Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Deeceevoice


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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The result of the debate was withdrawn by nominator. — Animum ''' |  talk ]] 17:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Deeceevoice
Inactive user; page is just used to rant about a block Deeceevoice perceives as unfair, posting links to some activist websites pertaining to contentious real-life issues, and some personal attacks against another user. — Animum ''' |  talk ]] 17:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Yes, the page is mostly a rant, and yes, it's loud and obnoxious. But except for the part about the personal attacks, this nomination is without merit. Deeceevoice is still active (but not as much as in the past), and his (her?) user page isn't all that offensive. Nominating it is a slap in the face to him, especially when he's done quite a bit of good work in the past. As far as personal attacks - I'm assuming this is a reference ot the page's discussion about Stlbach - it might be worth getting rid of those, but I'd like to hear from Deeceevoice first. Asking him on his talk page to delete it prior to make this nomination would have been a much less, well, dickish way of doing it. Raul654 17:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Must've been a twinkle malfunction; I'll alert Deeceevoice. — Animum ''' |  talk ]] 17:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Leave it alone. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 17:46, 30 September 2007 (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.