Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internodeuser

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was del mikka (t) 04:00, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Internodeuser

The ArbCom case for this user is over. The user is banned for one year. His user page still contains personal attacks and other rants I'm not bothering to read. -- Longhair | Talk 01:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete -- Longhair | Talk 01:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete since the Arbcom unanimously considered this user page "inappropriate" in its ruling, I see no reason to keep it around. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:18, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Ambi 04:08, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I've taken a look at the arbitration records, and it appears inflammatory to me. Perhaps provide a link to the arbcom decision after deletion? Enochlau 05:05, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Seems to me that this userpage is in violation fo a Arbcom ruling and several wikipedia polices. Jtkiefer 07:08, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete a userpage used to disrupt wikipedia. JamesBurns 07:09, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Inappropriate userpage. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:25, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per above. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:46, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Ah, we're finally doing something about deeply bad faith userpages. Good. Strong delete, and please consider nominating the three or four 'hate lists' that some people have made in the past months. Radiant_>|< 09:50, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, per reasoning above. --Scimitar 14:23, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and provide a link to the Arbcom case as reasoning. --Sn0wflake 14:44, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• More evidence of Longhair's obvious bias against completely insane conspiracy theories promulgated by ranting psychotics. Delete.

Comment: Guilty as charged Sir! -- Longhair | Talk 19:52, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Nestea 18:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Like Tim Canterbury from The Office I can't believe I'm actually hearing myself say this, but sometimes we need to keep evidence around to show those who knew nothing about the original incident what happened -- & why the contributor was banned. Just because it's in Wikipedia doesn't force anyone to look at it. -- llywrch 00:09, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment: Review the ArbCom case if you're short on evidence. The user page came along right near the end of my brush with this user, and may not even be part of the evidence submitted. -- Longhair | Talk 00:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment: the evidence is available at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Internodeuser/Evidence--AYArktos 00:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.