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 the mentioning of an individual editor has been removed(page is protected to prevent it being reinstalled), The questioning of policy on the retaining user pages of departed users. Under GNU and GFDL licensing we are required to retain the edit histories of the articles including who made the edit and when. Gnangarra 16:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jeendan[edit]

The text of the page makes reference to me specifically (another editor removed my name) in a setting where his/her assertions can go unchallenged and unedited. Joestella 17:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The assertions are free to be challenged on the user's talk page, and this is no better and no worse than literally hundreds of users' user pages who are active, have gone on wikibreak or left the project. I do, however, agree with the removal of name-specific information which has already taken place. Orderinchaos 18:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Orderinchaos 18:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep not NPA - NYC JD (interrogatories) 21:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep so the nom said Jeendan is referring to him criticizing him as POV-pusher for Australian Liberal Party. Joestella, You might really have done it, IMHO, so don't try to suppress people who criticize you. Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 03:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep just another WP user whom Joestella has pissed off. Joestella made his own bed. Timeshift 04:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep If the specific reference to the user is gone, then this deletion debate does not need to remain open. Needless to say, I can understand why another user has got pissed off with Joestella (And i've only become aware of the user in question in the last 24hrs). Just a shame to lose another WP editor. thewinchester 04:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't see anything there that attacks anyone. the nominator is a big boy and quite capable of defending himself with the written word rather than trying to censor Wikipedia. DanielT5 05:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I would have thought that WP:NPA (particularly "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views -- regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme") is being violated here. As for the idea that this represents censorship of Wikipedia, the user pages aren't a part of the encyclopaedia itself. Joestella 07:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I can see, the text doesn't dismiss or discredit - or even disparage - anyone's views, just takes an issue with behaviour. I would have thought this edit or this one much closer to an NPA violation personally. Orderinchaos 07:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree. But even so, users are free to respond directly on talk pages, or edit articles. This use of a user page allows the attack to go unedited and unchallenged. Joestella 07:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Extra-strong delete this is just some bitter person having a go at another editor, not even trying to make a specific article better ... if jeendan really is gone then he doesn't need a userpage any more. there's nothing else to discuss about it guys. GROW UP ChampagneComedy 20:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nowhere in policy does it say that a departed user no longer needs a userpage - I know of several cases of Wikipedians pushing up daisies with extant userpages. The above user is reminded of WP:NPA and closing admin is advised, if considering this vote, to check the user's contribution history. Orderinchaos 20:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nowhere in policy does it say that a departed user no longer needs a userpage And nowhere is there in policy does it say that you get to take up space permanently, either. --Calton | Talk 13:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per NYC JD. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A permanent personal attack left around on Wikipedia servers by someone not even sticking around to make token contributions? I don't think so. --Calton | Talk 13:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.