Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Frei Hans/Telepathy and war in popular culture


 * 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. — Aitias // discussion  00:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Frei Hans/Telepathy and war in popular culture

 * nb: the pop-culture one was CSD G1'd del-log


 * also up for deletion: User:Frei Hans/Telepathy and war

These pages were created by a now indefinitely blocked user. There is no reason to keep them. —  Dæ dαlus Contribs  02:31, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is process for its own sake, but might as well indulge. --Calton | Talk 02:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - with reservations. The user in question appears to have mental issues, and I am concerned that a) he isn't likely to stay away anyway, and b) will take this as further evidence that his apparent paranoia is justified. I think the best course in this case may well be for an admin to email him the full text of these pages with a note explaining that the sole reason for deletion is that they are not within the purview of Wikipedia, and then delete. → ROUX   ₪  02:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Roux. Brangifer (talk) 02:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete — The pop culture one could be CSD.G1 as patent nonsense as there nothing but the page title there and nothing useful in the history either. The other is a copypasta of some rev of the deleted article and should be deleted as such. I have no objection to someone emailing Frei Hans and copy of this; hell, send several versions. We are being trolled; "end the "sufferaging" [sic] now. Cheers, Jack Merridew 05:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I seriously doubt we are being trolled. Please read this. → ROUX   ₪  07:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've certainly considered that realm, but we really can't tell from what we can see. You might ping a professional but I would expect much the same from him as I've said and also a disinclination to opine much on-wiki. If he socks with this theme, it will be rather obvious. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:29, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Indefinite blocks are not infinite blocks. While there is no value in keeping these pages, deleting them seems a bit pointless. pablo hablo. 07:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. User may currently be indef'd, but they have been insistent on these articles.  Perhaps, somehow, when they come back they can properly turn them into articles.  If they create a new account (which would be bad, I know), the root of their work will still be accessible to them. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 12:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Harmless as a user page. The drama happened when it was an article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at the deleted content, this was not nonsense, but a plan for a new article. It is not a big loss, but was probably unnecessary to delete it.  I declined a speedy delete G6 earlier, because there was no reason given why this was non controversial. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not storage depot for the unwanted. If he needs a copy, mail one to him.--Calton | Talk 01:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: I know one has been speedied, but I'm with [User:Roux| ROUX ]] on this - my opinion is that we witnessed someone suffer a psychotic break, the start of which coincided with the deletion of ASIO file. He may come back, in the meantime, there's no need to shuffle this page off with such tearing haste.Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not therapy. If he needs a copy, mail one to him.--Calton | Talk 01:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I deleted the pop culture article as there really wasn't anything of any use on the page. I won't object if another admin chooses to restore it though. I don't care whether the other userpage stays or goes. However, I think it's highly inappropriate for any of us to speculate about the mental health of another editor. I'd encourage everyone to stick to simply discussing whether or not the userpages are appropriate as part of the project. Papa November (talk) 00:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Undelete on request if the user is unblocked.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:20, 15 July 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.