Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Geo.plrd 3/Daniel's notes


 * 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 debate was speedily kept per Daniel and others, Geoff can defend himself anywhere he chooses, including the talkpage. ~ Riana ⁂ 05:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Mediation Committee/Nominations/Geo.plrd 3/Daniel's notes
Delete due to author prohibiting me from defending myself against allegations. Geoff Plourde (talk) 04:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Geo.plrd 3/Daniel.Bryant's notes. This is an archive of my reason to oppose your third Mediation Committee nomination, and as an archive should not be edited further. This page can't be deleted because it explains the justification for my oppose at Mediation Committee/Nominations/Geo.plrd 3 - it's just split on a subpage. I cannot fathom how this is any different to me simply copying my rationale to the actual nomination, except it's easier to read on a subpage - you can reply on the talk page of both. Daniel (talk) 05:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. legit.  Blnguyen  ( vote in the photo straw poll ) 05:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I honestly see no issues here.  Jmlk  1  7  05:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I agree with Daniel here, archives should be kept and its legit..-- Cometstyles 05:38, 14 March 2008 (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.