Deletion of List of warez groups (4th nomination)

Comment: Right, so take the comments on their merits. The ones you mentioned have no merit, and treat them as such. It should also be noted that  is not policy, guideline, or anywhere near official. It is merely an essay. #Single-purpose_accounts|Wikipedia user-name policy has something to say about SPA, but that is to say to  unless there is a known case of sockpuppetry. Either way, a little/no contribution account or an SPA (assuming no sockpuppetry) should be given the same weight as any other editor in an AfD: think about what they say, not about who they are
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:UN||WP:AGF)

Comment: There's no need to be |un-civil. BBilge is |acting in good faith. What you're suggesting goes against Wikipedia's policies, specifically the fact that there are no/few external, credible sources, so only well-known groups can be talked about on the page
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Civility (WP:CIVIL||WP:AGF)

Comment: Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#Discussion|Policy has to do with the matter. |Single purpose accounts are typically afforded less weighting. This is particularly relevant since comments like "GIVE UP ALREADY!!!!" and "Nominator to delete was never in the scene" are as unobjective and poorly written as is this article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA)

Comment: Anyone acting in good faith can contribute to the discussion. The author of the article can make his/her case like everyone else. As discussed above, relevant facts and evidence are welcome from anyone but the opinions of anonymous and/or suspiciously new users may be discounted by the closing admin. Please bear in mind that administrators will discount any obviously bad faith contributions to the discussion when closing the discussion. On the other hand, a user who makes a well-argued, fact-based case based upon Wikipedia policy and does so in a civil manner may well sway the discussion despite being anonymous." Pretty much says it all. Judge their comments based on their merit, not on the fact that they're a little/no contribution editor. As always, pure opinion and  have little/no merit in an AfD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: This is an out and out lie, BBilge. I'm trying to |AGF, but I can't see it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: So in other words, |you like it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)