Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cjneversleeps/Corrections.com (2nd nomination)




 * 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. There is no specific time limit, but userfication is not an unlimited opportunity to retain previous speedy-deleted material without any changes. In the previous MFD for this page, the successful Keep arguments were mostly based on giving the user time to update it. The current Delete argument that 22 months is long enough is persuasive. RL0919 (talk) 18:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Cjneversleeps/Corrections.com
Page about a website with no secondary third party sources. It was userfied for improvements but the editor stopped editing shortly after that, in March 2008, and the article was never improved. Still no sources. Prod tag was rejected on grounds that it was a userspace page and said to send to mfd. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Hasn't been edited in over a year.  Triplestop  x3  20:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Since the user is active, what is the his/her position on this? PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 00:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC) Looked at wrong user's contribs
 * Delete as User:Cjneversleeps is inactive since 2008. PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 00:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Amazingly enough, users have returned after such a hiatus, so the issue is whether the page should be deleted, and has very little to do with the editor being absent a year. The page is suitable for userspace, hence has no actual reason for deletion (I find no rule at all suggesting that absence for any specified period is a reason for deleting userpages).  Nor is userspace required to have "reliable sources" or the like.  In short, absent a reason grounded in guideline or policy for deletion, default to Keep. Collect (talk) 00:39, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Inactive user, and it can be recreated/undeleted if the user comes back and wants it.--MrRadioGuy P T C E 02:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete for now. We don't keep these things indefinitely; if user comes back we can undelete.  -- Thin  boy  00  @072, i.e. 00:43, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't delete, as there are no time limits, and we don't want this user to feel unwelcome when he returns, but do blank as work in progress during a period of activity. When the user returns, he is free to continue his work at his own pace, and should not have to seek permission to have his work undeleted.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as abandoned userspace draft, or Incubate if anyone has any reason to believe the community might fix it up (unlikely). Miami33139 (talk) 10:56, 9 January 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.