Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Davidt8/2

 __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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:11, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

User:Davidt8/2


February 2010 WP:FAKEARTICLE of Bob Casey, Jr.. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Information is now editing under the name  (see Commons:User:Davidt8).  If he chimes in, his wishes should be respected.  Otherwise, either Courtesy blank or delete but notify the editor that he can get a WP:REFUND at any time.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  21:15, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Followup comment I have not verified that the two accounts are connected, I just took the Commons's editor's word for it. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  21:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * See also: sub-pages of User_talk:Davidt8. If these go to MfD, my recommendation is the same as above:  Since the editor is active, respect his wishes (the only "mandatory" thing would be to mark them as no-index but only if they were causing problems in search engines) or if he has no particular wish, courtesy-blank or delete them without prejudice for a refund.  Disclaimer I have a boatload of old pages probably including a few stale drafts in my user-space. As an active editor, I would take (very mild) offense if the stale drafts were deleted outright.  However, if they were summarily "noindexed" I would have no problem with that, and if they were "courtesy blanked" with notification and with the understanding that I had the "blanking editor"'s blessing to revert his edit, that would be fine as well. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  21:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I checked whether the editor was active and they weren't under this account. The notice goes on the editor's talk page. If the editor changed names, the normal implementation is a redirect to the current user talk page and movement of subpages. If the subpages weren't done, we can move them and move on. Even then, we don't normally allow for long-term storage of copies of current articles active user or not, in particular I'd be concerned about a long-term duplicate of a BLP article on a current US senator. Per WP:UP, drafts are intended to be temporary and either the edits were moved into the article or they weren't after four years. The other pages we can deal with later. If you support blanking, fine, but I think deleting these are better as I've had to chase down and re-blanking and push to delete some users who do want to keep their preferred versions up for whatever reason. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:02, 7 November 2015 (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.