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 Speedy keep - nomination in bad faith by a blocked (suspected banned sock) user (non-admin closure) copied and pasted from previous deletion discussion, just like last time. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 17:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:List of banned users[edit]

I think the banned list should be deleted because a user does not have to be on the banned list to be banned which makes the list irrelevant. Also, I don't think that this list should document the history of banned users. I think that it is an invasion of privacy to banned users who have disabilities. As a society, we have always kept documentation of people with disabilities as confidential as possible which is why I don't think the banned list is necessary for everyone to see. Stoodowned (talk) 10:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Nonsense nomination. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the fact that the list is not comprehensive does not mean it is useless, and it does have a useful purpose. I can't see any particular reason why the list harms disabled people without more evidence being provided. I suspect the nominator is a sockpuppet. Hut 8.5 14:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Rationale for deletion is nonsense, and the nominatior is surely a sock. — Gavia immer (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Indeed, and now blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep, disruptive nomination by a sock. Nsk92 (talk) 16:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]