I've been increasingly noticing that when established users leave the project (or decide to switch to a new account) an admin often deletes their usertalk pages. When I've questioned these deletions as lacking any basis in the speedy criteria, I've been pointed to [[m:right to vanish]]. Now, let me start by saying I see cases where an IAR deletion of usertalk pages might be the right thing to do: someone has account associated with a real-life identity and they are being harassed off wiki. Admins, and particularly OTRS, need some leeway here. However, as a general practice of "delete on demand" I find it problematic. Meta's "right to vanish" states ""Your user and talk pages, and their subpages, and other non-article pages that no others have substantively contributed to and whose existence does not impact the project, may be courtesy blanked or deleted." Now that clearly excludes any routine deletion of talk pages of established users, as others HAVE made substantial contributions. Further, the existence of those talk pages may well "impact the project" as conversation there will provide the context for decisions and posts elsewhere. Indeed, deleting such pages may well be prejudicial to other users. (A whole arbcom case, or deletion discussion, or a controversial block, can depend on a few diffs in a talk page history.) Especially, as are sometimes speaking of admin accounts. The meta page also suggests that blanking may be an alternative. As I say, I don't want to suggest that talkpages never be deleted. But I'm concerned about the impression of some admins that users have a "right" here - they don't. Or that the deleter has full discretion - they don't. Any deletion is an exercise of IAR and must have really good reason. The problem is that, if this continues, those of us unhappy will have little choice but to use DRV. But, if we do that, we'll also be drawing attention to the rare cases where there is a genuine reason (which is also why I will not give any examples here). Much better if we can send a clear message that these deletions of long-standing contributors' talk pages should not happen, unless there's really exceptional grounds (and perhaps those few cases could be discussed among a few OTRS people to check they are really necessary - and that selective deletion, oversight, or blanking will not suffice). The right to vanish is a right of contributors to leave, no questions asked, it is not a right to pull all your correspondence from the file and demand the employer shred every document you're ever signed. Doc

This is the case I hear most of. When someone insists loudly on deleting all trace of them here and they've had a controversial editing history, the usual reason is to come back and do the same thing again under a new account name.

I am also increasingly concerned that cases where someone is strongly insisting on a 'right to vanish' that it's actually 'right to return under another identity' being exercised, and the purpose for the deletions is to remove as much as possible the institutional memory and tell-tale signs of that person's previous interactions and behavior.