Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Salix alba/Bios theory

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 Speedy delete per U1. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 20:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Salix alba/Bios theory[edit]

This article is not being worked on in user space, and is deleted content. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lakinekaki/Bios theory for another discussion of this content. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This article is in the user space of an editor who has not been very active lately due to life commitments but probably will be again. What is the hurry for something written in user space? —Mattisse (Talk) 20:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is deleted content. Keeping deleted content around is fine if there is a chance for it to be developed into useful content. However, there is no indication that this will ever occur for this article as the article failed deletion criteria. We do not allow editors to userfy content simply as a runaround to avoid deletion. This is ensconced in Wikipedia deletion policy and userpage policy. I note that this particular user is an admin and so will have access to anything that they may deem necessary for future use in any case. Keeping this as a user-subpage is an obvious violation of our policies on deletion. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
del Must be said the chances of doing anything with this are minimal. I'd probably intended to put the content on another site. --Salix alba (talk) 00:21, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blank in case the user wishes to come back and work on it. Blanking it will render the page useless to search engine results. -- Ned Scott 10:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blank as per Ned, and as per the cited precedent, if you really think it is a problem. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I wouldn't actually support deleting this, but the author wishes for it to be deleted. This allows it to be deleted by CSD U1, unless he changes his mind. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 01:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - User indicated he wanted to delete it. See above. --Meldshal (§peak to me) 12:35, 30 July 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.