Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mimata

 __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 Let's talk about it! 14:50, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

User:Mimata


User:Mimata was last nontrivially edited on 2 May 2009. WP:UP states (my bolding): "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion." Because this page fails WP:UP and WP:NOTWEBHOST, it should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy close and blank the page. This is the minimum intervention required to bring the page into policy. Users do not own their userspace, and in the unlikely event that the user returns, their content is still available in the history. --Surturz (talk) 09:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)


 * blank sounds like a sensible idea. In the unlikely chance that this version is needed it can be recovered by the user without misleading all those search engines indexing copies of Wikipedia. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:08, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Because this page exists at Satchel Paige, there is no need to preserve this "old revisions" version of the page. The changes in this draft were instituted in the article but rejected as "redundant". Whereas the userspace version contains 12 references, the article contains 128. Far outdated, this GFDL violation should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 15:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article already exists, and this has been sitting there untouched for quite some time.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 19:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or Speedy close and blank (as per Surturz). WP:STALEDRAFT comes into play also.     ArcAngel    (talk) ) 15:20, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with deleting the page. Blanking a GFDL-violating draft that exists at Satchel Paige is unnecessary. Cunard (talk) 20:29, 10 September 2011 (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.