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--Aervanath (talk) 06:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a violation of WP:BLP. Including a link to Caitlin Upton is rude and unnecessary. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 21:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. A template style deletion notice was included onto the userbox -- Agathoclea (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree, Delete per nom. 207.237.33.36 (talk) 23:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete insulting link, and no reason to have such a userbox anyway. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Does not violate BLP which makes that reason inapplicable. In fact, the nom should AfD the article r edit it is the issue is that important. We, in fact, have thousands of articles just as or more "insulting:" indeed. And last I checked, most userboxes have "no reason" and that does not seem to be a reason for deletion. Collect (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The BLP violation is the link to Caitlin Upton in a negative context. This could be resolved by editing the box, but I suspect that will negate its purpose. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Exactly. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 13:24, 18 April 2009 (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.