 * Sock puppet pages should be deleted and the evidence brought to a single page.
 * Examples: Sockpuppets of Blu Aardvark looks like a Hall of fame
 * All other problematic pages should be deleted.
 * Examples: User: HEY I'M SUING THIS USER

Potentially harmful user pages
If a username or userpage can cause harm to someone, delete it. A users phone number, address, real name, age, or other personal information in a username or on another users page without the users permission can endanger that user. This does not just include information of Administrators, although they are a common target for this sort of attack. Usernames and userpages containing statements of Libel or Legal Threats are against policy and should be deleted on sight.

Attack Pages
See The Wikipedia Policy on Attack Pages, as this section is already Wikipedia Policy.

Sock puppet pages
"Sock puppet pages are kept for tracking purposes; they provide information useful to countering them, such as patterns and recent activity. This does not apply to most blocked users, and there is precedent for deleting sock puppet pages once the vandal becomes inactive." -- Pathoschild

"We don't need to build shrines for vandals, we don't need to recognise their impact to the point where we label each and every their brand new sock with "look! it's really HIM!". We don't need to feed vandals' vanity by stating that every wannabe pagemove vandal may be them. We don't need to state that Grawp is banned - we simply don't need it to block his socks on sight. And finally, we don't need to turn him into Willy on Wheels The Second - what's next, grawp expanding to like it was before with wow and numerous userboxen like "this user hates Willy"? Gosh, we can live with just one concise long-term abuse report." -- MaxSem

Sock puppet pages are like a hall of fame to a sockpuppeteer. While sock puppet pages are currently kept for "tracking purposes"; this may in fact be Feeding the puppeteer, while making a centralized page on the puppeteer makes "tracking" much less like a "hall of fame".

If all Sock Puppets are the same person, why keep multiple, and in some cases dozens. Grawp, the infamous HAGGER??!?!?!????! vandal, had His userpage and sockpuppet categories deleted.

Why keep User:Also, WIKIPEDIA IS COMMUNISM and not User:Almostcrime?

Exceptions to Sockpuppet Pages

 * When a high-profile user turns out to be a sockpuppet, e.g. Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-09-15/Poetlister

All other problematic user pages
"I've proposed a few times that we shouldn't be deleting the pages unless they are problematic. There are a lot of very good reasons to keep them, such as reviewing the situation behind the blocks by non-admins." -- Ned Scott