Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Leicester College vandal

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: delete . Per WP:SNOW. At this point it’s pretty clear what the outcome is going to be so no need to prolong the inevitable. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:33, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Leicester College vandal[edit]

per WP:DENY there is really no reason to have this and as evidenced by the fact that he continues to edit this, it really only serves to stroke his ego. Praxidicae (talk) 00:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:DENY, you should not be listing these things on this forum. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:03, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SmokeyJoe then how do you propose we delete this? Praxidicae (talk) 01:10, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something? Why isn't this cause to protect rather than delete? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:21, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhododendrites: I did actually protect it (log), figuring that's a simple way to prevent further vandal antics. I still don't know if this is the best venue to decide deletion of what is really a work page for anti-vandal teams. I don't cruise MfD myself, and have no idea what SmokeyJoe's "typical MfD reviewer" below is. – Athaenara ✉ 10:14, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reason we generally don't create LTA pages anymore. There isn't a need to and it is only rewarding their trolling. Shouldn't have been created to begin with. Praxidicae (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protect. Kamafa Delgato _(Lojbanist)^{Styrofoam is not made from kittens.} 01:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lojbanist: You created the page in March 2018. The only subsequent edits were vandalism and the reversion of vandalism. It doesn't seem to have been useful. Care to tag it for WP:CSD#G7 deletion? – Athaenara ✉ 01:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There needs to be a reason to have an LTA page—a reason focused on improving the encyclopedia. There are plenty of bored people who muck around for a hobby and many of them regard attention as positive feedback encouraging their efforts. This LTA page has no useful information beyond that the person mucks around and uses socks (wow, that's unusual). It should be deleted per DENY. Any useful links to the LTA page can be replaced with links to the SPI. Johnuniq (talk) 01:52, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Move to a subpage of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/JaySmith2018 and leave for the SPI clerks to delete archive or whatever. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's literally not what SPI is for. Praxidicae (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if LTA is an active process and separate from SPI, even if it overlaps an SPI case, archive to Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Archive. If "delete" requires an MfD discussion, it is hopeless contrary to WP:DENY. DENY usually means quietly revert/blank/archive. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:DENY. We don't need an LTA subpage for obvious vandals, and in this case, it's clearly making the problem worse, not better. Mz7 (talk) 03:32, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Neither do we want to encourage enthusiastic process newcomers to continue to through troll stuff onto forum pages like MfD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no other way to get stuff deleted. If an admin boldly deleted an LTA page there is a strong likelihood that people would make much more fuss than a simple MfD discussion. There is nothing in the report under consideration that is useful and archiving would serve no purpose other than encouragement for others to see if they can get their own commemorative plaque. Johnuniq (talk) 04:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MfD doesn't have to deal with SPI pages, and they frequently involve for more serious long term abuse issues. Why are LTA pages different? I think it is extremely undesirable to have it as standard practice to send every old LTA page through MfD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:39, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you’re coming from, but ultimately, if we’re all agreeing this LTA subpage shouldn’t have been created, then I think this could have been a pretty boring, unanimous delete consensus after 7 days, and the MfD discussion would have faded into obscurity. MfD isn’t watched nearly as much as, say, ANI or Jimbo’s talk, so I think the risk of the Streisand effect is less.
The next best alternative is to quietly blank or archive the LTA subpage to an obscure location, which I suppose is an acceptable compromise, but it leaves the LTA shrine publicly viewable onwiki, be it through an archive or a page history. I’m not strictly speaking opposed to that option, but at least with an MfD, what we leave behind is more or less boring procedural stuff, rather than actual links to vandalism. Maybe what we should really do is start a broader discussion about what to do with old LTA pages. Mz7 (talk) 08:13, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should be dealt with exactly the same way as SPI pages. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment ~~Delete~~. I see nothing there that's more useful than what the WP:SPI archive has. It has me wondering if any of the long-term abuse pages should exist indefinitely. – Athaenara ✉ 04:23, 12 December 2018 (UTC) (Struck. A. 10:36, 12 December 2018 (UTC) )[reply]

Note: just because I see nothing or wonder something doesn't mean nothing's there or I have great insight. Case pages for long term malefactors (e.g. Orangemoody) are necessary for the teams going after them (that one became so notorious it has a page in article space). The question here remains: is this specific case page useful and needed? – Athaenara ✉ 08:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think the typical MfD reviewer is competent to make that judgement, and the questions and answers associated with trying would be completely contrary to DENY. I think the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerks are suitably qualified, with their checkusers. Long term abuse that requires special tracking pages has heavy overlap with sockpuppetry. Some jobs should be left with the specialists. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roll out to the wider community for input and oversight (small s) at WP:VPP, with notifications at AN and SPI. ——SerialNumber54129 10:25, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- oversight? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For the recent discussion on LTA in general, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse (3rd nomination). —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RBI. LTA pages are a useful institutional memory tool for documenting the activity of serial abusers who have complicated behavioural patterns, edit a wide range of topics, make a habit of coming back after long periods of inactivity, or a whole series of other reasons that make an unwanted user difficult to detect. JaySmith2018 is none of these: they're just a troll, and a really basic one at that. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:15, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Praxidicae and Ivanvector. We don't need to put up shrines to every vandal, and when the ones we do have become a problem they should be deleted with as little attention as possible. Brad v🍁 15:41, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Praxidicae and Ivanvector. Basic trolling isn’t what LTA is for. OhKayeSierra (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, roughly what Ivanvector said. This is a page of limited to zero use. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everyone above and per common sense. This is not a useful page. Natureium (talk) 01:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - arguments above make sense to me. I think LTA can be quite useful, but not for relatively straightforward vandalism/trolling. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:39, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ivanvector and everyone above - LTA subpages are helpful, Troll subpages aren't. –Davey2010^Talk 19:38, 13 December 2018 (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.