Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GXXF

 __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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 20:29, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

User:GXXF


The user is indefinitely blocked for vandalizing talk and user pages, but even before then I argued on WP:ANI he was WP:NOTHERE based on his extremely few, largely worthless, often reverted article contribs. Take a look at his userpage, and you'll see this was where the bulk of his effort went, and it violates WP:NOTWEBHOST in spirit, if not the letter. I originally just replaced it with a template, but was reverted for no reason by an administrator. Because it's so great? Because it goes miles to build an encyclopedia to see a Chrome symbol, see that the user is in school, and is a Wikipedian [ dubious – discuss] and wants to be an admin this month? Ribbet32 (talk) 01:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Replace with transclusion of indefblockeduser. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 03:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't see any reason to delete the page or put a banner that says the user is blocked. There is nothing wrong with the page.  - GB fan 15:25, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Because we're not a webhost and we deny recognition. Why indulge these people? Ribbet32 (talk) 18:33, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think completely ignoring them after their block counts as "indulging" them. If anything, holding a discussion about whether their userpage should be deleted and hashing over their antics after they are gone is indulging. A2soup (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ribbet, you are the one who is drawing attention to them, not denying them. Everything you have done, the initial replacement of their user page with the blocked template and then this all bring attention to them. - GB fan 23:57, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Shullbit. A single action of replacing an elaborate userpage with a generic template would have attracted zero attention. You're the one who drew it out by reverting out of a misguided impulse to defend a blocked vandal. Ribbet32 (talk) 18:15, 20 January 2017 (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.