Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Benjamin Gatti/Evidence/Annotated


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 keep Hiding  talk 00:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Benjamin Gatti/Evidence/Annotated
A fork of Requests for arbitration/Benjamin Gatti/Evidence, created by User:Benjamin Gatti when he was asked to move his comments to their own area rather than interspersing them with the evidence given by other users. Firebug 19:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So, he was requested to separate his comments, and he did... admittedly, some of his comments can be less than wise, but he needs a space to give his special view of the case in which he is involved. I don't understand this deletion request. Keep unless a fuller explanation is forthcoming. Xoloz 21:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * He was supposed to include his comments in a separate section of the Evidence page, not fork the page. Firebug 21:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd take that complaint to Arbcom. If they are satisfied with his arrangement, fine; if not, they can clarify their instructions.  I don't comfortable considering an active Arbcom evidence page here. Xoloz 23:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

No reason for him not to have a space to put his comments. Keep --Chazz88 21:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * He has a space to put his comments. Userfy. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 20:24, 2 January 2006 (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.