Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Randy's enablers (2nd nomination)

 __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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 14:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Randy's enablers


Embittered whine, I nominated this for deletion with a consensus among participants to merge with WP:RANDY. The problem is, the editors of the main essay page don't want this, because obviously, the quality is completely trashy and it degrades anything it touches. A week of discussion at Wikipedia talk:Randy in Boise achieved no consensus on whether to keep the content there. Merge appears to be off the table, so delete. Ribbet32 (talk) 19:40, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete if no one thinks it's worth rewriting. CamelCase (Talk &#124; Contribs) 21:45, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete or Keep: If the essay is worth keeping, then keep it; if it's not good enough to keep, then delete it. But please don't merge it into an unrelated essay that it's only connected to by one word in the title. --RexxS (talk) 00:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Userfy to User:Cardamon/Randy's enablers as a disputed single-author essay. The MfD1 (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Randy's enablers) result to merge to a related essay was rejected at the target talk page, here: Wikipedia_talk:Randy_in_Boise.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2017 (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.