Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cookie8191


 * 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 debate was Page blanked and user blocked.  Syn  ergy 11:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Cookie8191
This userpage is a reproduction of List of Rugrats episodes with sections from the main Rugrats article added. The userpage is how the articles would look if they were vandalised. I've encountered similer pages before that were used for copy and paste vandalism. Now, this user has had all his edits reverted, but not for vandalism EDIT: Actually all his edits have been vandalism! This one was obvious! . I'm not suggesting this user is going to start vandalising. This page could only be served to vandalise them articles. And any vandals that find this userpage could also use it for copy and paste vandalism. I strongly believe that WP:DENY could be brought into play here. Finally, I requested the user blank the page and/or change it significantly via their talk page, but he actively chose to ignore my request. John Sloan (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Potential for copy-paste vandalism. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per TenPoundHammer. It screams potential vandalism. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  18:51, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not following you guys here... This seems to be nothing more than a sandbox, and I see no evidence that this is a copy of vandalism. The user does not appear to be making any vandalism edits. Poor edits? newbie edits? Maybe, but not vandalism. Several older versions of the page also appear to be nothing more than typical sandbox use . I see no issue here whatsoever. -- Ned Scott 07:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. User is now indef blocked for vandalism - rather moots the question of what they might do with the page. bd2412  T 07:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Move to User:Cookie8191/sandbox and blank. No reason to hide the contributions.   --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keeping the page's history would still allow him (as an IP) to do copy and paste vandalism. John Sloan (talk) 10:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * - upon seeing the discussion here, I looked into the allegation by the nom that all his edits have been vandalism and finding this true, blocked the user as pointed out by bd2412.  Following standard procedure, I have now blanked the userpage and tagged it with indefblocked.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 11:12, 18 August 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.