Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:United States/Selected panorama/18


 * 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 (speedy) - textbook G5 B (talk) 21:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Portal:United States/Selected panorama/18
Page was created by community-banned editor ABQStyle aka PoliticianTexas in defiance of his ban. See Banning_policy, which allows such pages to be speedily deleted under CSD G5. Speedy deletion was proposed and was declined. -- Uncia (talk) 17:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: See my comment under Portal:United States/Selected panorama/17. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per BannedMeansBanned, db-g5, and WP:DENY. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I believe the use of BannedMeansBanned (while admittedly a 'hard-knock' policy) in this context needs justification, rather than just referencing. The user was banned (upon what I must admit is a cursory inspection) for copyright infringement.  Why should we be so heavy-handed in this situation, which is apparently unrelated to copyright infringement?  I believe WP:Deny is rather inappropriate also, see my response to  Portal:United States/Selected panorama/17. 66.183.69.201 (talk) 02:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Response to comment: That would be incorrect—while he was originally blocked for copyright violations, he was banned for sockpuppetry. And so long as his edits as a sockpuppet stay in Wikipedia, he has motivation to come back and do more of them.
 * As for your comment about "due to the previously established character of this editor, we cannot afford to show him on any occasion that edits by him are acceptable"—that was all covered in previous discussions about this guy. By definition (as I understand it, at least), this is exactly what banning someone means. Consequently, we can say "he's banned, so let's toss the edits out" and everyone should understand that that's shorthand for what you wrote above. And if there's any disagreement about that, the discussion to have is about overturning the ban, not over each edit by edit !vote.
 * If you have a few hours you want to kill doing something completely unproductive, you can find all the history of this editor linked from this page. However, I'll warn you: I've already wasted those hours and don't think it was worth it, so I can't recommend it as either entertaining or educational. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Another response to comment: A community ban is an extreme measure and is only used in extreme cases. PoliticianTexas is such a case. A community ban is different from, and much more serious than, a block. If you are not familiar with bans, please read WP:BAN. Note in particular that it states that bans are applied to "editors who have exhausted the community's patience" and that "By banning a user, the community has decided that their edits are prima facie unwanted and may be reverted without any further reason." You may also want to read the discussion that resulted in this ban. --Uncia (talk) 13:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.