Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tlogmer subpages

 __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  no consensus to delete. Any discussion about possible moves can be held elsewhere. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 03:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

User:Tlogmer subpages
Abandonded copies of deleted articles. WP:FAKEARTICLE. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * User:Tlogmer is a recently (14 March 2012) deceased Wikipedian. See RIP.  Clearing out his userspace without even a mention of this is poor form.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:40, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some of these pages are facinating to read.  They are not a rabid inclusionist's random collection.  I'd like to see them preserved with the memory of User:Tlogmer.  Perhaps replace each with a custom tag to alleviate "FAKEARTICLE" converns.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see a bunch of fake articles that he has never edited as a fitting or appropriate memorial. duffbeerforme (talk) 22:14, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No, not suitable as a memorial. I presume that he saw something and had some intention.  I find them really interesting, though not really suitable, and stangely exhausting to go through.  I like the idea of move to WP:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, but not yet These fall under my deletion criteria for userspace material, some have not been touched for several years. Given they were managed by a recently deceased editor I think they should be moved from that userspace elsewhere, by a volunteer who can properly act on each article. Some are interesting to read, but not appropriate WP material. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
 * Keep and move to WP:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts. No point leaving them to gather dust in Tlogmer's userspace: this way they have a chance to be picked up and developed. JohnCD (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * These aren't "abandoned drafts": they're pages userfied to circumvent their deletion. If there are particular parties interested in "rescuing" them then they should be notified now and given the chance to adopt what they wish: otherwise these should be deleted per the consensus in the discussions which led to their userfication. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a fair view. Although interesting, I don't see any chance of the material being used for the benefit of the project. I've looked for some theme by which these pages may reflect the memory of the late user, but not found anything. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * A fair view, and one I'm inclined to agree with. A note should be left at WP:ABANDON to see if anyone "wants" any of them. But given that some haven't been edited in quite a while and, unfortunately, the editor whose space hosts them cannot edit them, it is inappropriate to host them indefinitely. Achowat (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I actually stumbled on this discussion while looking for the Monty Hell problem. That article could definitely be salvaged. -Nard 12:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As an encyclopedia article? No, it absolutely could not. We do not write encyclopedia articles on interesting discussions folk had on Usenet on a routine basis. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 08:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment At least one, User:Tlogmer/Facepalm can be deleted, because a better version is now in article space at Facepalm; I have not checked the others.  DGG ( talk ) 20:24, 28 April 2012 (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.