Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WP:V is not a suicide pact

 __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: Userfy. And mark historical. Redirect deleted, link from that other thing also removed. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:55, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WP:V is not a suicide pact


Recently, a months-long, multiple hundred kilobyte discussion about the same topic this essay addresses took place at WT:V, and is yet unclosed. The emergent consensus there should override this outdated essay into oblivion. This ten-year-old essay does not aid in understanding either WP:V or WP:BLP, and appears to have been linked to six times ever, twice in the past two years. Snuge purveyor (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The shortcut WP:VPACT will also need to be deleted, and the link to this essay at the bottom of Our social policies are not a suicide pact. Snuge purveyor (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete, horribly outdated and pointless. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Archive maybe, but do not delete.  Consider merging and redirecting to similar essays about other policies and advice not being intended to be read narrowly and absolutely.  These essays are Wikipedia history, and this history should not be deleted/censored.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with you about protecting history, but every substantial edit to the essay under discussion was made by a single editor on one day. I don't feel like that's really part of our institutional history. Maybe userfy? Snuge purveyor (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good point, it could be userfied. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Userfy per Snuge purveyor. No opposition to a historical tag if anyone feels it is due. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 01:52, 26 June 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.