Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wow78

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 debate was Delete by Spartaz, non-admin closure. Macy 22:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wow78

This user page is the result of a subsequent userfication after a delete decision at AFD. It appears the original article was created as part of a school project. The user, is has not been active at WP in any way outside this article. Also it is very likely that this user and User:XOgirl who uploaded the images used are one and the same person or at minimum are friends. If this page goes, the images should also go. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per CSD G4. - Icewedge (talk) 22:51, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • G4 generally does not apply to userfied content. -- Ned Scott 03:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Has anyone here looked at the page history? Obviously not. The last and only time that page was edited was five months ago (aside for the MfD tag). G4 says that articles userfied for "explicit improvement [are] excluded", not that people are just able to save a copied version of a deleted article with the comment 'userfy' and then walk away. - Icewedge (talk) 03:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep It was userfied to them; they deserve to be able to keep it and reintroduce it and another time. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 00:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. User has had plenty of time to work on this. They haven't. Time to get rid of it. --UsaSatsui (talk) 01:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blank or weak neutral (not sure what that means, but it sounded right..). It doesn't seem problematic, and it might have some potential to be an actual article. -- Ned Scott 03:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • they needed it for marking. Its gone now. Spartaz Humbug! 06:02, 5 September 2008 (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.