Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Blocked user

 __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 Keep. — xaosflux  Talk 03:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Blocked user


Hoax page created by IP Leaky  Caldron  12:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The user is blocked. It's hard to see anything out of the ordinary here. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:33, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't reporting something "out of the ordinary". I was reporting a simple fact. Jeez, precious or what?! Get on with it mate, you obviously don't want anyone helping in your special area. Leaky  Caldron  12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What a strange reaction. And there I was thinking you had made a mistake by suggesting this page is a hoax, and was created by an IP, and is something for which there's a deletion rationale. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose Deletion. This user page, along with User:Place holder, User:Example, User:Example2 and User:Example3, are used as examples on various help pages and in discussions. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as no valid reason for deletion is given (the nomination is completely wrong in every important aspect) and none is obvious. Leaky, I think you made a mistake here, nobody else can see what you are claiming to see in your nomination, suggest just withdrawing it. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The MFD was made IN GOOD FAITH, following the addition of the Talk Page with a Block Tag 12 years late. Maybe hoax was an incorrect rationale and maybe there is no rationale. My mistake doesn't warrant piss taking by zzuuuzzz. Leaky  Caldron  20:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My first comment was a cordial invitation for you to consider whether you'd made a mistake which could be quickly cleared up, and didn't warrant the response it received. I suggest this gets speedy closed. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could have "cordially" pointed out what was wrong - instead of trying to be "smart". Leaky  Caldron  21:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I will make a note to point out each and every error in some detail in the future. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2016 (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.