Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DrFleischman/sandbox

 __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. Should the content be required for a future dispute resolution a revision can be temporarily restored by any uninvolved admin, but the page should be blanked. Deletion is without prejudice for recreation of the page for standard sandbox usage. — xaosflux  Talk  02:28, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

User:DrFleischman/sandbox


Per WP:UP, this collection of diffs relating to Petrarchan47 should be deleted. Petrarchan47 has repeatedly (and politely) requested deletion from DrFleischman since February 2014. DrFleischman has been inactive for months at a time but checks in and reads the requests without taking action. More recent diffs include another polite request for deletion on March 14, May 8, yet another on May 9, and a notice from myself on May 10 politely reminding the user of the user page guidelines and giving them information about how to go about requesting deletion of the disputed sandbox page. DrFleischman initially complied with the request by blanking the page on February 5, but restored it a month later where it has grown to its current size. In response to these requests in March, DrFleischman told Petrarchan47, "I'm preparing an WP:RFC/U to address our ongoing issues. It's taking some time because I've been having connectivity problems lately. This is not harassment; it's a good faith attempt to resolve our problems." Since March, DrFleischman has not responded to repeated requests for deletion. Given that DrFleischman has not been active on Wikipedia since March (except to participate in a recent ANI discussion about another editor) and that Petrarchan47 feels she is being attacked and harassed, it appears that the "timely manner" of compiling diffs for dispute resolution has passed. Viriditas (talk) 10:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Clear POLEMIC. Compiling a list of diffs/links relating to other editors is creepy and is not permitted unless preparing for a report at a noticeboard soon. Johnuniq (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, more than ample time has been given to use these in a relevant manner. Thargor Orlando (talk) 12:29, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete for of all the above obvious reasons. Rather than feeling attacked or harassed, I think "trolled" is a better descriptor.   petrarchan47  t  c   09:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Records negative about other editors kept on public display has a strong negative effect.  Keep these records by all means, if you must, but keep them offsite, and private.  You can only bring them back up again if engaged in some form of dispute resolution.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:29, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Today he returned to delete most of the content, but retained one section containing a diff that points to more comments about me such as, "Petrarchan, you've been around long enough to know what your DR options are. Canvassing is not one of them." thereby leaving a little hint that I have been canvassing. He also includes a warning: "She can talk to you all she want, but it will lead to bad things for her, and possibly for you as well if you continue to keep your head in the sand and distort policies and guidelines like this. Please wake up Bink, and consider what you have to lose (beyond my rapidly dwindling goodwill)."
 * I would ask that the entire page be deleted.   petrarchan47  t  c   05:36, 21 May 2014 (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.