Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Pcarbonn/arbitration


 * 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 debate was deleted per CSD G7. Non-admin close. 哦，是吗？ (O-person) 21:27, 30 December 2007 (GMT)

User:Pcarbonn/arbitration
Unfiled ArbCom workup, presents one side of a multilateral dispute. Would be rejected by ArbCom as a content dispute anyway. Of no value as an RfC workup, as the article has now moved on from this point. Guy (Help!) 19:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Abstain until the user comments. Was there any particular reason you didn't ask him about this page before slapping an MfD tag on? -Amarkov moo! 19:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. It was actually filed, in mid December, and rejected as a content dispute. The case, such as it is, is therefore available in the history of Requests for arbitration. If this same case were refiled without changing then it would be rejected for the same reason; if subsequent developments involve user conduct then this would not be the basis for the filing. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Last edit before the case was removed is here. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed to delete per Sam Blacketer. I still think asking the user first would've been nice, but if it's already been filed and rejected, there's no point in keeping it. -Amarkov moo! 20:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I do not need this page anymore.Pcarbonn (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2007 (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.