Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Government office for Science


 * 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 Speedy delete by Fritzpoll as user request at User:Munch922 after unblock and rename. Tikiwont (talk) 10:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Government office for Science
Obvious article and even more obvious COI/role account. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete User space is not for maintaining content forks. The material is minimally cleaned-up from some official blurb, unpublished as far as I can find, which raises strong suggestion of some insider relationship to the subject. Discussion ongoing at WP:COIN. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * delete: Probably a draft of Government Office for Science created by the same user. Normally I would educate the user and encourage him to put it up for deletion himself, but this account has been blocked. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  01:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep COI is not an absolute prohibition against editing, and the putative user is now unable to defend his position.  Moreover he responded to a query about any COI, and asked for advice from another editor about any areas of concern un the article.  The particular instance appears to be related to the British Government, and not to a private corporation, and thus does not appear to be an area where contentious issues are apt to arise, hence in an area where COI edits are not barred.  I would hope, for example, that articles on NASA projects have NASA-related editors. Collect (talk) 11:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Government entities don't get a free pass on COI or any other of our principles; and heaven knows governments are prone to spin-doctoring and spamminess (I'll forebear any ethnically-biased remarks about the English Crown and truth). Any useful information here should be in the actual article, not on a userpage of a role account. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Government Office for Science, or delete. Stifle (talk) 12:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge any non-redundant content to Government Office for Science, and delete. Note that the user has now been indefinitely blocked, so are unlikely to have any further use for this page. Terraxos (talk) 20:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * User has been unblocked and renamed. Content is now at User:Munch922. Since the user also created Government Office for Science, I see little benefit of keeping a separate version around. If it isn't deleted, it can be simply replaced by a user page header.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:54, 14 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.