Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets/Dbromage

Using Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Matthew as a precedent, I've courtesy blanked this page as it pretty obvious that these claims have been proven false by the Arbitration Committee.

If anyone wants to examine these false claims then they are welcome to examine the history of this page.

This editor has departed Wikipedia since these claims were made. I hope by blanking the page the community sends a signal that he is welcome to return.

I must admit I'm no expert, but it seems CSD#G7 does not apply.

Does anyone has any opinions how this false evidence can be permanently removed? Logic Fuzzy (talk) 07:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit concerned about the fact that you created your account today, and this rather large edit was your very first - and so far only - action. Is there any way you can allay my concerns? Johnmc (talk) 09:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Johnmc, If you would like, please support the comments I have made here at User_talk:Rlevse Logic Fuzzy (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little bit late in the day, but I see nothing in this article which would require a courtesy blanking. Logic Fuzzy's rationale for blanking - to send "a signal that he is welcome to return." - is quite odd, the fact remains that nothing was proven either way, and the other fact that his account seems to have been specifically created for the purpose of blanking this discussion also seems odd. So therefore, I've decided to be bold, and unblanked the page.Johnmc (talk) 06:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]