Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mohcrit4me


 * 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--Aervanath (talk) 12:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Mohcrit4me
Friginator (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Usually when nominating a page for deletion you should include a rationale. Nevertheless, Delete as this user has made no other contribs (unless there are some that are deleted?) and seems to be mistaking Wikipedia for a place to randomly post things. // roux   19:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Random vulgar nonsense. &mdash; neuro  (talk) (review) 19:09, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Blank - the user is only days old and this does seem somewhat bite-y, but ya it does seem very random and not what a user page is for. While the nominator did not provide a reason, it is nice to see he did leave a welcome message and notice regarding the nomination for the user. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Blank (and keep) - There are a few words on this page worth keeping amongst the offensive material or nonsense. Since the user is so new they nee to be educated rather than eliminated. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. If we merely blank this page, the vulgarity will still be accessible through page history. Since there is nothing worth saving in that page... --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 01:29, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Blank That something can be found in "page history" is not compelling. There is lots worse in page histories throughout WP, and this is not close to triggering my "delete it" sensibilities. The aim is to save the editor, not the words. Collect (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Roux. I truly do not believe that the user who posted this nonsense has the disposition to become an editor, though I would be happy to be proven wrong. It is unreasonable to expect all new users to immediately be professional editors, but a certain level of seriousness is required. –Black Falcon (Talk) 19:26, 25 March 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.