Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Evrik

This should have never been certified. It has no real substance and should be made to go away. --South Philly 01:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is closed- it was taken off WP:RFC/U some time ago but we don't delete old RfCs. WjBscribe 01:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I might say to delete if it truly were just some stupid RfC, but many established editors agree that Evrik did something wrong. -Amarkov moo! 01:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - old RFCs are not customarily deleted. Also, South Philly - can you please undo the portion of your edit which changed (unicode?) characters all over the page? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Amarkov. I cannot imagine that any certified RfC should be deleted, but were one certified exclusively by users editing disruptively and partaken of only by such editors, deletion might be counseled; here, though, many editors participated in the discussion, and so deletion is surely plainly disfavored. Joe 03:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Amarkov. Important to keep those things as part of an audit/documentation trail. --Fredrick day 11:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all of the above. No legitimate reason to delete a legitimate RfC from WP record. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 19:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If it was ever closed no one told me ... and it doesn't show up on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. --evrik ^(talk) 20:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that it is not listed in the archive page, but it was removed from the active page here by Radiant!. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 00:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]