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: redirect to Wikipedia:Reserved usernames#List of reserved usernames. I refined the target to the specific section the names are mentioned in. (non-admin closure) Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:34, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Command line script (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

User:Move page script (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User:ScriptImporter (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

No need for these placeholder accounts for scripts that have never been run on enwiki and are likely to never be run on enwiki to exist, and their existence causes chaos by showing up in people's database reports for user pages of nonexistent users, like at WP:VPP#Are "users" only human editors and bots?. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:19, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• There's neither contributions nor log actions assigned to any of these three usernames, so I don't think we lose anything by deleting them. (Contrast User:Maintenance script.) They don't even need to be restored if that changes, since there's global user pages on meta that'll keep these blue. But I have little sympathy for people running queries that turn up pages like this but don't know how to exclude them. —Cryptic 18:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Cryptic: While they have user pages on Meta, those won't appear on other wikis because technically they don't have global accounts. For example, if you look at Special:CentralAuth/Command line script, you'll see that it doesn't have one. Perhaps a better long term fix is to file a Phabricator ticket to get global accounts for these scripts so that their global user pages will actually work. —⁠k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:07, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hunh. In that case, this mfd shouldn't prevent restoring/recreating the pages if they get edits or logs before the global pages work. —Cryptic 01:16, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, solely because they aren't linked from anywhere useful, not because the users don't exist. If these scripts had contributions, I would oppose deletion. Like Cryptic, I don't particularly care that these bother gnomes by showing up in database queries, which is not a valid reason for deletion. Toadspike [Talk] 14:19, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Wikipedia:Reserved usernames, which I've created that page to provide an overview of reserved usernames and a brief explanation of each, which should also suffice for reserved usernames that have no foreseeable use on the English Wikipedia. —⁠k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 04:30, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no objection to this. —Cryptic 05:32, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Wikipedia:Reserved usernames. “Not needed” is a very weak reason to delete. Blanking (archiving) or redirecting are superior solutions to “existence causes chaos by showing up in … reports”. Deletion should be reserved for things that should never have been created. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

“ people running queries that turn up pages like this but don't know how to exclude them” should learn how to. Report bugs should not be a reason to create work, reports should serve the project, the project should not be altered to serve reports. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2026 (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.