Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:184.59.23.225

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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 no consensus. harej 02:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

User:184.59.23.225
Not an actual user page - created by an IP user who has apparently since moved on. Kelly hi! 06:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose deletion. It was/is a real page created by a user who showed an extremely high level of sophistication, yet denied other identities. I think he or she is either a banned user or currently operates one or more sockpuppet accounts, perhaps as an administrator, and that this page should remain for future reference if needed. There are other IP talk pages, keeping this one won't hurt anything. If someone else latches on to this IP and edits WP under it for a while, they can always edit the user and talk pages to indicate they are not the same person as the November 2010 tenditious  mystery person.-KeptSouth (talk) 23:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The reason why why I think the user is a sysop or frequent and very experienced editor is found in the user's edit history - for example the first edit the user made had this ES: "that's not a link to another page, it's a local anchor." The user then made a trip to the Reliable sources noticeboard, and within a day or two of his or her first edit - asked a question of a candidate for Arbcom. Therefore I think all traces of this user should remain, including his user page -- besides which keeping the page is harmless. -KeptSouth (talk) 00:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's possible to become a very experienced editor without having an account, you know. Uncle G (talk) 05:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, anything is possible. But in reality, what this editor evidenced is very high level of expertise, denial of other accounts or identities, arguably tendentious editing, filing unsubstantiated complaints -- basically working the system in ways that are contrary to the spirit and purpose of the Wikipedia project. Whether he/she actually and usually edits as an admin, a registered user or an IP user or whether he/she is a banned user is irrelevant to my opposition. My point is that no traces of this user should be obliterated. No harm is done by keeping the page. Removing the page may hinder later justified attempts to put this person on the right path or to ban him/her from editing under sockpuppet or other accounts. -Regards-KeptSouth (talk) 07:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Userpages for anonymous users who have edited do not qualify for WP:CSD speedy delete Nonexistent user. 184.59.23.225 is a computer's address and not the name of a Wikipedia registered user. Internet Protocol addresses are assigned to a host either anew at the time of booting, or permanently by fixed configuration of its hardware or software. Persistent configuration is also known as using a static IP address. In contrast, in situations when the computer's IP address is assigned newly each time, this is known as using a dynamic IP address. As a computer address, IP 184.59.23.225 can be assigned to more than one person. User pages speaks of a user page in the context of assignment to one person. Since there is nothing to indicate that 184.59.23.225 is restricted to a single person -- to a single Wikipedian--, the User:184.59.23.225 user page runs afowl of WP:UP. Delete. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 08:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: The first 4 sentences are merely an primer on what is an IP address, static vs. dynamic. The only reason given is in the last 2 sentences: "Wikipedia:User pages speaks of a user page in the context of assignment to one person," therefore the "user page runs afowl of WP:UP" I agree that is an inference that can be made, but it is a rather weak one, and it is outweighed by the policy reasons I have discussed above which include the ability of the community to police system gamers. In the future, this user page could provide some indicator of the true identity of the user, who as I have remarked, has some issues. Or maybe there will be no problem in the future, but there should be no haste to delete this particular page. WP:UP also does not solely contemplate single users contrary to Uzma's assertion, and it provides specifically for blanking the page in an instance such as this one:"Blanking user and user talk pages (i.e. overwriting with a blank page) is always acceptable provided non-removable notices (if any) are left intact." We should blank the page, not delete it. -Regards-KeptSouth (talk) 11:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * One more comment on this request to delete - There is nothing that affirmatively indicates that the user has disappeared or has lost the IP address. He/she made about 100 edits ending in late November, but that is not even one month ago.-KeptSouth (talk) 11:50, 16 December 2010 (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.