Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Vandal


 * 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; these kind of things you can just bring up with an admin and they'll likely delete on their own. Kind of the gray area between XfD and Speedy. --Xavexgoem (talk) 19:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Vandal
I know it's not been edited for a while, but there's no real reason to keep it. Look at the history, it's only been used for silliness, and the two unblock requests came from other accounts. The request for usurpation is absurd, too! It doesn't set a good example. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► hemicycle ─╢ 19:53, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete as long as it will be impossible for anyone to recreate this page. (change) Collect (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC) and block anyone from taking the clearly inapt name. If we just delete it, that would be harder to accomplish, I fear. Collect (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How? The account's blocked. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► hemicycle ─╢ 21:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I noted the usurp request -- I would like to know that such a request can be made impossible to fulfill. Collect (talk) 11:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The account is blocked. A bureaucrat will not rename any user to "Vandal". I am proposing that the page be deleted, why are you proposing that it be kept? ╟─ Treasury Tag ► hemicycle ─╢ 12:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * As I am a lowly editor, I did not presume to know the actions of bureaucrats in name usurpation cases. I have known folks with "Vandal" as a real surname (Danish), so such a person might well get approved.  Richard Bartle had "Conan" as a forbidden name in his MUD -- until a kid with that as his real name started crying.  Collect (talk) 15:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Collect; nobody could possibly hold that name without a bureaucrat letting them have it, and no bureaucrat in their right mind would. How does this affect the deletion of the page? ╟─ Treasury Tag ► hemicycle ─╢ 15:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have seen some names which did not get pounced on in my life (many much worse than this) - so I tend to think the stopping should be done before anyone could conceivably err. Keeping this page makes it clear to anyone looking at usurpation that the account has serious problems from the start. Cost of keeping the page is virtually nil.  Collect (talk) 15:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The stopping has been done. The account is blocked. Nobody can possibly get hold of the username. What's the risk? The cost of keeping the page is that it is an outlet for the silliness I pointed out in the nom. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► hemicycle ─╢ 15:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Whether or not the page exists has no relevance to whether or not someone can usurp the username; the account is blocked, and no bureaucrat is going to do a usurp for this particular name. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * ← ← Cool stuff there-- PirateSmackK Arrrr! 04:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Although there was no need for an MfD. The page was lying there in loneliness without much trouble. Simply putting it in CAT:TEMP would have gotten it deleted anyway. There are several pages in that cat with nothing but trollish unblock request in the page history; we don't MfD these separately. -- PirateSmackK Arrrr! 04:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:37, 31 May 2009 (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.