The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Michelle McManus. MBisanz ^talk 02:56, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle McManus discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Contested PROD. Prod concern: This article is unreferenced, the numbers are suspect, the original version contained information about a seeminly-non-existant album, and most importantly, there is no reason any content that can be referenced can't be added to Michelle McManus. This is an unnecessary split-off that appears to be just for the purpose of spreading content over additional aritcles. Prod2 text: In addition to the above, it is highly likely that this article was created by a sock puppet of an indefinitely blocked editor, User:Nimbley6. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Nominators recommendation: Redirect with or without edit history to Michelle McManus and lock or delete and salt, and lock to prevent re-creation by disruptive editor. Salt or lock should be for at least 30 days but not more than a year. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Nominators observation 2 1/2 days in: Consensus seems to be to redirect and protect, which implies keeping the edit history. No objections here. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 19:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note The creator of this article is blocked until 22:02 26 January 2009. This AFD should not be speedy-closed until a day after this editor's block expires to give him a chance to respond. However, should the allegations of sockpuppetry of a banned editor prove true, the article may qualify for speedy deletion. davidwr/([[User_talk:davidwr|talk (contribs)/(e-mail) 05:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC) indefinitely blocked. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note The article that this content belongs in is semi-protected. The creation of this article was the editor's second edit. This suggests that had the editor been able to edit Michelle McManus, he might have done so rather than create a new article. Perhaps when the editor's block expires he can elaborate on this. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 05:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect. This information was already in the article for the singer prior to its creation. Non-neccesary duplication. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect and protect - if McManus warrents a seperate discography page it can be requested and made. This sockpuppeteer is relentless and refuses to engage with the community (I've tried). A redirect will stop this being remade. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect and protect - per Jza84. Several editors have attempted to reason with this editor to no avail. I suspect part of the problem is that the editor simply doesn't understand why what they're doing is wrong: see, for example, this attempt to get another editor (who hasn't edited since January 1st) to upload images (this followed the sockpuppeteer's uploaded images being repeatedly deleted on commons). Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 12:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the benefit of others, it should also be said that this puppetmaster is a child. --Jza84 |  Talk  15:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, claims to be a child - its been caught out fibbing once or twice now. That said, age is the only polite explanation I can think of - subject to the caveat that my 10 year-old niece is a far better speller, and has far more "clue". Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 17:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/redirect. It's not like Michelle McManus is overly long. Stifle (talk) 17:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect and protect the page. JBsupreme (talk) 17:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Nominator's additional comment This article was created by Flyingmonkeyswithparis (talk · contribs), who was later confirmed to be a sockpuppet of the banned user nimbly6. This means this article is eligible for speedy-deletion under criteria WP:G5. However, doing so would leave the article open for re-creation by another editor, probably the next nimbly6 sockpuppet. Resolution through AFD is preferred because the results are binding on any editor, including undiscovered future nimbly6 socks. If the article is redirected and locked, the talk page will still be open for ((editprotected)) requests. A discussion to restart the article can happen Talk:Michelle McManus as well, should it become necessary. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 17:35, 27 January 2009 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.