Wikipedia:Long term abuse/JarlaxleArtemis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (restore | cache | MfD))
- Other Relevant MfDs: User:Grawp
LTA subpages are often deleted if the user is not active. Grawp, however, is still active and there's no reason to think he'll stop (in fact, there have been discussions on the mailing list about how to get rid of him). This page should thus be undeleted until such time as the Grawp attacks actually stop. Not only that, but since this vandal doesn't like having his personally-identifiable information posted, resurrecting this page will give us some much-needed leverage over him. *** Crotalus *** 18:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore, no valid reason given for deletion. Note: WP:DENY is explicitly not a deletion criterion. Stifle (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore. I said it before and I'll say it again: WP:DENY is useless against Jarlaxle and will remain so so long as his flock keeps following his orders. As far as I'm concerned, if he outs others (as he did to me last night thru his wethers) he deserves to have his own PID available. -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 22:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Everyone on Wikipedia knows Grawp's modus operandi - if the sole purpose of keeping this page is to document it, it's no more useful than the page on Willy on Wheels. (That's keep deleted on wheels!) --B (talk) 05:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the purpose of this page is to discuss Grawp's real name and background, and give us leverage over him so that, if he demands it be removed (we know he doesn't like having it posted) we can first demand he stop vandalizing and harassing people. *** Crotalus *** 15:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
overturn & list at MFD Consensus can change but since rthis has been through MFD before and was kept, thisw should not be deleted without a discussion. Spartaz Humbug! 14:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It was deleted after a discussion, that's the thing. WP:DENY was the reason the closing administrator cited. -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 21:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It was? The MFD linked to above was keep and I can't see the reference to the discussion in the log. Would you mind pointing me in the correct direction? Thanks Spartaz Humbug! 21:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Not really, damnatio memoriae was a call to to effectively remove any reference to having ever existed. WP:DENY makes no such request (even if it did you wouldn't get the developers to delete all the move logs anyway), indeed the nomination suggested "Gosh, we can live with just one concise long-term abuse report" and many supported that view, hardly an erasing of all memories (That actually reference Wikipedia:LTA#Grawp an LTA report on Grawp which still exists again not an erasing of all memory). I note your comment in the MFD, "We need to strike a balance between WP:DENY and keeping people informed;", which is oddly similar to what WP:DENY says itself and has done for a long time "Information on vandalism should be critically appraised for its genuine value, and if that value outweighs any detriment from the publicity of that vandal/vandalism." --81.104.39.44 (talk) 23:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If you had been there at the time, you would have realized that WP:DENY was being horribly misapplied, effectively warping it into damnatio memoriae. -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 18:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, you know what? Its really hard to review a deletion if half the information is kept away from the deletion review. The actual discussion did not reference this page but the consensus was clear and its obvious that this does fall under that decision so changing to endorse but I really wish Krimpet had referenced the MFD in her deletion summary. Spartaz Humbug! 14:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment what's wrong with Wikipedia:LTA#Grawp can't that information be enhance if it's deficient, is there a specific need for this older subpage? --81.104.39.44 (talk) 23:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The older subpage describes his history and says who he really is. *** Crotalus *** 15:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore DENY is being misapplied. The only real threat that this page poses is that it will leave editors and administrators with the misaprehension that Grawp is one human and not a meme. Protonk (talk) 13:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I have added the Grawp MfD up top. Note that this is not an attempt to add "Grawp"'s userpage or its sockpuppet categories to the deletion review; it is merely there because the page was deleted due to that discussion, not the LTA:JA MfD. -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 19:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore per nom.--Hospitality Flawless (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|