- 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 keep-- Aervanath talks like a mover, but not a shaker 17:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
User:Kmweber/In Progress
Another abandoned subpage from a user who has vanished. Will never be used again. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Majorly talk 01:18, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Kmweber hadn't even edited it when he was active (not that that would constitute reason for deletion though). Caulde 19:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - per nominator. — macy es: bot 19:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- Strong keep Kmweber recently left wikipedia.
Two days ago Ten pound hammer put up six of Kmweber's user subpages up for deletion: - Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/In Progress/Karl Kae Knecht notes No policy mentioned, admits page is harmless.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/3RR_loophole_update_notice No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion, nominator states they have nothing against Kmweber
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/In_Progress No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/Some AfDs to fight WP:POINT mentioned, I don't understand how this user space page disrupts wikipedia.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/Servantship Reform No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion. States that he is not targeting Kmweber
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/Welcome template No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion.
These pages are no more worthy of deletion than some of the nominator's own user subpages:
- All of knweber's user subpages meet Wikipedia:Subpage guidelines, even more than some of the nominator's own user pages (they are more directly related to wikipedia).
- User:Majorly and User:Macy made sure to be the first and second editors to vote delete in all of these user pages.
- Ten pound hammer supported the community ban of Kmweber: Kmweber community ban proposal (3rd), and also opposed his Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Kmweber
- travb ( talk) 11:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - even if the page below is kept, and Kmweber returned, this page is of virtually no use. Terraxos ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep It's not the way I'd format it, but there's no solid reason to delete this. - Mgm| (talk) 13:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per MacGyverMagic. -- MISTER ALCOHOL T C 20:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep There is not a single policy or guideline reason to delete this page, so why should we delete it? So Why 23:28, 8 January 2009 (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.
- 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 keep-- Aervanath talks like a mover, but not a shaker 17:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
User:Kmweber/In Progress
Another abandoned subpage from a user who has vanished. Will never be used again. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Majorly talk 01:18, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Kmweber hadn't even edited it when he was active (not that that would constitute reason for deletion though). Caulde 19:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - per nominator. — macy es: bot 19:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- Strong keep Kmweber recently left wikipedia.
Two days ago Ten pound hammer put up six of Kmweber's user subpages up for deletion: - Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/In Progress/Karl Kae Knecht notes No policy mentioned, admits page is harmless.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/3RR_loophole_update_notice No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion, nominator states they have nothing against Kmweber
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/In_Progress No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Kmweber/Some AfDs to fight WP:POINT mentioned, I don't understand how this user space page disrupts wikipedia.
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/Servantship Reform No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion. States that he is not targeting Kmweber
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/Welcome template No policy reasoned mentioned for deletion.
These pages are no more worthy of deletion than some of the nominator's own user subpages:
- All of knweber's user subpages meet Wikipedia:Subpage guidelines, even more than some of the nominator's own user pages (they are more directly related to wikipedia).
- User:Majorly and User:Macy made sure to be the first and second editors to vote delete in all of these user pages.
- Ten pound hammer supported the community ban of Kmweber: Kmweber community ban proposal (3rd), and also opposed his Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Kmweber
- travb ( talk) 11:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - even if the page below is kept, and Kmweber returned, this page is of virtually no use. Terraxos ( talk) 21:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep It's not the way I'd format it, but there's no solid reason to delete this. - Mgm| (talk) 13:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per MacGyverMagic. -- MISTER ALCOHOL T C 20:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep There is not a single policy or guideline reason to delete this page, so why should we delete it? So Why 23:28, 8 January 2009 (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.