Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Radicaldreamer29/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: delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Radicaldreamer29/sandbox


UPE sandbox of blocked editor ☆ Bri (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment well writen and backed up by RS. Legacypac (talk) 17:41, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't these be a straightforward WP:G5? &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 17:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sometimes I think SPIs and checkuser blocks are made as difficult as possible for anyone to make sense of. No userpage tag -- just a block log that points to a particular SPI. Need to dig into that archive to figure out it's part of some other group, but no indication on any of their user pages that they're linked... anyway. Delete as a WP:TOU violation and per WP:NOT. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 17:51, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - As with the previous two, it would be easier if they could be G5'd, but delete it anyway. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - With more than 5.5 million articles, we don't need to focus on expansion to the point where we consider accepting UPE just because it is reasonably well written with a source. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2018 (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.