Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Paul Andrew Mitchell

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 take to WP:AFD per User:Metropolitan90 - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitch Modeleski. Assuming the article stays, I think there is a strong consensus to keep the talk page also. If anyone is thinking about WP:DRV, please wait for the AFD to finish first. Non-admin closure. Shalom ^Hello 09:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Paul Andrew Mitchell

Pointless Giggity Giggity GOO! 23:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep people often get on Wikipedia and claim we are violating their rights (and then sometimes the material is deleted under WP:BLP. These complaints are not pointless. In this case it appears to be legitimate (the article was made just a stub). If it's offensive it should just be blanked. -N 23:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, and watch for attempts to delete it when he realizes it doesn't serve his purpose. (It's pointless, but, if it really is him, we need to keep it.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above. It's important to keep things such as the complaint by the subject of the article for reasons outlined by those above me—arf! 00:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep if such a thing is possible. There's no rationale for the deletion ("pointless" doesn't do it), and moreover, this is an article talk page, which shouldn't even be debatable as MfD, IMHO. MSJapan 22:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep someone expressing BLP concerns is anything but pointless Hut 8.5 11:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - although I don't think there are legitimate BLP concerns with the article, there's no reason to delete a talkpage complaint given in good faith. Talk pages are very rarely deleted (unless there's an urgent privacy concern, in which case MfD would not be the appropriate forum), and "pointless" is not a reason for deletion under any policy of which I'm aware. Walton^talk 14:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete based on implied legal threats (including citation to the federal racketeering statute) and the bizarre allegation that "[w]hen I attempted to remove the [allegedly] false and defamatory material [from a Wikipedia page], I was threatened with a knife by an unidentified suspect." Newyorkbrad 23:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
• Take to WP:AFD instead. The main article this relates to is a one-sentence unsourced biography, and if the main article is deleted the talk page will be removed too. --Metropolitan90 00:24, 1 July 2007 (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.