Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Lightbringer (2nd nomination)




 * 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  Forget it. This LTA page hasn't been touched in forever, so I had the feeling that this user was no longer a threat. I still think it's silly as hell, but obviously the consensus is against me. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Long term abuse/Lightbringer
Long inactive vandal, community banned. No attacks from him in over a year, no evidence that he'll come back. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - this is such an obvious thing to keep I am astonished you would nominate it for deletion. There may be no evidence that he'll come back (though I remember seeing his name on AN/I sometime within the past couple weeks, I think), but there is no evidence he won't, and destroying this kind of institutional memory is... inadvisable. → ROUX   ₪  19:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep just because he does not appear to have been active, there is no proof that he won't (I can think of reasons why a editor may not be visible for a year, without that user being unable or unwilling to come back at some future time). If the Wikimedia Foundation ever say that they're running out of server space, then it could need to be deleted, but otherwise I can see no harm in removing this, but I can see potential harm in removing it. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 20:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: deletion doesn't save any server space. It just removes the page from view for people without the viewdeleted userright. Only oversight actually deletes information from the relevant sql tables. → ROUX   ₪  20:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply: I know that, and can never forsee a time when the Foundation would tell us there was a problem with server space - one of my reasons for keeping this. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 20:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment For information, the last MfD for this is at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Lightbringer in December 2006. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 20:16, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strongest possible keep - this is an important record of behavior for a persistent (and topic-specific) vandal, and as long as the possibility exists that he may return, this information is essential in determining admin action. MSJapan (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Given the nature of Lightbringer's editing, not having this page would make it very difficult to confirm if there is a new Lightbringer sock should he show up in the future. -  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Tear him for his bad verses! ) 22:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep with apologies to TPH, this page never should have been nominated for deletion. ArcAngel (talk) 22:46, 4 October 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.