Category talk:Candidates for deletion

'''Please use this page to discuss pages that have been labeled for deletion. List the Articles with delete tags under the articles, and media with the delete tag under media. Any other talk goes under "Category Talk". To say what you think on an article/media, put a number under either keep or delete where the article/media is listed, and copy this code " #  " (without the quotes) or just ~ (four tildes). Voting will end if the discussion has been inactive for two days and has 3 or more total votes.'''

Discussion
When you add a topic to this page, please make it a link to the page we are discussing. This makes it a lot easier to find the pages. Thanks!

Also make sure you use the "Category:Candidates for Deletion" and not the speedy delete one so it'll be easier to find and delete topics. Thank you so much for understanding!

~Your Admins

Links to categories:


 * Candidates for Deletion
 * Candidates for Speedy Deletion

Summaries
A list of previous votes can be found here.

Delete

 * 1) Account has no posts, likes, or anything and is deleted. Why keep it? ~Hype (Message me) 19:50, July 22, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) NG (talk) 19:55, July 22, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) -spy
 * 4) LegoWebby101 10:49, July 27, 2016 (UTC)

PHINN
The info on this page is exactly the same as the archive article. Seeing as he's posted on the new MBs 2 times and not at all since 2012, I say keep the archive and delete this page.

Delete

 * 1) -spy

Keep

 * 1) Deleting the original article just because he hasn't posted on the new MBs doesn't make any sense to me. Plus, saying that "All the information in this article is in the archive article" is incorrect; his current MB avatar and rank aren't in the archive. Furthermore, the entire point of a Wiki is to keep track of present-day information. So why delete that and keep outdated information? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 12:20, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Ale. ~Hype (Message me) 16:56, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) Fine Impossibubbles (talk) 17:21, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) LegoWebby101 10:50, July 27, 2016 (UTC)

Comments

 * Uh, won't deleting this page screw up the PHINN/Archive page, as it's directly linked to the original? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 22:07, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
 * It would be a simple matter to remove any links directed towards the new article. ~Hype (Message me)
 * No, I mean, because the PHINN/Archive article has the PHINN article before the parentheses... won't deleting the original PHINN article also automatically delete the PHINN/Archive one? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 22:19, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. Even if it did, you could always restore the archive. -spy

JediMasterDarthVader
He's made 5 posts on the new MBs, and none since 2014. He has an archive article. Basically the only thing missing from that is his new MB sig, which I don't think is enough to warrant keeping an entire article.

Keep

 * 1) Deleting the original article just because he hasn't posted on the new MBs doesn't make any sense to me. Plus, saying that "All the information in this article is in the archive article" is incorrect; his current MB avatar and rank aren't in the archive. Furthermore, the entire point of a Wiki is to keep track of present-day information. So why delete that and keep outdated information? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 12:20, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) ~Hype (Message me)
 * 3) FINE Impossibubbles (talk) 20:07, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) LegoWebby101 10:51, July 27, 2016 (UTC)

Delete

 * 1) -spy

Yannick7199
This user has never posted on the new MBs and the information in this article is the same as his archive.

Delete

 * 1) -spy

Keep

 * 1) Deleting the original article just because he hasn't posted on the new MBs doesn't make any sense to me. Plus, saying that "All the information in this article is in the archive article" is incorrect; his current MB avatar and rank aren't in the archive. Furthermore, the entire point of a Wiki is to keep track of present-day information. So why delete that and keep outdated information? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 12:20, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) ~Hype (Message me) 16:56, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) Fine Impossibubbles (talk) 17:21, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

Genralaustin
He's only made a few posts on the new MBs, nothing of merit. He hasn't posted since 2013. All the information in this article is in the archive article.

Delete

 * 1) -spy

Keep

 * 1) Deleting the original article just because he hasn't posted on the new MBs doesn't make any sense to me. Plus, saying that "All the information in this article is in the archive article" is incorrect; his current MB avatar and rank aren't in the archive. Furthermore, the entire point of a Wiki is to keep track of present-day information. So why delete that and keep outdated information? Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 12:20, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) ~Hype (Message me) 16:56, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) Fine Impossibubbles (talk) 17:22, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

BlockHead007
Okay, I kinda get keeping the other articles. But come ON. None of this guy's posts are even there anymore. There is literally no reason to have this.

Delete

 * 1) Impossibubbles (talk) 19:35, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) AmazingPythor 20:20, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) His posts are viewable in the Internet Archive... And again, just because there's nothing new doesn't mean it can be an excuse for the main article to be deleted. Alemas2005: Mostly Harmless(Talk to me) 20:16, July 26, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) ~Hype (Message me) 20:18, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

Comments

 * ALEMAS. Who the HELL is going to look at an internet archive. I'm not changing my vote on this one. xD