Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Digwuren/Denial of Soviet crimes

 __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, can be undeleted upon request. kelapstick(bainuu) 14:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Digwuren/Denial of Soviet crimes


Abandoned draft by a long gone user. All material is basically a collection of disparate facts which is already in the corresponding articles. I.e. in the currents state it is WP:SYNTH. -M.Altenmann >t 08:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Is too good to delete.  It is a valid subject of history.  It does not contain any NPOV violation, POLEMICs, and the alleged WP:SYNTH I don't agree with.  It is sourced.  It is closely related to the article Historiography in the Soviet Union, but expands on it.  A prime example is Denial of the Holodomor.  At worst, blank with Inactive userpage blanked, but this is not the sort of shallow & brief AFC cruft that should be deleted just for being old.  History topics, especially, should never be deleted for being old.  I think Talk:Historiography in the Soviet Union should be notified, as well as the WikiProjects tagging that page.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:10, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You say "prime example is Denial of the Holodomor". So what? it is a full-blown article in itself. My point is that the current article has no additional value, rehashing what has already been said in wikipedia in greater detail. "WP:SYNTH" I meant that the page simply puts mechanically together a bunch of various topics. If decided that such an article is necessary for wikipedia, it may be just as mechanically cooked from the individual ones. -M.Altenmann >t 06:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That is the sort of thing that userspace is for. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete due to special circumstances: In 2009, the editor was banned for one year and topic-banned for an additional year.  He hasn't returned under this account since.  Since Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe/Evidence links to this page ("Their first article, which has been preserved on Digwuren's userspace was in fact deleted for POV issues") and since this page falls under Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe, I recommend logging this MfD somewhere relevant if the page is deleted.  I don't know where the best place to log it would be, but I trust that the closing admin will figure it out.  But for the special circumstances I would say either "keep" or "courtesy blank and lock, but leave edit history." davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  03:14, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * These special circumstances do matter. I didn't notice that the user has not returned since being temporarily banned.  Noting that the WP:SYNTH concerns means that the value of the page is probably restricted to its author, I would support soft deletion, that is, delete, but allow for undeletion should the user return to productivity and request undeletion.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It is possible that he has returned under a different name. He was and probably still is under a "limit 1 account, tell ARBCOM which account you will use before you resume editing" restriction. I haven't seen any specific indication that he has returned under a different name, I'm just saying it is possible.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  04:05, 27 July 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.