Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Peer review/Tomás Frías/archive1

 __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:  delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Tomás Frías/archive1

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Created by the sockmaster and then reviewed by their confirmed sockpuppet. Confirmed at w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JackWilkesMcCarthy. Certainly an invalid peer review and while it doesn't meet any CSD criteria I don't think keeping this is useful as it would be continued to be referenced on the talk page as a peer review by Wikipedia editors (difference here being it received no peer review but only self review). Deleting might also be useful under WP:DENY. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 09:51, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. We certainly shouldn't keep around works of sockmasters and their sockpuppets. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 11:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as bad faith by sockpuppets. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:10, 13 November 2022 (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.