Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cheverny


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 12:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Cheverny
Page is being used as a graveyard for deleted articles. Whenever one of his articles (which range in quality from non-notable singles to poorly sourced rumors to hoaxes, although I believe he is generally fooled by the hoaxes rather than originating them) is deleted, it winds up here on his userpage. This isn't userfying to improve the articles, but userfying to defy deletion. -- &mdash;Kww(talk) 02:06, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Also User:Cheverny/Chesaigne- User Chevergne


 * Keep As moot since the user deleted the material being cited. Seems that just asking for deletion of the material would have worked. Collect (talk) 02:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Look at his "My Outrage" section on his talk page, and you will understand why that didn't seem promising. I reverted the blanking as well, as it contradicts the MFD instructions.&mdash;Kww(talk) 02:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I had thought the "no blanking" rule was associated with the added caveat not to remove the notice. "Blanking," as a specific act, removes the notice. The notice definitely invites the user to "edit" the page, after all.  I would not have said that removal of the material objected to was in contradiction of the MfD instructions as they are written.  Can anyone point to a discussion about the difference between "blanking" and "removal of material without removing any notices"? WP:GD does not seem to bar the deletion of objected-to material Thanks! Collect (talk) 14:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I grant that I may be misinterpreting things. If I am, I'll happily revert my restoration.&mdash;Kww(talk) 15:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete userfying to defy deletion, indeed. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Go ahead and delete it. I don't have the time, nobody cares, so delete it because I said I DON'T WANT TO BE A PART OF WIKIPEDIA ANYMORE. --Cheverny (talk) 00:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - userfying content is not supposed to be a way to evade deletion indefinitely. If he's not working on this material, it shouldn't be in his userspace - and there's no need to keep the content here to 'save' it, as in the unlikely event that the articles get undeleted, the content can always be restored. Terraxos (talk) 16:30, 15 December 2008 (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.