Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Password Saeba Ryo

 __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  speedy keep. Huon (talk) 02:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Password Saeba Ryo


WP:POLEMIC Remover remover (talk) 14:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC) This user mentioned other user's name on his own user page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remover remover (talk • contribs) 15:06, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 *  Speedy Keep No reason to be deleted. --Claw of Slime (talk) 14:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)--Claw of Slime (talk) 15:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC) added


 *  Speedy Delete Personally, The result of sock puppet would bring out all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted, in other words the consistency of user talk page of IA-32, X86 and X86-64 would be damaged heavily, and would also affected other wiki users, editors and readers. So for this very reason, I nominated this user page for deletion. I do not wish anybody break the reputation of Wikipedia, and zero-tolerance any disruptive edits. So I slip my opinion to others.  Remover remover (talk) 14:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This entry was made by the nominator and the "speedy delete" recommendation here should be ignored. Per WP:DISCUSSAFD, as the nominator, "you can explain your earlier recommendation in response to others, but do not repeat your recommendation on a new bulleted line." (emphasis added - jeh) This amounts to "voting" twice (once in the nomination, once here). Perhaps would be willing to change "speedy delete" to "Comment". Or, this entire thread could be indented to be a comment thread under Claw of Slime's entry above. Jeh (talk) 19:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Even though this user talk page is deleted, the fact that User:Password Saeba Ryo is a sockpuppet of User:Janagewen will not be dismissed. --Claw of Slime (talk) 15:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No, sock puppet would damage the consistency of so many talk pages, evaluated as useful and sensitive information which might help further improve appropriate articles. So removing his user page would help keep that consistency, leaving the block status without changed. Remover remover (talk) 15:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, "all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted". But, Janagewan (don't protest, it is clear to me that you are Janagewan), please note the words "may be". Nobody is going to go around to every talk page ever edited by PSR and delete PSR's comments in the rare cases where such comments are followed by useful discussion. WP editors are more sensitive than that to talk page consistency. I am, however, motivated to note on those pages that PSR has been indef blocked as a sockpuppet and that further responses to PSR are not encouraged, as your continuing attempts to evade your block should not be rewarded. Jeh (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * speedy keep - the user page contains a sock puppet notice, which is perfectly valid, and there is no reason to delete it. --bonadea contributions talk 15:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I now realise this MfD is about the user talk page rather than the user page (which has also been nominated for deletion). Same difference, both user page and user talk page should be speedily kept. --bonadea contributions talk 15:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, but what we could use other reasons to block this user rather than puppet, because of the reason I've mentioned above. Remover remover (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * has already been indef blocked for being a sockpuppet. That's history. It's not going to change. Your nomination here is poorly motivated and will not accomplish what you are seeking. Please stop wasting our time. Jeh (talk) 19:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: No reasons to delete this user page. Additionally, there should be no strong reasons to delete posts made by  on the above mentioned talk pages –  discussing things from different viewpoints is perfectly fine. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 15:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No, keeping his user page is the evidence to prove this sock puppet, which in turn, all the pages would lose their consistencies, including yours. So for the consideration of Wikipedia.org, I wish you change your mind not too late.  Remover remover (talk) 15:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Any chances, please, for explaining why do you advocate on 's behalf in the first place? &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 15:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I do not support on that user, but Wikipedia.org. Remover remover (talk) 15:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 15:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Through reading his words on talk page of IA-32 and x86, I know you do really need go back to college and learn Architecture again! I think you are not eligible for writing on computer science. Because you do not care what you wrote, and many might potentially mislead readers in confusion. You also let the Wikipedia.org alone, just remove other editors depending on your mood. So luckily, you are editing on Wikipedia.org not something or somewhere. This is not personal attack, wish you understand. But for your response to this deletion, I think Wikipedia need more editors not like you. Sorry! Remover remover (talk) 16:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This is total nonsense, and it sounds like you're just another instance of . &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 16:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep: WP:POLEMIC does not appear to me to apply to either 's user page or user talk page, and even if it did, the appropriate response would be to delete the offending material rather than delete the pages. 's arguments here seem quite nonsensical to me: I do not at all see how removing PSR's user pages would have anything to do with the retention or deletion of PSR's activity on various article talk pages; as far as I am concerned, whether PSR's contributions to other talk pages should be deleted, struck out, hatted, or left as-is, is completely immaterial to this discussion.
 * Aside: As Dsimic pointed out above, the phraseology, illogic, attitudes toward editors who disagree, and mercurial emotions in 's comments here are very much reminiscent of indef-blocked and his indef-blocked sockpuppet . Please see yet another SPI for Janagewen. Jeh (talk) 18:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep: We almost never delete user's talk pages, and there is no reason to do so here. There isn't even any content that that needs to be deleted from the page. Meters (talk) 19:58, 29 December 2014 (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.