Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dantheu2man/The Odd Subpage/may/pages/lucky/pages/off/will/clicking/closer/soon/Wikipedians

 __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 all. Courcelles 01:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Dantheu2man/The Odd Subpage/may/pages/lucky/pages/off/will/clicking/closer/soon/Wikipedians
The following pages are included in this nomination:

The arguments for deleting secret pages are summarized in the essay Why secret pages should be deleted. WP:UP states that examples of unrelated content to writing an encyclopedia are "Games, roleplaying sessions, secret pages and other things pertaining to "entertainment" rather than "writing an encyclopedia". Such activities are generally frowned upon by the community. Facetious games of no educational value relevant to the project are routinely deleted at MfD." WP:NOTMYSPACE states that "[t]he focus of user pages should not be social networking or amusement, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration." To the creator: in a July/August 2010 policy discussion (at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Archive 34), community consensus was that the policy What Wikipedia is not does prohibit secret pages. The deletion of this page is not a reflection on you; instead, it is a reflection of the changing community consensus that secret pages set an inappropriate ethos at Wikipedia. In that policy discussion, I wrote here about why all secret pages should be treated equally; whether a user social networks or does not social network on Wikipedia has no bearing on the fact that all secret pages should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 04:37, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete All - Normally I would argue with you, Cunard, that policy does not absolutely prohibit secret pages, but this collection is so over the top that I'm not going to waste time doing so in this case, and in this MfD. This is well past any leeway given to otherwise productive and established editors and serves no useful purpose per any of my previous arguments elsewhere. Therefore delete all per WP:UP. — Becksguy (talk) 05:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:NOT and WP:UP. Wow. As pointed out, what's here is well beyond the exceptions given for established editors. MER-C 08:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Ugh. &mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 13:28, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Wow. Is a rationale really necessary?  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 18:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Also delete strong mouse and any other subpages of The "Odd Subpage" that may have slipped through Cunard's listing. &mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 22:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I would let a simple hidden page slide, but this is too much - it's basically a full game. Netalarm talk 04:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a rather ridiculous amount of pages. I'm not particularly opposed to secret pages on Wikipedia, but this is taking it too far. Nomader  ( Talk ) 04:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete -this is way too far. -- Cycl o pia talk  21:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all Incredible... this must be the bottom of the slippery slope everyone always talks about.VictorianMutant (talk) 02:56, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete the whole bunch per WP:UP. It has already been pointed out multiple times, but this is just too much to turn a blind eye. Salvio  Let's talk 'bout it! 23:44, 18 September 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.