Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ed Poor/FM


 * 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  Deleted by USer:BD2412 after author request (G7). Eluchil404 (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Ed Poor/FM
Attack page on specific user, not in use for as preparation for a RfC. -- Tim Vickers (talk) 18:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; seems moot now that he's been desysopped, anyway. *Dan T.* (talk) 18:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Why not just ask Ed first? bd2412  T 19:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I notified him as suggested, and he is welcome to comment here and at Miscellany for deletion/Ed Poor subpages. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep There is, as far as I know, no time limit on maintaining material, in another discussion, three years was determined not to be "too long." Long-term editor, seems the benefit of the doubt should apply even more here. Collect (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as an attack page - it's not as though he's going to be able to use this now for some sort of action against FM in any case. dougweller (talk) 21:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Three years would certainly be too long to keep a page like this. A week or two, while actively gathering evidence for an RFC or RFAR, would be acceptable. This page hasn't been edited in over two years. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 00:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete: "list of everything bad that some user ever did" WP:Attack page. HrafnTalkStalk 09:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete attack page on a specific user, would be acceptable as preparation for some sort of dispute resolution but not for archiving for two years. Hut 8.5 16:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; not being used to prepare and RFC, looks like an attack page. Guettarda (talk) 20:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Delete, I would have speedied this attack page had I known of it; still would have had Collect for some unstated reason decided it was worth keeping. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Tim, Will and Dan. I'm all for allowing users to build an RFC or arbitration statement in their userspace but only in a reasonable period of time and then it needs to either be filed at WP:RFC/USER or WP:RFARB or moved to their own hard drive or somewhere else other than leaving it sitting in userspace indefinitely. You can't just leave it sitting around here for two years without any sign of planning to actually do something with it. And as Dan says, it's all rather moot now that circumstances have changed rather drastically since this page was created and there would no longer seem to be any potential usefulness of it remaining here on Wikipedia. Sarah 11:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unacceptable to have this sitting around for this long. Risker (talk) 01:04, 2 January 2009 (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.