Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Johnsirett/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. Salvio giuliano 20:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Johnsirett/sandbox

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Delete per WP:COPIES. Old clone of List of video games considered the best as it appeared around that time, that has been inactive for numerous years. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:07, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Do not delete, but blank. This is a sandbox, and editors are allowed to have sandboxes in their userspace. You made no attempts to reach out to the user to ask them to clear their sandbox. Dragging them here to MfD when blanking is the standard practice wastes everybody's time. --⛵ WaltClipper - (talk)  14:15, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep (blank). It isn't necessary to apply deletion to WP:COPYWITHIN-problematic userspace pages. Users should not perform such unattributed copying to their sandbox, but if the revisions lacking attribution (and attribution may be provided after the fact) stay in the page's history, it is not a problem of such magnitude that multiple editors need to discuss it for seven days. /edit: switch to delete; I was not opposed to deletion per se but my belief was that this isn't something that merits a full MfD; WP:COPIES advises users who copy content to their articles to request deletion when they're done...and when they don't do so? MfD? There's a theoretical attribution hazard, so sure, why not... Best to treat such cases uniformly/—Alalch E. 14:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:COPIES, in favour of List of video games considered the best. Content forking should be moderately discouraged, and old content forks are more of an attribution hazard than any value in historical record of whatever the user was thinking of doing, but did not do. SmokeyJoe (talk) 18:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete as a fake article, a content fork, and an attribution hazard. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - Restoring the blanking so that MFD participants can see what they are !voting on without having to search the history. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete as an obvious violation of WP:FAKEARTICLE and WP:COPIES. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 06:00, 8 April 2023 (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.