Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mrmister22/SCARED!

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: keep. General consensus is that deletion isn't necessary. bibliomaniac 1 5 04:30, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mrmister22/SCARED!

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:STALEDRAFT userfied in 2009, but no further activity in 11 years. Appears to be a WP:POVFORK of Scared! that remains stored in userspace for no apparent reason. LuckyLouie (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - If the editor were active, we could ask them what they are doing with it. Redirecting to the article would be an option, but deleting is better. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Complicated. This userpage is older than the article. It needs investigating. Why was it userfied? —SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
According to the userfier (Special:Diff/276214083), it was per an e-mail request, though they didn't state from whom. The creations of this page and the mainspace article don't seem to be directly related; this was created in May 2007, the userfication happened in March 2009, and the mainspace article was created by another user (SIbuff; now blocked for copyvios) in February 2010. That's all I could compile. Glades12 (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't blame the admin who userfied the page back in 2009. I'm sure it was done in good faith at the time. But I do think 11 years of free web hosting is enough. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@LuckyLouie: How is this webhosting? Glades12 (talk) 18:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Intentionally or unintentionally functioning as a web based repository for someone’s old files, e.g. WP:NOTWEBHOST. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By what definition of “functioning”? [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-90&pages=User:Mrmister22/SCARED! Pageviews records disproves that it was being used as webhosting. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, good to know, thanks. - LuckyLouie (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Mrmister22 has been inactive since 2011, so we are unlikely to get any insight from him. Glades12 (talk) 20:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There’s just no point. Are we going to leave stuff like this forever? SK2242 (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not leave it forever? This is userspace. Only users who look for it will find it. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - WP:NOTWEBHOST. There’s a reason stale drafts eventually get deleted. SK2242 (talk) 14:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - There’s no evidence of NOTWEBHOST violation, and allegation rarely applies to material close to suitable content. The reason for G13 was the BLP and copyright violations in the tens of thousands of unwatched unreviewed drafts, and these reasons do not apply here. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the article. There is no good reason to hide the history. No evidence of “POVFORK”ing. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Scared!, in the manner of which such pages are generally handled. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 00:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This looks like this can use more discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Who cares? It's not a fork; it was written beforehand, right? What's the specific deletion rationale. "There's no point" is not a reason for deletion. WP:NOTWEBHOST is for things unrelated to Wikipedia. This clearly is. There is absolutely nothing gained by deleting, but bringing it to MfD, creating a whole separate discussion page, etc. actively takes up more time and space than this did. If it doesn't qualify for WP:CSD and doesn't qualify for WP:STALE, you need another actual reason to delete... not just an absence of a reason to keep. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is not a NOWEBHOST ciolartion. It is an atempt at a valid Wikipedia article n a notable topic, so it is not unrelated to Wikipedia's purposes. Thus there is no good reason to delete it. Indeed there was no good reason to nominate it for deletion, in my view. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:09, 2 June 2020 (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.