Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Obtund/CVUA/AlexJFox

 __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, with Delete for User:Obtund/CVUA/Zedd Milestone. If any of these pages are ever relisted at MfD, they should be listed individually and one or more reasons for deletion from User pages should be used. -- Jreferee (talk) 06:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Obtund/CVUA/AlexJFox


Subpage of a confirmed sockpuppet of User:Tricdl27 created in violation of his block.  Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 18:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

There are a number of other related pages that I am also nominating for the same reason: I don't see any reason for these pages to exist. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 18:59, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * redirect to a now deleted page
 * nominated under WP:CSD which was rejected because "It's archived from something that was used by someone else, not just Obtund", although this page is an orphan.
 * also nominated under CSD#G5 which was rejected because "This is kind-of a talk page", although it's an orphan and its only use was its creation by Obtund.
 * nominated under CSD#G5 which was rejected because "Created by Dank". According to Dank's edit summary, he was "re-creating deleted page per request on my talk page". The only link is to the original request for a copy of a deleted page by Obtund. No use has been made of the page since its creation.


 * Keep all except the redirect one. These pages were not only created and written by the banned user in question, as they all consist of discussion between the banned user and somebody else, so G5 doesn't apply. Unless the other user named wants the pages deleted I don't see any reason to get rid of them. Hut 8.5 19:08, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * hasn't edited since 14 September 2012 and I can't find the diffs in his contribution history that match the times shown.
 * vanished in January 2013. Not being an admin, I can't even find his contribution history.
 * User:Obtund/Samsung doesn't serve any purpose for anyone except Obtund, who won't be able to use it anyway because he is blocked. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 19:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:CSD applies to "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others." Neither of the archive pages have substantial edits by others so G5 does apply. There's nothing in G5 that says it applies to copies of discussions. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 23:50, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You're interpreting these terms extremely legalistically. The pages may not have been edited by people other than a banned editor, but it's clear that they contain content which was not written by a banned editor, and so the spirit of G5 would be violated if these pages were deleted under it. We don't, as a rule, delete archived discussions unless we have some compelling reason to do so, even if those discussions involved banned or blocked editors. Hut 8.5 11:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I'm interpreting using some common sense. These pages serve no purpose to anyone except an indefinitely blocked editor who can't use them. Anyone else mentioned on the page is unlikely to know they exist and if they wanted a copy, they can ask for a copy themselves. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * All of these pages consist of a discussion between a banned editor and somebody else. They aren't only of interest to the banned editor, that somebody else might be interested as well. Other editors may be interested if they want to investigate the behaviour of either party. Even if that isn't the case it isn't a valid reason to delete the page. We don't delete pages just because nobody has laid claim to them, we delete them when there is some compelling reason to do so. I'm not seeing any such reason here. Hut 8.5 17:03, 1 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. The Samsung page was never edited by Obtund; it was copied by Dank (push to talk!) from somewhere else, where Obtund was engaging in a discussion.  Others have all been edited by others, and while I don't hugely see a reason to keep them, they appear to be equal to any other talk page, so we shouldn't delete them any more than we should delete any other old discussion.  Nyttend (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that I've deleted the redirect on IAR grounds. It doesn't completely fit the criterion, but it's thoroughly useless now that Obtund is blocked, it has no useful history, and I can't imagine anyone finding it useful.  Finally, AussieLegend, look at Special:Contributions/Vanished user 23520819 for Zedd's contributions.  Nyttend (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Obtund/CVUA/Zedd/archive and User:Obtund/CVUA/LlamaDude78/archive haven't been edited by other editors. They are copies of pages that have been edited by others, but they haven't been edited by others. User:Obtund/CVUA/Zedd/archive is a cut and paste of this revision of User:Obtund/CVUA/Zedd, which isn't nominated. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 23:37, 27 July 2013 (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.