Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Joseroyal/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:  Keep (non-admin closure) WaltCip (talk) 15:04, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

User:Joseroyal/sandbox

 * – (View MfD)

used as communal free webspace The Banner  talk 09:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Not seeing what nom sees; this is either (a) the workings of an article, probably a list article, or (b) testing, which is what sandboxes are for. Doug Mehus T · C  15:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Reasonable content. ——  SN  54129  17:05, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - This user has 18k edits. Is there any ambiguity about whether they're here to build an encyclopedia? I have no trouble seeing this as related to their efforts to do so. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 18:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per User:Dmehus. Not sure what nominator thinks is wrong, but this is a draft article in a sandbox.  It will probably be declined if submitted; notability is not required for sandboxes.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above. Again, not seeing what the nominator sees.  J 947 &thinsp;(c) , at  18:48, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Please look at the edits and especially: who is editing it. Usually, sandbox is edited mainly by the "owner". But not in this case. The Banner  talk 19:24, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but I don't think there's a rule against multiple editors editing in a user's sandbox. If the user is not objecting to it, then I don't see a problem with that. There could be a case for moving to Draft: namespace, but I'd have to wait for the other editors to opine before changing my view. Doug Mehus T · C  19:48, 22 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Project related sandboxing, there is nothing wrong here.  There are no signed of WP:NOTWEBHOSTing, look at pageviews for example, and no evidence submitted by the nom.  Do not police others userspace without good reason.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * User:The Banner said "Please look at the edits and especially: who is editing it". It looks like you have discovered that  is now editing as .  The second continues the editing pattern of the first. This is not necessarily a WP:SOCK violation, and is not a usersubpage deletion reason.  Possibly, they forgot their password.  You could ask them. They never post talk comments, which is not unusual, let alone forbidden.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:30, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * And probably the same with, who also has the same editing pattern of being non-responsive and adding excessive detailed stuff. The Banner  talk 09:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, looks the same again.
 * Maybe, ask them all if they are each other. Then, if they don’t answer, crosslink them all on their userpages, which you would have to create.  The justification would be clarity and accountability for a curious editor.  Take care to not imply wrong doing.  This would be better than deleting their worst looking edits, which will serve to prevent non-admins from being able to scrutinise them. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Matthew and Jose never ever answered over the years. Zero (0) responses. Perhaps a SPI is a quicker way. The Banner  talk 14:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Good, you guys can keep this shadow website. I withdraw the nomination. The Banner  talk 09:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I would personally object to early closure, unless WP:SNOW applies. Let this be closed normally by a non-involved closer, so it can be closed as "keep"/"WP:SNOW keep," assuming that's the way this goes. We're only 2-3 days away from closure anyway, I think. Doug Mehus T · C  18:43, 24 February 2020 (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.