It's a none valid reason to cut off any profile just because the source is not contemporary with the profiles life time in it self, if we have not valuated the second hand source.
One example I can demonstrate is a continuous source that was filled in under a period of at least 500 year. At first the source was oral, but after hand when the tradition of writing took place, it was put on paper, or leather to be correct, thus a living source under its creation, despite the fact that the first parts and the last parts has several hundreds of years in between, as a continuous chronicle.
So how would that source not be seen as contemporary? The answer is simply just because no one (as in people in general) can understand this today. This is where the trustworthiness comes in. If we do not understand, we should do nothing. If we search and find a source, no matter of if it is a second hand, or a third hand source, to be credible, we can use it if. there are no contradictions, the chronology fits, it makes sense, and other things/conditions indicates that it's right.
So without research, we will do bad things, no matter how good the intention was or looked like, and this is a fact. As stated here before by others, some people will find the clues to thoose deleted profiles, and might bring them back, so deliting profiles without clarifying why they were deleted, disconnected, will likely create more fuzz to come.
