Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ronz/notes

 __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. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 02:46, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

User:Ronz/notes


This sort of thing should be kept off-wiki really. Admittedly most of it is not related to specific enwiki users, but the intent of the content is to identify and deal with enwiki users. There is no benefit to keeping this material on English Wikipedia, the user should keep all this material elsewhere and just present relevant parts of it when needed for action. MPS1992 (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * This is harassment. Please withdraw. --Ronz (talk) 04:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Why does your page have a separate section entitled "hindujagruti.org - npov and rs as well - rsn first? Raksha Bandhan"
 * Why does your page have a separate section entitled "Daniel Brandt" with subsections below it?
 * What benefit does Wikipedia gain from you maintaining these amongst many other subsections? MPS1992 (talk) 05:15, 20 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Is Daniel Brandt a living person, and if so, what right have you to splatter your opinions about what he may or may not think, across Wikipedia user space that is not intended for that purpose. MPS1992 (talk) 05:18, 20 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The topic of Daniel Brandt is one of considerable historical interest for Wikipedia. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. No valid reason offered for deletion, and the page is well within reasonable leeway for a respected Wikipedian. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. No policy-based arguments have been presented for deletion. The page is clearly labelled as a notes and reference page for the user, and appears to be exactly the sort of thing that user subpages are intended for. The nomination looks like an attempt at harassment. Girth Summit  (blether)  10:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * "within reasonable leeway for a respected Wikipedian" = the longer you've been here, the more rules you can get away with breaking because you've formed more friendships? Just to clarify. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 13:50, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * What I'm not seeing is any indication of the rules that anyone thinks are being broken here. A page called 'notes', which has some links to articles, noticeboards, sources and, well, some notes on it - no assertions, no opinions, just links and notes. Seriously, what is it you think they are getting away with? (FWIW, I don't recall ever having interacted with Ronz, but I have seen them around on a lot of talk pages and discussions - AFAICR, their arguments have always been well-informed and policy-based. That's what is generally meant by well-respected). Girth Summit  (blether)  14:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * That's what I mean by "a respected Wikipedian" too. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:07, 21 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. No policy-based arguments have been presented for deletion. If there were any, I'd be sure to address them. --Ronz (talk) 18:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per there is no reason to delete this. And Smokey's link... WOW Legacypac (talk) 05:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - I do not see any problems on this page. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 22:26, 23 February 2019 (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.