Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BigzMMA/sandbox

 __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 delete. JohnCD (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

User:BigzMMA/sandbox


Page of recently indef blocked user. Existed as a backup location of articles that were deleted or in the process of deletion so as to save them for future creation Hasteur (talk) 17:11, 29 March 2012 (UTC) Hasteur, are you saying that everything on this page has been deleted by process from article space? --Dweller (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - I see no reason to delete these potential drafts; indefinite block does not mean infinite block. Achowat (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC) see below comments Achowat (talk) 12:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have, however, removed the non-free content from the sandbox, as it is inappropriate for User Space. Achowat (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It has not been. See BAMMA 8, for instance. Achowat (talk) 18:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. Does all the material either fall into properly deleted articles / articles currently under consideration for deletion? --Dweller (talk) 18:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it appears that all of the material exists as moderately accurate facsimiles of live Articles not-currently-under-discussion. Achowat (talk) 18:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What I'm saying is that the user appeared to create these as backstops so that they could be restored as is in the future, a potential CSD:G4 line. Based on the file that all 3 articles were (at one point at AfD) the way that the user edited this page (by updating it after they updated the existing article) seems to suggest this type of usage. Hasteur (talk) 23:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as unattributed backup copies of either current or deleted articles. Mt  king  (edits)  19:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note : I have updated Moonriddengirl on the existence of this MfD as I had, prior to it starting asked for her comments on the page. Mt  king  (edits)  19:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Inquiry - in your comments on Moodriddengirl's talk, you mentioned a potential copyvio; do you have any other information on this? Achowat (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * if it is as I think an unattributed copy of a WP article it would be a breach of the CC-BY-SA licence and thus a copyvio. Mt  king  (edits)  19:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's hosted on Wikipedia. I really, really doubt their are attribution issues. Achowat (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I suspect there is an issue and that's why I asked Moodriddengirl for her input. Mt  king  (edits)  20:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Mtking is correct that the copying into the sandbox violates WP:Copying within Wikipedia. These issues (I call them "technical" violations) are usually not treated like copyvios of external sources because they can be fixed on Wikipedia. Flatscan (talk) 04:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm with User:Flatscan here. But note that legally, they may not just be technical violations; any use of freely licensed content in a manner that is inconsistent with the license may be treated by a court just as seriously as use of material that has no free license. A legal license is the author's way of saying, "You can use it if you do this..." If you use it without doing "this" (whatever it is), you have no permission. (I know Flatscan knows this; this is a general explanation for others. :)) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete this collection of unattributed copies; use the original articles (BAMMA 8, BAMMA 9, SFL 1, SFL 2) if desired. It is possible to repair the sandbox to conform with WP:Copying within Wikipedia, but the standard method requires restoring any deleted articles anyway. I examined BAMMA 8 on |the talk page. Disclosure: I came here from User talk:Moonriddengirl and saw WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive233. Flatscan (talk) 04:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Not worth fixing for the sandbox of an indef'ed user, if and when he comes back and requests the un-delete then fix the issue. Mt  king  (edits)  05:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I tagged it with Copying within Wikipedia so that it will be picked up by a maintenance category if/when it is restored. Flatscan (talk) 04:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete until and unless user successfully negotiates an unblock. If a user in good standing desires to work on any deleted articles in the good faith belief that they can be brought in line with policies, they should be moved for incubation or userfied. But we can't host them in this person's user space without proper attribution, and there is no good reason to move the articles from where they currently rest if he is not going to return to work on them. Where they are now, they will be more easily accessible if somebody who is an editor in good standing needs them for further development. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Moonriddengirl and WP:CWW (and excellent read, btw, thanks Flatscan.) Achowat (talk) 12:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hasteur noted that BigzMMA copied a portion of his sandbox to 2012 in Super Fight League . Hasteur and TreyGeek have reworked the article, but it probably needs some attribution pointing to the original SFL 1 and SFL 2 articles. Flatscan (talk) 04:44, 2 April 2012 (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.