Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Daniel Brandt

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 delete. I've removed the legal threats and blocked Brandt for violating NLT. Gamaliel 18:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Daniel Brandt

The only purpose of this page is to spew

legal threats. User has never made any effort to contribute to Wikipedia in a productive manner. As you know I'm generally in favor of userpage freedom, but this crosses the line. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 05:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete as a violation of
WP:NLT. --Hetar 08:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Speedy delete. —Locke Cole • t • c 09:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: on a related note, I've proposed a new CSD G9 criteria for legal threats, see
  WP:CSDs talk page. —Locke Cole • t • c 09:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Delete. The page doesn't further the project. -Will Beback 09:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as an attack page on, well, everyone. One more person in support and I'll do it myself with the greatest of pleasure. Brandt has enough outlets for his ranting, we don't need to be another one in the name of fairness. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 13:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, too many apparently good-faith keep votes. Delete anyway, does not help build an encyclopaedia to say the least. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 15:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Silly userpage legal threats are one thing, but deleting them just aggravates the situation. Everybody calm down, take a deep breath, and solve this with Mr. Brandt rationally. Deleting his threats resolves nothing, and just aggravates him more.
T/_C\^@ 14:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Speedy Keep per Werdna648. Also, "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" shouldn't censor its dissident voices. --HK 14:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit to help build it,
not an experiment in anarchy. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 15:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Speedy delete, ban creator (again!) per
WP:NLT. Kirill Lok s h in 14:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

*Keep I don't agree with it, but I don't think it is a legal threat, all the information is true, and there are no explicit threats to sue anyone. Prodego ^talk 15:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Call it a legal threat and ban me yet again if you like, and we can test the new law."? How much more explicit would you like it to be? Kirill Lok s h in 15:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"And delete this User page, the two Talk pages, and the History pages. It's the smart thing to do." isn't that a user request? CSD U1? Prodego ^talk 15:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'll just watch, and possibly close. Prodego ^talk

I'd agree with deleting it under U1 - but the deletion of a user talk page only occurs under extenuating circumstances.

T/_C\^@ 16:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete Locke Cole's new CSD G9 is a good idea; in any case, this is a misuse of userspace. Xoloz 16:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Legal threat, of no value to the project. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia does not negotiate with terrorists. Mackensen (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remember
WP:NPA Prodego ^talk 17:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm well aware of it. He has indicated that he'll do certain things if we don't do as he asks. It's a statement of fact. Mackensen (talk) 17:56, 5 April 2006 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.