Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

Miscellany for deletion (MfD) is a place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic pages in the namespaces which aren't covered by other specialized deletion discussion areas. Items sent here are usually discussed for seven days; then they are either deleted by an administrator or kept, based on community consensus as evident from the discussion, consistent with policy, and with careful judgment of the rough consensus if required.

Filtered versions of the page are available at

• Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no drafts
• Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion no portals

Information on the process

What may be nominated for deletion here:

• Pages not covered by other XFD venues, including pages in these namespaces: Draft:, Help:, Portal:, MediaWiki:, Wikipedia: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText: and the various Talk: namespaces
• Userboxes (regardless of namespace)
• Pages in the File namespace that have a local description page but no local file (if there is a local file, Wikipedia:Files for discussion is the right venue)
• Any other page, that is not in article space, where there is dispute as to the correct XfD venue.

Requests to undelete pages deleted after discussion here, and debate whether discussions here have been properly closed, both take place at Wikipedia:Deletion review, in accordance with Wikipedia's undeletion policy.

Before nominating a page for deletion

Before nominating a page for deletion, please consider these guidelines:

Deleting pages in your own userspace	If you want to have your own userpage or a draft you created deleted, there is no need to list it here; simply tag it with {{db-userreq}} or {{db-u1}}. If you wish to clear your user talk page or sandbox, just blank it.
Duplications in draftspace?	Duplications in draftspace are usually satisfactorily fixed by redirection. If the material is in mainspace, redirect the draft to the article, or a section of the article. If multiple draft pages on the same topic have been created, tag them for merging. See WP:SRE.
Deleting pages in other people's userspace	Consider explaining your concerns on the user's talk page with a personal note or by adding {{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~  to their talk page. This step assumes good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}. Take care not to bite newcomers – sometimes using the {{subst:welcome}} or {{subst:welcomeg}} template and a pointer to WP:UP would be best first. Problematic userspace material is often addressed by the User pages guidelines including in some cases removal by any user or tagging to clarify the content or to prevent external search engine indexing. (Examples include copies of old, deleted, or disputed material, problematic drafts, promotional material, offensive material, inappropriate links, 'spoofing' of the MediaWiki interface, disruptive HTML, invitations or advocacy of disruption, certain kinds of images and image galleries, etc) If your concern relates to these areas consider these approaches as well, or instead of, deletion. User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion. Articles that were recently deleted at AfD and then moved to userspace are generally not deleted unless they have lingered in userspace for an extended period of time without improvement to address the concerns that resulted in their deletion at AfD, or their content otherwise violates a global content policy such as our policies on Biographies of living persons that applies to any namespace.
Policies, guidelines and process pages	Established pages and their sub-pages should not be nominated, as such nominations will probably be considered disruptive, and the ensuing discussions closed early. This is not a forum for modifying or revoking policy. Instead consider tagging the policy as {{historical}} or redirecting it somewhere. Proposals still under discussion generally should not be nominated. If you oppose a proposal, discuss it on the policy page's discussion page. Consider being bold and improving the proposal. Modify the proposal so that it gains consensus. Also note that even if a policy fails to gain consensus, it is often useful to retain it as a historical record, for the benefit of future editors.
WikiProjects and their subpages	It is generally preferable that inactive WikiProjects not be deleted, but instead be marked as {{WikiProject status|inactive}}, redirected to a relevant WikiProject, or changed to a task force of a parent WikiProject, unless the WikiProject was incompletely created or is entirely undesirable. WikiProjects that were never very active and which do not have substantial historical discussions (meaning multiple discussions over an extended period of time) on the project talk page should not be tagged as {{historical}}; reserve this tag for historically active projects that have, over time, been replaced by other processes or that contain substantial discussion (as defined above) of the organization of a significant area of Wikipedia. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Wikipedia, consider userfication. Notify the main WikiProject talk page when nominating any WikiProject subpage, in addition to standard notification of the page creator.
Alternatives to deletion	Normal editing that doesn't require the use of any administrator tools, such as merging the page into another page or renaming it, can often resolve problems. Pages in the wrong namespace (e.g. an article in Wikipedia namespace), can simply be moved and then tag the redirect for speedy deletion using {{db-g6|rationale= it's a redirect left after a cross-namespace move}}. Notify the author of the original article of the cross-namespace move.
Alternatives to MfD	Speedy deletion If the page clearly satisfies a "general" or "user" speedy deletion criterion, tag it with the appropriate template. Be sure to read the entire criterion, as some do not apply in the user space.

Please familiarize yourself with the following policies

• Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
• Wikipedia:Deletion process – our guidelines on how to list anything for deletion
• Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – a how-to guide whose protocols on discussion format and shorthands also apply here
• Wikipedia:Project namespace – our guidelines on "Wikipedia" namespace pages
• Wikipedia:User page – our guidelines on user pages and user subpages
• Wikipedia:Userboxes – our guideline on userboxes

How to list pages for deletion

Please check the aforementioned list of deletion discussion areas to check that you are in the right area. Then follow these instructions:

Instructions on listing pages for deletion:

To list a page for deletion, follow this three-step process: (replace PageName with the name of the page, including its namespace, to be deleted) Note: Users must be logged in to complete step II. An unregistered user who wishes to nominate a page for deletion should complete step I and post their reasoning on Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion with a notification to a registered user to complete the process. I. Edit PageName: Enter the following text at the top of the page you are listing for deletion: {{mfd|1={{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}}} for a second or subsequent nomination use {{mfdx|2nd}} or {{mfd|GroupName}} if nominating several similar related pages in an umbrella nomination. Choose a suitable name as GroupName and use it on each page. If the nomination is for a userbox or similarly transcluded page, use {{subst:mfd-inline}} so as to not mess up the formatting for the userbox. Use {{subst:mfd-inline|GroupName}} for a group nomination of several related userboxes or similarly transcluded pages. Please include in the edit summary the phrase Added MfD nomination at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]] replace PageName with the name of the page that is up for deletion. Please don't mark your edit summary as a minor edit. Check the "Watch this page" box if you would like to follow the page in your watchlist. This may help you to notice if your MfD tag is removed by someone. Save the page II. Create its MfD subpage. The resulting MfD box at the top of the page should contain the link "this page's entry" Click that link to open the page's deletion discussion page. Insert this text: {{subst:mfd2| pg={{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:PAGENAME}}||2}}| text=Reason why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~ replacing Reason... with your reasons why the page should be deleted and sign the page. Do not substitute the pagename, as this will occur automatically. Consider checking "Watch this page" to follow the progress of the debate. Please use an edit summary such as Creating deletion discussion page for [[PageName]] replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion. Save the page. III. Add a line to MfD. Follow   this edit link   and at the top of the list add a line: {{subst:mfd3| pg=PageName}} Put the page's name in place of "PageName". Include the discussion page's name in your edit summary like Added [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]] replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion. Save the page. If nominating a page that has been nominated before, use the page's name in place of "PageName" and add {{priorxfd|PageName}} in the nominated page deletion discussion area to link to the previous discussions and then save the page using an edit summary such as Added [[Template:priorxfd]] to link to prior discussions. If nominating a page from someone else's userspace, notify them on their main talk page. For other pages, while not required, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the miscellany that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the page and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter or Wikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may add {{subst:mfd notice|PageName}} ~~~~ to their talk page in the "edit source" section, replacing PageName with the pagename. Please use an edit summary such as Notice of deletion discussion at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName]] replacing PageName with the name of the nomination page you are proposing for deletion. If the user has not edited in a while, consider sending the user an email to notify them about the MfD if the MfD concerns their user pages. If you are nominating a WikiProject, please post a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, in addition to the project's talk page and the talk pages of the founder and active members.

Administrator instructions

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	11	42	53
TfD	0	0	0	2	2
MfD
FfD	0	0	0	2	2
RfD	0	0	5	23	28
AfD	0	0	0	3	3

Administrator instructions for closing and relisting discussions can be found here.

Archived discussions

A list of archived discussions can be located at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates.

Active discussions

Pages currently being considered are indexed by the day on which they were first listed. Please place new listings at the top of the section for the current day. If no section for the current day is present, please start a new section.

2008-10-06

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 debate was Delete Tikiwont (talk) 07:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Zanbam

Violation of WP:UP#NOT and/or WP:NOTWEBHOST, using user space as promotional page. haz (talk) 14:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, content is (almost) unintelligible. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Page is promotional in nature. Delete as per WP:SOAP. Jordan ^Contribs 17:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete: Wikipedia is not your webhost to put anything that has nothing to do with building an enyclopedia. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was delete Lazulilasher (talk) 15:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

User:The Real Baby Ace/subpage/walgreens environmental record

POV fork in userspace. User hasn't contributed since May. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 14:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - Content no longer meeting WP:User last edited by The Real Baby Ace on 6 May 2008 seems ripe for deletion. -- Suntag ☼ 16:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per above, but noting that there are similar pages at User:The Real Baby Ace/subpage, now all listed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Real Baby Ace/subpage--Tikiwont (talk) 08:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete Tikiwont (talk) 07:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Rmattai

Violation of WP:UP#NOT and/or WP:NOTMYSPACE, using user space as personal webspace. haz (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, we're not a web host. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Actually, the user in question tried to create this page as an article, and someone else put in their userspace. User has four edits. 140.247.243.171 (talk) 02:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment: Not sure if the no crystal ball policy and the band policy applies in userspace. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 20:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - user created a vanity article. I userfied it prior to deleting the article so as to not bight. However, the user hasn't been back (using this account, anyway), and NOTMYSPACE should apply. Rklawton (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete, taking into account the promotional username. Tikiwont (talk) 08:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Nitrousmusic

Violation of WP:UP#NOT and/or WP:NOTMYSPACE, using user space as personal webspace. haz (talk) 13:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, almost empty. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete - per WP:IAR and this (MySpace memorial page). Will delete the images as well. I will notify the nominator separately and seek further advice. I suspect that deletion will be the result in any case. Deletion of this discussion page might be needed as well. Carcharoth (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Jacksterlinghowlett

User page that seems to be meant to promote his paintings. User's contributions are limited to this user page and several images of his paintings, which were never used in any articles. —Bkell (talk) 13:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, we're not myspace. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 14:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Keep Tikiwont (talk) 07:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tutorial (Formatting)/sandbox

This is an exact duplicate of the regular sandbox. It would probably be just as productive to redirect this to Wikipedia:Sandbox. -- GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, it would (agree with nomination) -- how do you turn this on 02:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Having a number of sandboxes prevents horrendous edit conflicts in the main one, and it's useful to have it linked to the formatting tutorial so that people can see examples of formatting tests and build on what others have done. Might as well keep it for these two reasons. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 02:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Zzuuzz. In any case, it can't hurt to keep it, especially seeing as ClueBot II is configured to keep it in order. haz (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Having only one sandbox will make that one sandbox mostly useless, with the number of edits and randomness that goes on. -- Ned Scott 01:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy keep per above. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 13:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete all pages but advise user accordingly in case they return. Images need to be addressed separately and are not necessarily deletion candidates anyways. Tikiwont (talk) 08:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

User:David Cruise/Homogeneity

This user has long been absent and all these articles are versions for long term storage. All the images that fall on the pages as the only usage should also be deleted.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• User:David Cruise/Homogeneity as to Homogeneity (statistics) - Images all on commons
• User:David Cruise/Matrix Addition as to Matrix addition - Images all on commons
• User:David Cruise/Multiple correlation as to Multiple correlation - No images
• User:David Cruise/Supermatrices as to Supermatrix - Image:Supermatrix 1.png, Image:Supermatrix 2.png, Image:Supermatrix 3.png, Image:Supermatrix 4.png
• User:David Cruise/War Cycles as to War cycles - Images used elsewhere
• User:David Cruise/Matrix Subtraction as to a redirect to Matrix addition - Images on commons
• User:David Cruise/True Variance as to True variance - Image:True Variance 7.gif, Image:True Variance 6.png
• User:David Cruise/Witch trials as to Witch-hunt - Image:Map of Witch Trials.jpg, Image:Bruloir.jpg, Image:Fire 2.jpg, Image:Raising the Devil.jpg, Image:CottonM.jpg, Image:Malleus Bar Graph.jpg, Image:TortureRack.jpg, Image:IntestinalCrankA.jpg, Image:TortureChamber.jpg, Image:Weyer.jpg, Image:NeedleUnderFingernails.jpg, Image:DevilExists.jpg
• User:David Cruise/Canonical Analysis as to Canonical analysis - No images
• User:David Cruise/Diana assassination is just a link to an off-wiki site - No images
• User:David Cruise/Mayerling is just a 3 line "article" - No images
• User:David Cruise/Variance is a blanked page, but this edit to it speaks to the user's exit [1]

• Keep all and use {{NOINDEX}}/blanking on any that might be problematic. The "long term storage" really isn't an issue for pages that became inactive because an editor left. This is very different than someone intentionally creating pages to serve as a stored version. Sandboxes don't have idle timers. -- Ned Scott 01:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Consider me neutral right now. Seems he didn't actually work on any of these. -- Ned Scott 22:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
• Have a look at this relativly short talk page Talk:Canonical analysis. The above pages are simply copies of articles that he wrote in which he is keeping his prefered versions. It is also very likley that this user and the user and IP address in this diff [2] are the same person. The references added to the respective articles appear to be written by the person behind User:Cruise. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 22:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete all as archived/permanent content in user subpages. -- Suntag ☼ 10:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment - MfD is not for deleting images. That need to be done at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. -- Suntag ☼ 10:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• Following on from what you have said and to clarify, those images that are copyleft/PD should be copied to commons then deleted from en-wiki rather than straight deletion. Seddσn ^{talk Editor Review} 02:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - I only checked Witch hunt but I couldn't find where in it's history the Witch trials subpage was allegedly archived from, it appears unrelated except as to topic. The images should not be dealt with here at all unless they are eligible for speedy. Also, notwithstanding editor's retirement years ago, it is irregular not to place a notice on the user's talk page.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 04:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

2008-10-05

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 debate was Delete. Tikiwont (talk) 09:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Tom Sayle/TalkHeader

This template discourages people from discussing someone's edits with them which is the entire purpose of a user's talk page. It only encourages nastiness among editors and serves no real purpose to an open community. Additionally, the user has been blocked for his combative nature so I'm not sure if this should stay with him being indefinitely blocked. Metros (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Heck, I could even go for a speedy on this. Clearly inappropriate. --UsaSatsui (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete: If you are creating templates like this because of your editing, your template will be deleted on sight. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 17:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete a personal sub-page of an indefinitely blocked sockpuppetering user with no purpose (given that he is blocked). - Icewedge (talk) 00:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Obviously delete, discourages discussion. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, as obviously counter-productive. Nsk92 (talk) 12:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment The user page came from Template:If you are here. -- Suntag ☼ 10:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete previous content. The recently created redirect is not obviously a good one to me, but can be challenged at RfD if deemed necessary. Tikiwont (talk) 09:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Goals

A completely unofficial list of "goals" which are rather mangled and not really at all accurate. Redundant to the real mission statements we have dotted about. J Milburn (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, not really our goals. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 14:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment why not just redirect it to WP:5P? -- Ned Scott 01:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete In a terrible state, not actually defined goals. Seems to have been test-edited. Delete. Jordan ^Contribs 18:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Currently is a sensible redirect. No need to delete anything. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Keep - In a discusion short on convincing arguments either way, I can only note that the request for deletion hasn't found any support. It might help to discuss its usage or usefulness elsewhere, though, including the question whether this should be rather a template or a GIF. Tikiwont (talk) 09:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject External links/Ad

This has to be one of the most user-abusive wiki-"things" I've ever seen. I thought my mouse was broken when I first saw this monstrosity. I'm not 100% certain this is the correct XfD process for this page. It is intended solely for transclusion, making it a template, but it is not in the "Template:" namespace.
— SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep these ads are fairly common. I couldn't personally link you to the actual template which most people use for "ads", but I'm sure someone can. Either way, I similarly don't know if this should be template space or WP space. But I do know it shouldn't be XfD'd. :) --Izno (talk) 14:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Template:Wikipedia ads. Joe 04:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. I agree completely with the nom about it being annoying, but that's not a reason to delete it, and it could serve a purpose. --UsaSatsui (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Seems to be apart of the Wikipedia ad project. -- Ned Scott 01:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Part of a WikiProject, no meaningful reason for deletion. Jordan ^Contribs 18:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment isn't this part of the {{Qxz-ads}} system? -- Suntag ☼ 10:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Fix the problems. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment: "Keep Seems to be apart of the Wikipedia ad project" and similar comments aren't actually a delete/keep rationale of any kind. Being part of a project doesn't magically grant XfD immunity. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

2008-10-04

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 debate was Delete as we're either doing what everybody wants or simply undo a userfication that has not resulted in an encyclopedic artcile. Tikiwont (talk) 08:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Orson20/Leon Ousby

This is the remnants of a userified article twice deleted at AFD (once as not notable and the second time as a partial hoax). The author has indicated on the page that the article's subject wishes it to be deleted. Looking through the page history, it appears that the author is either the subject of article or someone known to them. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment why not G7 it? Author who may also be subject requests deletion of article in user space. TravellingCari 04:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I would, but I'm practising assuming good faith. I really need the practise. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Gotcha, in that case I'll leave it be and just support deletion per the reasons you mentioned and per G7 TravellingCari 14:54, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• I'm a little confused here. At first I thought Leon Ousby was requesting deletion vi92.40.212.254 (talk) 20:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)a an IP, but it would seen that the IP is Orson20. 92.40.175.92 (talk · tag · contribs · count · WHOIS · ip details · trace · RBLs • http • logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · spi · checkuser · socks ) and 92.40.147.127 (talk · tag · contribs · count · WHOIS · ip details · trace · RBLs • http • logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · spi · checkuser · socks ) made the request, while 92.40.191.235 (talk · tag · contribs · count · WHOIS · ip details · trace · RBLs • http • logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · spi · checkuser · socks ) and 194.201.64.90 (talk · tag · contribs · count · WHOIS · ip details · trace · RBLs • http • logs · block log · arb · rfc · lta · spi · checkuser · socks ) have made contributing edits that appear to be Orson20, mixed in with other edits from Orson20 while logged in. So it would seem that this is Orson20, and thus a speedy-able deletion. If he could log-in and make this request, it would save some time. -- Ned Scott 01:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Or, maybe Orson20 feels that blanking it is the deletion, and the message left behind is an explanation for the removed content? -- Ned Scott 01:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
• This IP address is Orson20. Leon Ousby wishes the page to be deleted. The blanking of the page was me removing it and yes the message is an explanation of why. It appears I crossed boundries of privacy. I apologise if I have caused offence. The article went a little way off track from how I indended it to read. I received an email requesting it to be edited or removed from T.J Management LONDON which is the company the represents Leon Ousby. I am still considering editing, but at this stage I would prefer it to be deleted. Once again I apologise if I have offended any people/person mentioned in the Article. Orson Griffiths
• Delete per the above. -- Suntag ☼ 10:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per the above. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete If the subject's management service has requested deletion because the article violates privacy then it is advisable it is removed even if it is in userspace.Apron Maxim (talk) 07:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

2008-10-03

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 debate was Keep. Synergy 14:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Manuelhp42

Enlists the workings of a real-life person, and may be an account used to impersonate this person, based on edits to the namespace -- ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 23:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

• Provisional keep...or it may just be the person? Thousands of editors have a "real-life" profile. It doesn't look like anyone made any effort to discuss this issue with Manuelhp42 prior to this MfD and it looks rather bitey to try to delete the userspace of someone who we should assume is in the clear. If the profile was negative or of an underaged person, it might be a different story, but without evidence of misuse I cannot sanction deletion. the skomorokh 18:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - The user last edited the page on 22 August 2008, so it may be too early to delete it. Perhaps give it three months (until 22 November 2008) to let it work itself out before listing it at MfD again. -- Suntag ☼ 10:35, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Keep for now. Tikiwont (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Nicolenicolenicole79

User page written in a form to mimic an article in the mainspace, that may impersonate a real-life YouTube user that includes information that may be used to reveal an identity later on -- ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 22:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. I don't see how this is any less valid than any other "my biography" page in userspace. – iridescent 00:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - this user just opened the account Sept 28th. Give the girl a chance. Sure her only edits so far are to her user page but its been only a week. Based on the user page it is fairly obvious that she can compose and design using Wiki... lets try and get her to stay around and expand her interest base. Perhaps a welcome message and a a suggestion that by adding content outside of her page would be great. Her attitude on her talk page in regards to the AfD on the article page ain't great, but I also think the AfD was closed quite quickly as well. Lets revisit this user page nomination in three months if she has not done anything else for the encyclopedic and my !vote may be very different.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 18:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Chomp Chomp. I'm with Jordan on this one, if, in a few months this is still around, and that's all the edits this user has then we can discuss nuking it. User:MrMarkTaylor ^{What's that?/What I Do/Feed My Box} 11:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, unless these are her only edits. I will try and convince her to move out to others parts of the wiki and expand. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Speedy keep. Allegations about user conduct are not valid grounds for deletion of a user page. Hut 8.5 18:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

User:OwenX

this user bullys the Wikiepedia users, He removes content that others think is proper and should be kept on site. he blocks and warns users for doing things that really he should not be doing. this Is a FREE encyclopedia and should be able 2 express content that is good. I wanted to create a page about my band and he removed my page because im not famous. now i thought that we are all equal, i guess not. i guess that the more famous musicnans can have a page but we cant. thats discrimination do to unfamability. -- Jarmusic2 (talk) 17:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Keep and speedy close. See WP:MFD#Prerequisites: "User pages about Wikipedia-related matters by established users usually do not qualify for deletion." Seems likes a bad faith nomination to me. RJaguar3 | u | t 18:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Keep as no real policy based reasons to delete this talk archive have been brought forward. Tikiwont (talk) 08:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:EyeOS/Archive 1

Clear flame war; not worth even being in an archive. Message from XENU^{u, t} 15:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Is there a guideline somewhere about deleting flame wars? I'd like to review the guideline and precedent before weighing in. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Keep: The only guideline I can find is the help for archiving a talk page. That doesn't talk about deleting page history, although it says that even for user talk pages that archiving is preferable to deletion. The idea of completely deleting the entire history of discussion for an article seems way outside of standard practice. Whether I think the discussion was useful or not doesn't enter into my decision. However, if there is a policy or guideline somewhere that says flame wars should be deleted, point it out to me and I'll change my mind. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Disagree. Well, it's not got any 'of value' content. It's just one huge flame war that's not even worth being archived. Message from XENU^{u, t} 01:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Suggestion if this page is really problematic then I have a suggestion. Go to the talk page and see if others feel the same way, then instead of using the normal cut/paste archive, use a dated diff link instead. -- Ned Scott 02:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

This discussion ended 6 months ago; it isn't active. The major usernames involved in that discussion are no longer active accounts; it's likely no one would respond. Since it's in an archive, it doesn't really impede any current discussion. Is there any situation in which Wikipedia guidelines support deleting the talk history? Or is the history of how an article got to be the way it is valuable even if it was a somewhat ugly process? WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment I'm still active, I've just decided to avoid participating with the voting process to avoid being yelled at. Psychcf (talk) 12:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep No reason not to. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

2008-10-02

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 debate was No consensus to delete. Author can still ask for deletion via {{db-user}}. Tikiwont (talk) 09:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Marvin Shilmer/New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

This page is a copy of an article, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The page has not been modified in several months. User page guidelines state:

While userpages and subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content, this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. In other words, Wikipedia is not a free web host. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion.

-- Jeffro77 (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. Preferably:
  1. Ask the user to blank the page
  2. Blank the page yourself if you don't get a response, or have a reason to skip #1
  3. Come here to MfD

--SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Step 1 was done. The response to step 1 made step 2 impractical.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I've added {{NOINDEX}}, which will exclude the page from most search engines. -- Ned Scott 02:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was keep. east718 // talk // email // 04:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Seddon/SandboxNWT

This page is a copy of an article, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The page has not been modified in several months. User page guidelines state:

While userpages and subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content, this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. In other words, Wikipedia is not a free web host. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion.

-- Jeffro77 (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Your quoting of policy is correct but for future reference I think that this MfD is probably unnecessary. The real purpose of the page was for use during a case I was mediating with the Mediation cabal. A topic which is a contentious area and the possibility of another dispute arising is likely given its nature. In this case and for other pages in my userspace I may have forgotten about, and also other non-contentious user pages, it is probably easier just coming to ask me (or the specific user) directly about the page rather than going through the hassle of MfD. In this case I have no opinion on whether this page is deleted or not, as I suppose I could just ask for it to be restored if needs be. Its just more hassle in the end. Seddσn ^{talk Editor Review} 19:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps a text file on your own computer or alternative web-host would be a more appropriate location for keeping different versions of articles long-term.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that an unreasonable request to make. The retention of this content in the mediator's user space is, here, very understandable; if I may speak candidly, there are better things we could all be devote our time to. Anthøny ✉ 15:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Has a purpose and does not violate the spirit of the userspace rules. MBisanz ^talk 04:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Whilst the nominator's rationale is understandable, in this case I view this page as an exception to the standard restrictions on retaining deleted content in one's userspace: with a little foresight, it is not unreasonable to say that the waiving of the sections of the user page guidelines pertaining to such deleted content is for the "wider good"—the resolving of a content dispute is clearly the higher priority. Guidelines reflect our communal norms in the rough majority of incidents, rather than religiously dictate how we should behave in all situations. Keep. Anthøny ✉ 15:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Having three users each keep their own version of the article seems like a good way of (re)starting a content dispute rather than resolving or preventing one. In any case, I have now commented out the categories on all three copies of the article so that these user subpages are not displayed in the Category namespaces.--Jeffro77 (talk) 19:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I have used the tactic a number of times in the course of my Mediation work. I truly do not think hosting deleted content in one's user space serves to re-start a content dispute; if anything, it is very much the opposite. Anthøny ✉ 20:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I've added {{NOINDEX}}, which will exclude the page from most search engines. -- Ned Scott 02:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was Delete. This takes into account that the version is a mere copy and that the editor hasn't been active for months with a related arbritration case rejected because of this inactivity as well. Tikiwont (talk) 08:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Cfrito/New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

This page is a copy of an article, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The page has not been modified in several months, and the editor appears to be inactive. User page guidelines state:

While userpages and subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content, this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. In other words, Wikipedia is not a free web host. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion.

-- Jeffro77 (talk) 17:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I've added {{NOINDEX}}, which will exclude the page from most search engines. -- Ned Scott 02:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

2008-10-01

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 debate was delete. east718 // talk // email // 04:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Aaronshavit/Zionism and racism allegations

Abandoned soapbox being treated as an article, POV pushing in userspace. Also of concern since it shows up second-place on a google search and contains a dicey "Racist statements by the main Zionist figures" section. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Against deletion

Please note the following points:

• It was nominated in the past for MfD deletion but the result of voting was 'Keep' with almost consensus (see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Aaronshavit/Zionism and racism allegations). No important changes to the material made since that time.
• Please remember it exists only in my account pages and it still needs a lot of work before being published as an article. It still in progress. The material is nothing but a draft (i.e. it is not an article yet). it is marked explicitly as a draft on the user's main page.
• The material clearly appears in the scope of user pages and no other articles link to it.
• It doesn't show up in the first few pages in google search[3]. --Aaronshavit (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment nominated nearly a year ago when it was quite new, as the user states above "No important changes to the material made since that time" - user space used for stuff like this is for use when working on articles, not indefinite storage. If it isn't being actively worked on and is unlikely to become a useful mainspace article in a reasonable time frame it should be taken offline.--82.7.39.174 (talk) 06:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as the assumptions of the previous MfD aren't valid anymore. There is no progress. If the user really is interested in upgrading this to NPOV encyclopedic content, they can work on it also offline, considering the recent AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racism and Zionism that resulted in Delete. In any case mark with {{noindex}}.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, per nom. Soapboxing. Nsk92 (talk) 12:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Delete, WP:SOAP CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was No consensus to delete Lazulilasher (talk) 00:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Missle43

Delete - user page being used as personal webpage/self-promotion. Otto4711 (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep I don't agree with Otto here. I'm neutral on the MySpace/YouTube links, but I see no evidence of self-promotion. The user has made edits outside their userspace, to articles unrelated to those mentioned on his userpage, and it's reasonably established and commonplace for users to write about themselves as human beings as well as Wikipedia users. I don't see an issue here. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - I am seeing here not a Wikipedia user writing about himself, but a Youtube user having created a Wikipedia userpage with the same moniker for further promotion. Main space edits related to a school or this[4] do not convince me that we should give some leeway here.--Tikiwont (talk) 08:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - The user last edited the page 14 September 2008, so it seems premature to delete it. Perhaps give the matter until 14 December 2008 (3 months) to resolve itself before relisting it at MfD. -- Suntag ☼ 10:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
• Remove all off-site possibly promotional links until the user contributes more to the encylopedia than he has contributed to his userpage. Deletion is too bitey. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I removed the off-wikipedia links. The commons link led to nothing. [5] --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

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 debate was delete. Although the "it's harmless" line of argument has historically been afforded more weight at MFD than AFD, I don't feel it's quite persuasive against a policy-based rationale, such as the couple here that cite WP:NOT. east718 // talk // email // 04:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:EricV89/TeenWiki Cabal

I am very concerned with this cabal. While I tolerate the Bathrobe cabal because it was created as a joke, not as a social network. This Cabal was created only for the purpose of socializing, which violates WP:MYSPACE and reduces overall productivity.  Marlith (Talk)  01:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep I'm not seeing a problem here, and since it's creation there hasn't been any issues. -- Ned Scott 02:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Looks completely harmless. If/when there's a problem, we can do something about it then. -- how do you turn this on 00:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - It's a humourous cabal nothing more. Not meant for socialization, only discussions on how to improve Wikipedia among teen editors. --eric (mailbox) 04:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
• Keep as humourous. Just remove all the non-free images per Wikipedia:USERPAGE#Images on user pages. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 20:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
• This page blatantly violates WP:MYSPACE. We've kept "cabals" similar to this in the past because they (at least ostensibly) claim to be focused on improving the encyclopedia. There is absolutely no intent here. It's purely a social page. They've got movie reviews for goodness sake. It also had fair-use images, which I've removed. seresin ( ¡? )  00:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Makes no indication of how it will improve Wikipedia and doesn't look at all humorous. Movie reviews? Featured track? How is that either funny or improving the project? Userspace is not a substitute for Myspace groups. Mr.Z-man 18:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete More myspacing. MBisanz ^talk 04:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment The nature of the bathrobe cabal is not one of a group, but rather, a funny page like WP:ODD and WP:LAME as opposed to a group. This cabal in itself, is meant to be a group with discussions, not a joke page. Marlith (Talk)  05:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment As a person who feels that sites like myspace are a cancer on the internet, I'm having a hard time equivocating this "cabal" to the spawn of evil known as myspace. Feel free to support its deletion because you feel it's stupid or whatever, but come on, it's not even close to being like myspace. -- Ned Scott 22:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - Wikipedia is not myspace, and I honestly do not see how this works to better the articles that we are all here to write. Also, when I saw the term "teenagers" it made me worry: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy. Tiptoety ^talk 02:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Wat? Protecting children's privacy? That case was about people preemptively freaking out and making a big issue out of nothing. Not only that, but we're not even talking about the same age groups here. -- Ned Scott 03:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete "Myspace hurts my eyes" --Jimbo Wales. It serves in no way to improve the project. Jordan ^Contribs 17:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Nice assertion, now would ANYONE care to actually back this up? None of you have even come close to showing how this is might create a situation described on WP:NOT#MYSPACE. Being like myspace in some remote aspects (and for the love of god, don't give myspace credit for such basic concepts, even if they have tainted them by association) doesn't mean it is a violation of any of the four cited examples on WP:NOT. -- Ned Scott 03:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
    • My apologies for appearing worked up about this, but many of us are mindful of the myspace/ESA-paranoia-slippery slope that leads to tons of needless deletions. This is a far cry from what we set out to avoid in WP:MYSPACE, and we need to stop acting so freaking paranoid about anything with the slightest similarities to something like myspace. Especially when there is no evidence of disruption. -- Ned Scott 04:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Granted I'm not going to lose any sleep on it, but it's a pet-peeve of mine. -- Ned Scott 04:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
        • That's it, I'm thinking about this waaaaay too hard. -- Ned Scott 04:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

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.

Closed discussions

For archived Miscellany for deletion debates see the MfD Archives.

2008-10-02

• Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/St. John's Lodge (speedy close)

2008-10-01

• Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marktna (delete)