Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MisfitToys/List of celebrities with links to the U.S. Republican Party

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 Delete - About celebrities, so BLP concerns are not as bad as with private people, but are still fairly compelling (especially reading the articles, a lot of the content comes across as editors making the affliaition, rather than the subject doing so. I'll call attention to Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles, if it's actually going to be used in the future. Wily D 06:07, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:MisfitToys/List of celebrities with links to the U.S. Republican Party

I'm assuming that these articles were moved into user space in order to be improved and moved back into the mainspace. That hasn't happened. Instead it both have become sanctuaries for any anonymous IP to come and add a celebrity to the list, most often without any sort of reference. We don't keep deleted articles in user space indefinitely, and I think it is time to delete these. Both have been around since 2004 and I doubt with the rise of BLP either would survive for long in the mainspace. AniMate 20:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Stale — content almost all from 2009 and earlier. --Klein zach 00:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I'm not entirely convinced these are necessarily drafts – mightn't they be in use as a resource for an editor or a group of editors wishing to fix up or keep an eye on articles on these lists? (For example using related changes?) I think there's enough doubt that WP:STALEDRAFT is applicable to negate the benefits of deleting these. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:47, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Dwain (talk)
~~Weak Keep~~ Delete all (see below) - My inital reaction was the same as Arms & Hearts above - MisfitToys could be using these lists for some encyclopedia purpose rather than merely hosting the information. It's not like he's only looking at one party and not the other. Then I thought, probably not; more likely a stale draft. Then I read Arms & Hearts' post above and again had some doubt. ~~I'm on the fence. Default to weak keep.~~ -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 04:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately neither of the weak keeps address the fact that there are multiple BLP violations and unsourced assertions here. I'd point editors to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dwain/Republican Celebrities Page (2nd nomination) which explains Dwain's contributions. AniMate 04:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - What explains my contributions? Who the hell are you to explain anything about me? Dwain (talk) 04:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I should have said your "contribution here" and not "contributions." Perhaps I'm wrong that your participation here has nothing to do with your list of Republican celebrities being deleted, but I suspect that is a major factor in your being here. If I'm wrong, I apologize for jumping to conclusions. AniMate 11:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're right, but can't these issues be fixed by editing, rather than deleting, the pages? We could just move the page and remove the context, or else just remove all unreferenced items. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Sure editing can remove the unsourced ones, but we'd likely have to semi-protect them in order to stop IPs from continuing to add people to them. These were userfied after deletion was agreed upon at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of celebrities with links to the U.S. Democratic Party. That was over six years ago. Unless MisfitToys has edited while logged out, he also hasn't touched them since 2006. If he or other editors were using these as a resource, surely they would stop the addition of unsourced celebrities. That hasn't happened either. AniMate 21:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm going to go a little further with this. If this is, as you assert as at least a possibility, a resource for users wishing to keep an eye on the articles on this list, it is incumbent on them to protect it. If I had a list that could so easily violate BLP, I would make sure to do everything to keep it from doing so. Since that hasn't happened here and frankly because its been there for so long with little to no improvement, I don't think we should keep it. AniMate 22:16, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Editors don't have obligations of the sort you describe, and your argument still doesn't amount to a lot more than "these pages require a lot of work", which isn't a reason to delete them. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:34, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Under normal circumstances I would agree with you, but we're not talking about an article. We are talking about a deleted article someone has asked to be placed in their user space. Were this a regular article, MisfitToys would have no obligation to protect it. However, this is an article that was deleted, and MisfitToys asked that he or she be given responsibility for it. Editors may not have the obligations I describe in most circumstances, but if they ask for something to be moved to their user space, they take on that responsibility. AniMate 11:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete means weak delete and anything could tip it one way or another. Now we are discussing others and IPs editing a user pages that is not their own to remove BLP problems and an admin protecting the user page from IP edits and until the BLP removal editing is done? The circumstances are clear that these pages were moved into user space in order to be improved and moved back into the mainspace, but that hasn't happened in the short-term hosting time alloted by WP:STALEDRAFT and the pages have drawn problems from others who have no authorization to edit those user pages. Delete. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace is not an indefinite incubator for deleted content, especially deleted content with BLP implications. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:22, 28 September 2012 (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.