Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Angieskidney

 __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  Blanked. --RL0919 (talk) 02:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Angieskidney
Absent user. Normally this would go to another venue however in 2006 this user created their account, made this slightly spammy user page for their website of the same name, and than left. (They also uploaded File:AK-Title4site.gif). Not only has the user not made any other contributions, the website is no longer in use - it is now one of those generic domains that has links to like domains. I would say to block the user name as a violation of Username policy - Company/group names, however it isn't an active user. Soundvisions1 (talk) 03:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Blank If the problem is the expired domain. Otherwise - violates nothing.  This prevents a new user from using the name and harms nothing.   Claiming it is a "group" at this point is not going to help the project. Collect (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Blank I have declined to block the user as there is no recent activity for years. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply: I guess I am not being clear - I am sorry for the confusion. I did not make any formal request to block the user as they have not been active in years, I simply pointed out that I would have had they been active but as they aren't active it is a null issue. The expired domain is not a violation, that is not why I made the nom, I made the nom because it was/is a single purpose account. I was going to simply blank the page but figured I would put it out here for discussion in case anyone wanted to do more than blank the page. Again, sorry of my nom was not clear. Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have blanked this page. If it contained violations of WP:FAKEARTICLE, the page should be deleted, but since it does not, blanking is an acceptable remedy. Cunard (talk) 07:36, 24 October 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.