Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Synergy (talk | contribs) at 01:55, 27 September 2008 (new date header; move one to correct date). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed 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

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

How to list pages for deletion

Shortcut

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 10 14 24
TfD 0 0 0 1 1
MfD Lua error in Module:XfD_old/AfD_and_MfD at line 34: bad argument #1 to 'sub' (number expected, got nil). Lua error in Module:XfD_old/AfD_and_MfD at line 34: bad argument #1 to 'sub' (number expected, got nil). Lua error in Module:XfD_old/AfD_and_MfD at line 34: bad argument #1 to 'sub' (number expected, got nil). Lua error in Module:XfD_old/AfD_and_MfD at line 34: bad argument #1 to 'sub' (number expected, got nil). Lua error in Module:XfD_old/AfD_and_MfD at line 34: bad argument #1 to 'sub' (number expected, got nil).
FfD 0 0 0 2 2
RfD 0 0 4 22 26
AfD 0 0 0 6 6

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.
Purge the server's cache of this page

2008-09-27

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Super Baby Princess personal page

2008-09-26

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, as there is currently no indication that any of below would make it to main space. Tikiwont (talk) 09:09, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:FallenWings47 subpages

User sub pages appears to be being used to create and store wikipedia articles about non notable subjects outside of article space, bypassing the notability requirements in the article space -- Duffbeerforme (talk) 10:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:FallenWings47/INTERWEB
User:FallenWings47/Noah Hickman discography
User:FallenWings47/The Awakening
User:FallenWings47/Velociraptor Apocalypse
User:FallenWings47/Mark My Words
User:FallenWings47/Emesis
User:FallenWings47/Dawn of Fury
User:FallenWings47/Prevailing Darkness
User:FallenWings47/The Greese Munkies
User:FallenWings47/Angels, Of Distortion
User:FallenWings47/The Cake is a Lie
User:FallenWings47/Ashes of an Angel
User:FallenWings47/Simply Hobo (song)
User:FallenWings47/Haircuts
User:FallenWings47/Simply Hobo
User:FallenWings47/List of ATBTH aliases
User:FallenWings47/List of Rise Above the Static band members
User:FallenWings47/List of ATBTH live performances
User:FallenWings47/GO FORTH!
User:FallenWings47/Noah Hickman
User:FallenWings47/Joe Van Schaick
User:FallenWings47/Brandon Holm
User:FallenWings47/Jake Olsen
User:FallenWings47/Denim Kuck
User:FallenWings47/Get Leighed
User:FallenWings47/Get Stretched
User:FallenWings47/Go Ona Kwest
User:FallenWings47/Checkmate
User:FallenWings47/The Seven Deadly Sins
User:FallenWings47/The Wenises
User:FallenWings47/Ched
User:FallenWings47/Voodoo
User:FallenWings47/Rise Above the Static
User:FallenWings47/Bob's Untitled Side Project
User:FallenWings47/List of ATBTH band members
User:FallenWings47/Dlectronica
User:FallenWings47/ATBTH

  • Delete Re-creation of articles in user space. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we're not myspace.⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 05:36, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I suspect that this user is well intentioned and is having trouble with wikipedia's restriction on what's allowed. Unfortunately, we have to insist on independent reliable sources, or we'll be overrun by promotional content. Some the content he is salvaging is not so bad per se, it is the thin end of the wedge, and regretably our insistence that it can't stay may seem harsh. The user might like to consider Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. Allow him to move the content off-site if he wishes. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per all above. abf /talk to me/ 19:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but let the user move them off site; Wikipedia is not a web host. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 18:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, not a web hosting service. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete lol what a waste of server spaceAlexnia (T) @ 20:29, 1 October 2008 (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.
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) 08:47, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Projectlongbeach

This page is being edited by a huge number of IP addresses and the User whose name it is, I have been watching this for quite a while, and the User is not editing on any other Wikipedia page. This page is being used for some off-wiki game, Wikipedia is not a personal website. Corvus cornixtalk 23:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Corvus, I'd prefer to see you first tell this user "Wikipedia is not a personal website, see WP:NOTWEBHOST, stop abusing wikipedia or we'll delete your userpages" and blank the offending content. If you did that, I daresay that you would full and unambiguous support for deletion if the user persisted. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The user was already notified about an ANI discussion about them several days ago. Corvus cornixtalk 04:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • WP:ANI is not so good for message. It has such high traffic and frequent clearing/archiving that it is effectively useless for someone not online right now. How long is the link to the relevant thread good for? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think 48 hours after the last comment on the subject. But the editor continued to edit during that time and did not post to ANI. Corvus cornixtalk 00:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - WP:NOTWEBHOST says it all. Don't coordinate off-wiki games on Wikipedia. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 18:24, 28 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-25

Wikipedia:Requests for wheels (on wheels)

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. It looks like the discussion was leaning toward delete, and it looks like the community does take WP:DENY seriously; I think if there'd been more participation a consensus would have emerged. But there's a bit too much opposition to deletion here for me to feel comfortable closing this as delete. delldot ∇. 05:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silly nonsense page has got to go now, it's not funny anymore. Plrk (talk) 22:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Some existing project pages: 1, 2, 3, and 4. An MfD keep: 1. Some MfD deletes 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Some AfDs deletes: 1, 2, 3, and 4, A DRv: 1. User subpages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. -- Suntag ☼ 22:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not funny? Says you. I think it's pretty funny. I'm slightly concerned about a WP:DENY issue, but not enough to care. --UsaSatsui (talk) 00:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Still funny. --Carnildo (talk) 01:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mark it with a humor tag and move on. I guess I don't think it is riotously funny, but some people might. Protonk (talk) 01:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's got a humor tag in the corner. --UsaSatsui (talk) 06:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Smallest humor tag. Ever. In that case...who cares? Keep it. Protonk (talk) 05:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. I guess I wheely don't care about this page. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak delete: Apparently reminiscent of the WoW days. Need this be the last we ever speak of this here or anywhere else? --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 03:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete... obviously something referencing WoW. No need to memorialize one of the most blatant vandals on wp.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 06:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Humour, relating to wikipedia, is of value for learning purposes. See self-reflection. It is at least worth the cost of keeping it. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, having read Suntag's links, I think WP:DENY might outweigh possible learning purposes. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tag as essay? - It looks like some form of essay on requests for moving pages (putting the page on wheels?) that uses humor to express how complicated the page moving instructions are. As near as I could find, Wikipedia:Project namespace is a basis for MfD reviewing of project namespace pages. Wikipedia:Project namespace#Information and discussions seems to not address situations like this page, perhaps because similar pages haven't raised enough interest to do so. If there is a more detail policy/guideline page addressing project namespace pages like this, please post. Without a standard to apply the page against, it seems to come down to I like it/I don't like it. -- Suntag ☼ 08:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless fun. -- how do you turn this on 18:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - still funny. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 18:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:DENY NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 00:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not funny. And useless. And per NuclearWarfare. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There's a history behind this that's not immediately obvious. Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/User:Willy on Wheels? I'm still trying to work it out. Is it something from usenet, or was there something funny in now deleted contributions? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There was once a persistent vandal that kept moving pages from "<article name>" to "<article name> ON WHEELS!!!" and the like. This vandal was a menace and kept eluding block after block. Some people thought this was very funny (see above), and as thus "ON WHEELS!!!" became some sort of Wikipedia meme. Many pages have been named and many jokes have been made in honor of this vandal. Plrk (talk) 12:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • On one hand, vandalism is never funny. Broken windows should be fixed. Graffiti should be removed. WP:DENY is right.
      • On the other handProject space efforts should not be deleted, even if the efforts are misplaced. We should not censor project space contributions. Cernsorship creates new evils. Solutions can be worse than the original problem.
      • Therefore: Convert to a redirect to Wikipedia:Silly Things, keeping the page history hidden from search engines but available. Accordingly, do the same thing with this MfD and most of the links Suntag provided. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are we going to make one dedicated to the other page move vandal? If this one survives we should... 211.30.111.105 (talk) 13:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:DENY, as a tribute to a vandal who has not been seen on Wikipedia for some time. As a second choice, userfy to a subpage of someone who thinks this is funny; it doesn't belong in the project namespace. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:47, 30 September 2008 (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.

User:Ericsenunas/Dynatrace

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. delldot ∇. 04:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also

User subpages which exist solely to promote a company. They are splattered with external links to redirect readers to the company's website. The first page is listed in several mainspace categories. User:Ericsenunas has made a few edits to other articles to add external links to the same company. Relevant guidelines and policies: WP:EL#ADV; WP:UP#NOT; WP:COI. -- Wronkiew (talk) 16:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I think he's editing not logged in. I userfied it in June per his request but I have no comment on whether this is deleted. TravellingCari 19:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Looks like advetising. Delete unless the user can justify it. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:03, 27 September 2008 (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.

User:Ameer1234567890

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 most, delete Eddie as advertising, remove the link to Ameer's blog. delldot ∇. 04:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ameer1234567890 (last edit 18 July 2007)
Also

User page designed to lure Wikipedians away from the encyclopedia by an editor who has not edited in many months makes this a user page improperly being used as a personal web page. -- Suntag ☼ 06:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep all. These pages each contain one link to a non-Wikipedia web site (or in one case, two identical links to the same web site). But that's not a violation of policy as far as I know. Containing one link to a non-Wikipedia web site is not inappropriate. The problem is when a user page is used as a personal web page, not when the user page contains a link to a personal web page. Furthermore, Wikipedia has no claim on our Internet usage so as to make it improper to "lure" readers away from the encyclopedia. Finally, I could find no evidence that any attempt was made to discuss the alleged problems with these pages with the article creator(s) prior to nominating them for deletion. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I removed User:Molmol1234567890, User:Military123456, and User:Greatminds0123456789. My read of Wikipedia:NOT#BLOG is that these user pages do not present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia (if they do, please explain). I'm not sure about distingushing "using" vs. "containing", but these user pages solely contain information that makes them a personal webpage that provide instructions to off wikipedia sites, such as referral links to web sites unrelated to Wikipedia. A focus of these user pages is to find readers with share interests for socializing or other interactions outside of Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a claim on Wikipedia's Internet usage (see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not) and these social networking user pages do not facilitate communication among participants in Wikipedia's project to build an encyclopedia. -- Suntag ☼ 15:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Most of them are harmless. Delete Eddie, which appears to be trying to advertise an affiliate link. See WP:ELNO #17. Wronkiew (talk) 17:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but remove the link to his blog out of fear that he is only here for self-promotion. Let him link to his blog if he makes good faith contributions to wikipedia. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:07, 27 September 2008 (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.

User:12345678910111

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. delldot ∇. 04:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also

Archive of content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. -- Suntag ☼ 06:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. SPA userpages, only purpose is to hold content not suitable in mainspace. If there is a reason to keep such stuff, it should be in the userspace of a real user account. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:10, 27 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-24

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) 09:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:King1234567890

Improper use of user page. Repost of deleted material from Markcho world order and Trailor hood wrestling federation. ZimZalaBim talk 23:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

delete - this guy is a common vandal who has no respect for the guidelines and policies that govern his editing privilages. He and User:Marktna should be permanently blocked as well. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 23:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and block said accounts. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 00:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No edits outside this page, clearly not here to help the project. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete MBisanz talk 03:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete User:King1234567890's edits going back to 5 May are all to his user page, except for a few edits. Blocking is a different issue, but the user page appears to being used to maintain a personal web page. -- Suntag ☼ 05:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete A7 or G11, take your pick. I also endorse blocking the creator for vandalism/spamming, and note that User:Marktna has already been blocked. 206.116.63.240 (talk) 05:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Pointless, previously deleted information. Jordan Contribs 06:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOOK I DO NOT ENDORSE WHAT MARKTNA DID I DIDNT ASK HIM AND I APOLOGIZE FOR HIM DOIN IT BUT PLEASE LET ME KEEP MY PAGE IT IS MY INFORMATION —Preceding unsigned comment added by King1234567890 (talk • contribs) 06:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. If it's already deleted, and you need access, I'm sure a Wikipedia:Administrator will help you. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-23

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) 08:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nalinabeysekera

Violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST/WP:UP#NOT as excessive personal information unrelated to Wikipedia. haz (talk) 19:58, 23 September 2008 (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.

User:CampMythmaker

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. delldot ∇. 23:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC) Duplicate of article in user space. Said article (The fandango) is also up for deletion has been deleted. Username suggests a single purpose account. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC) Withdrawn Copy of article has been removed. That looks better. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, there are other 'myths' that can go along with this. I suggest you check out michigan-dogman.com and watch the video, this is a real legend. the ottawa people tell it very wellCampMythmaker (talk) 16:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's a real legend. But the point is, you seem to be using Wikipedia as your personal webhost, which is not allowed (see WP:WEBHOST). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete - G4, per discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The fandango. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Page has been edited to remove the deleted content. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • History delete only since the page subsequently has been edited. "The Fandango" would seem to fit better in "Fandango", a newsletter by the Rushford, Wisconsin artist Billy X. Curmano that is identified as "continually in print since 1983 as a tongue in cheek peek at art adventures and random thoughts." -- Suntag ☼ 15:28, 25 September 2008 (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.
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 including some more subpages not explicitly mentioned here Tikiwont (talk) 08:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:0tat/ Led Zeppelin Mothership

Wikipedia:USER#Copies_of_other_pages. User subpage/s is being used as fork/substitute of main wikipedia article, with links. This space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed version. A google search indicates it has being used outside of Wikipedia in competition with the main Led Zeppelin article, and has appeared in a news story as indicated by the news archive listing [1]. User has not edited outside of their own subpages, since April 2008 [2], and has added only articles to their subpages as well as their main userpage User:0tat being used for a repository of userboxes and links -- A-Kartoffel (talk) 00:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • NB: If you check the links at the bottom of the user page for User:0tat, it appears a collection of five sockpuppet accounts have been created, housing alternate music articles to the main Wikipedia articles, with links, done in the same format as User:0tat's subpages. A-Kartoffel (talk) 00:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here is the list from the bottom of User:0tat's user page:
User:Absad suspected sock puppet. See SSP
User:0tat is a suspected sock puppet of Absad
User:Agast is a suspected sock puppet of Absad
User:Arrtt is a suspected sock puppet of Absad
User:Bigmir is a suspected sock puppet of Absad
User:Diditun editor in good standing
-- Suntag ☼ 16:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per User page#Copies_of_other_pages, private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion. The user subpage appears to be a preferred version of a Wikipedia article that has not been edited since 8 March 2008. Generally, long-term is about three months and six months very likely qualifies as long-term and going without an edit for so long appears to meet the archival purposes requirement. -- Suntag ☼ 16:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all Per suntag. Protonk (talk) 01:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:37, 29 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-22

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 redundant to the task force. Tikiwont (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Kingdom Hearts

This is a WikiProject page that was created by a single user. There is no talk page and the main page only has three edits. I do not believe the project will be worked on further as the same user has created a task force page under WP:VG. The current scope encompasses 12 articles and one template. Four of the articles are FA, one is FL, and fivefour are GA. There is little that can be done to further improve the articles right now, so a Project page seems unneeded. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC))--minor correction edit (Guyinblack25 talk 05:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

  • Support deletion, and a speedy per housekeeping would not be minded. --Izno (talk) 22:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletions. Guyinblack25 talk 04:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Created 21 September 2008 and MfD'd 22 September 2008. No apparent prior discussion with the project creator or notice about the MfD to the project creator. -- Suntag ☼ 05:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're right, I MfD'ed this under the assumption that the creator had abandoned it. The user has been notified and asked to comment here. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
  • Delete the WikiProject and keep the task force (in this case, one must go; you can't have both a WikiProject and a task force on one topic at the same time). This seems to fit much better as a task force. MuZemike (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unnecessary. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as redundant to task force. GlassCobra 23:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unnecessary wikiproject that never really got off the ground. The task force is enough. Randomran (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete highly unnecessary wikiproject. Probably abandoned by the user who created it. RockManQ (talk) 23:59, 27 September 2008 (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.
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, where I am taking the blanking of User:Action Shell as consent; in case of need let me know. Tikiwont (talk) 08:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kuramalover et al

Fan fiction, chats, and plain old nonsense hanging out in user space. -- Zetawoof(ζ) 10:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Talk pages generally are not deleted via MfD. I modified the above four user talk pages and removed them from the MfD nomination. -- Suntag ☼ 15:50, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete junk. JuJube (talk) 06:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Action Shell has been blanked by user. Delete others as WP:UP#NOT violations. haz (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no other contribs to the project, users are not active, etc. -- Ned Scott 03:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or history delete through the MfD nomination per WP:NOT. -- Suntag ☼ 08:37, 28 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-21

User:SCNTM

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. Looks like SCNTM has agreed to move their workpage to a subpage, I'll leave that to him/her to do. delldot ∇. 23:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating this and User:Aydi101/Sim City's Next Top Model for deletion an article about this non-notable show has already been deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sim City's Next Top Model). This looks like a Wikipedia page being used as a web hosting service than any attempt to improve the article, as no references are being provided to establish its notability. It has already been blanked because of this on more than one occasion. --Snigbrook (talk) 22:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Is using wikipedia userspace as a non-wikipedia webhost. Advise user, from WP:NOT:

If you are interested in using the wiki technology for a collaborative effort on something else, even if it is just a single page, there are many sites that provide wiki hosting (free or for money). You can also install wiki software on your server. See the Wiki Science wikibook for information on doing this. Scratchpad Wiki Labs also allows personal wikis. See also Wikipedia:Alternative outlets.

--SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy to subpage and keep. Userfy User:SCNTM into a user subpage since content was being edited as of 5 September 2008. Keep User:Aydi101/Sim City's Next Top Model since was being edited as of 21 September 2008. -- Suntag ☼ 16:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I remember commenting on this same subject matter elsewhere. It wasn't the AfD. I think it was a prior MfD. So if someone can find a prior discussion on this material, that would add to the discussion. -- Suntag ☼ 17:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy and keep. I think what we should do from now on is cite the sources and links to the episodes. With that, both series have reached enough publicity for an article on Wikipedia. SCNTM (talk) 00:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see a collection of information not at all related what what might be based on independent secondary sources. Publicity is not what justifies an article, coverage in third party reliable sources is required. Having the information and then looking for sources is just wrong. You need to start with the sources and work with sourced information. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Wikipedia:User#Copies_of_other_pages states subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content so long as it does not become an indefinitely archive page. A rule of thumb is that after three months from the first post to the user page, then it starts becoming more like an indefinitely archive page. Eventually, I think this material will get delete. However, since this material is relatively new to a user page and SCNTM has edited the encyclopedia, it seems reasonable to keep the user page for a while longer to allow SCNTM a chance to source the content. Moving the material to user subpage would help matters as well. -- Suntag ☼ 08:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "Userfy" is not an applicatable option for a user page. It is already in userspace. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Taking into account the AfD, chances of this becoming an article are slim. The edits that i see amount to updating the tables with respect to what is happening on Youtube rather than adding any reliable sources. I mean we can also resurrect this if Aidy101 can point at two or three referecnes. Nor do i understand why we have two accounts involved here. Given that it is an acronym, SCNTM looks mostly as a promotional role account.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:53, 3 October 2008 (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.
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.  Sandstein  20:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dc76/Userbox IndependentChechnya

As per Wikipedia:USERPAGE#What may I not have on my user page?, users are strongly discouraged from having content on their userpages that constitutes "...personal opinions on matters unrelated to Wikipedia...", "...non-encyclopedic related material", or "[p]olemical statements unrelated to Wikipedia". The userbox being nominated is each and every of those things. While cases where the community is tolerant to this type of content are not uncommon, this infobox is one that is clearly divisive and provocative. Why we are still allowing this kind of material to be used on our editors' userpages is simply beyond me—it is goes against the very spirit of Wikipedia and affects the colloborative environment in a very negative way. Why nominate this particular infobox but not the rest? Because one has to start somewhere and this one is as good bad as any, because I do not believe in nominating things in bulk, and because I have every intent to nominate each and every similar infobox after this one is processed.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 02:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep These user boxes are awesome for identifying POV pushers and such. It is displayed on an editor's page at their own risk and we should not legislate against it. --mboverload@ 02:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The potential usefulness of such userboxes in those regards is not in question, but they also aggravate editors who hold an opposing point of view and do more harm than good in the end (just follow any heated East European-related topic for a few days; you'll see). Ask yourself this—if one is to create a userbox supporting KKK (or "white power"), how long would it take for such a userbox to be stomped on by the disgusted community because it is "clearly divisive", "disruptive", and "unrelated to building an encyclopedia"? Just because this userbox is not as offensive (it does not resonate with the English-speaking editors as well for the reason it does not strike their home that close), does not mean we need POV-pushers to have a ball by letting them keep it.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 03:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If editors are aggravated because they hold differing points of view, they really need to work out that issue before editing wikipedia. Supporting banned or illegal organisations is not the same as expressing a political view. You are complaining about POV pushing whilst attempting to censor a POV you obviously disagree with. --neon white talk 10:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't jump to ungrounded conclusions about me, and remember that this discussion is about the userbox, not about my alleged POVs (which you got all wrong, by the way). As for "expressing political views", how is a demonstration of a political view which, in essence, calls for partitioning of an existing country, not disruptive or poisoning the editing atmosphere? Can't argue with your "working out different views" statement, though—if everyone followed that, we wouldn't be having this userbox (as well as other userboxes of the same nature) in the first place (one's own userpage is always a great place to start practicing that advice). I can live with this kind of userboxes just fine, but I know some productive editors who are really ticked by it and, unfortunately, react to it by simply displaying an opposing kind of userboxes, thus ticking some other editors and creating a vicious loop of hostility. If that can be at least somewhat elated by deleting a rectangle with a picture in it, why not do it, especially when rectangles of this sort fall under the definition of undesirable userpage content as per WP:USERPAGE?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"how is a demonstration of a political view which, in essence, calls for partitioning of an existing country, not disruptive or poisoning the editing atmosphere?" because it simply isn't. If people are too narrow minded to accept other political points of view then it's entirely their problem and something they need to deal with. There are many seperatist political positions in many countries in the world from tibet to quebec, ireland, scotland, wales, basque etc. Disagreeing with the principle of devolution is not grounds for censoring wikipedia. "If that can be at least somewhat elated by deleting a rectangle with a picture in it, why not do it" Why not delete all wikipedia in case someone is annoyed by it? So what if someone wants an opposing userbox? There's pro-choice and anti-abortion, evolution and intelligent design etc. --neon white talk 16:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand why you keep referring to this nomination as "censoring Wikipedia". "Censoring Wikipedia", in my book, is prohibiting certain materials from appearing, or encouraging certain materials over other materials to appear, in main space. We are talking about userspace here, which is already "censored" by WP:USERPAGE. We do not allow quite a few things on our editors' userpages, but not because we disagree with them in principle, but because they do not fit the purpose of building a free encyclopedia. If people are too narrow-minded to understand, for example, that they can't peddle goods and services on their userpages, it is entirely their problem, too, but we would still remove such content. Expression of political/religious views falls under the same category. If you go to church wearing a "jesus sucks" t-shirt, is the pastor censoring you by asking to leave the premises? No, because while you have a right to commit such an act, you are also going against the norms accepted by the community you are visiting. Plastering "I support Republicans/Democrats/Burma/Orthodox Church/United Nations/independence of Chechnya/independence of Scotland/and-I-also-like-pizza" messages all over one's userpage does nothing to promote collaborative atmosphere and, indeed, only aggravates other "narrow-minded" (but nevertheless productive) editors who happen to hold an opposing point of view. This is what this nomination is all about.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's obvious that the user pages have progressed beyond the guidelines so i dont think they are of any use here. I dont see how this remotely affects a users ability to edit. Everyone has views to pretend otherwise would be more damaging. --neon white talk 10:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Making statements like that is very dangerous as they undermine our policies and guidelines. What's to prevent anyone from stating that any our guideline somehow "progressed beyond" whatever it is that person does not like in it and then to keep going about one's business by safely ignoring the whole thing? If you believe that a certain guideline is obsolete or is in dire need of being updated, please propose changes there; until then, we are supposed to uphold the principles we are declaring.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
KKK userbox. Other Chechnya user boxes: 1 and 2. -- Suntag ☼ 05:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - any evidence that Dc76 (or I with my userboxes, for that matter) is a "POV-pusher"? Biruitorul Talk 07:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The nomination is not about you, Dc76, or anyone else using these boxes being POV-pushers, but about the fact that the existence of these boxes is contrary to the guidelines the community expects everyone to follow (although, judging by the essence of the comments accumulated so far, it would be more accurate to say the guidelines "the community wants everyone to believe it wants everyone to follow").—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thank you for clarifying that, but it was Mboverload, not you, who made the initial charge. I should've addressed the question more directly to him. Biruitorul Talk 16:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:GUS. -- Ned Scott 04:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Is unrelated to wikipedia, possibly divisive, at odds with the core principle of NPOV. Should real-world NPOV permeate the entire project, beyond mainspace? To delete could be considered censorship. Hasn't there been a community discussion on this? Where is it archived? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To delete would be in complete accordance with WP:USERPAGE, which, unfortunately, seems to be in contradiction with WP:GUS. If this userbox is not deleted, then a discussion will definitely need to be started regarding the USERPAGE/GUS incompatibility, and one of the two needs to be amended in the end.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    No conflict. Wikipedia:Userbox migration is not a guideline and Wikipedia:User page is a guideline, so Wikipedia:User page trumps. -- Suntag ☼ 17:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Good catch. Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still, WP:UBM has kept the userbox drama away (and is treated as if it were a guideline by many users) - I'm not sure we really want to unlid this can of worms for more "OMG!!! You deleted my userbox you [insult]!!! But [another userbox] is even worse!!! Kill it with Fire!!!" CharonX/talk 08:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't believe this is the best way to go about trying to change guidelines to eliminate the use of politically based templates. It would be preferable to nominate two templates directly opposed to each other for deletion at the same time, so as to make it obvious that your opposition is to political templates in general rather than to the particular template being nominated. For example, you could nominate User:Hexagon1/EU3 and User:S.Örvarr.S/Template:EU. As an alternative, you could nominate Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics for deletion, which would not eliminate the userboxes themselves but would avoid encouraging their use and creation. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Like this? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
-- Suntag ☼ 06:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said in the nomination, I do not believe in nominating more than one thing at a time. Rest assured, my next nomination is going to be for a template from an opposing set. Thank you for the suggestion to nominate Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics for deletion; in the hindsight, it would have been a better place to start —Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Let's keep a lid on this can of worms - as the userbox wars in the past have shown this kind of thing just causes too much of drama. Also see WP:UBM. CharonX/talk 08:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The solution is worse than the problem. Intolerance breeds intolerance. If these userboxes really hurt, stay away from them. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:47, 26 September 2008 (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.


2008-09-20

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) 08:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eolcohort2007

Page seems to be used as a personal website. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:11, 20 September 2008 (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.

2008-09-19

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. I can't comprehend the "speedy close" opinion, frankly.  Sandstein  20:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pasquale Camporeale

User's only contribs are to this page, two years ago. WP is not a host for personal pages. If this is deleted, please nuke the photo as well. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - why are we trying to get rid of this page really? It is by no means a personal page. It has his name and his photo -- if there had been contact information, his resume, vacation photos, etc, I would give it to you; it ain't in this case. Yea he is inactive, but this user page is not really in contrivantion of any of the policy or guidelines for user pages. Is there some drive to rid WP of inactive users and their user pages? If it is simply to get rid of them, perhaps a WP:RfC would be a better place to start a discussion (if there is one, please point me to it) rather then a random MfD.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 15:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's nothing particularly wrong with it, but there's no use in keeping it. I'm going through the 166,000+ user-created public domain photos on wiki and cleaning them out, and I check to see where they're used. This one is used only on this page. Every page we keep adds a tiny bit to maintenance tasks like the one I'm performing. It's not serving any function, and he clearly is not coming back, after two years of never contributing. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The "delete" closures of five MfDs—Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Austinleal, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Efrym87, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Carlodue, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Danielpr, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Carlodue (the Efrym discussion is the broadest and aggregates many of the comments offered at the other discussions, but because the pages, the arguments toward the deletion of which would and should, one imagines, have been quite similar, were listed separately, one might do best to read each of the MfDs to gain a full appreciation for the scope and nuance of the discussion)—in which the deletion of non-G11able user pages created by one-off editors was considered were recently challenged at a well-visited DRV, in which that deletion was (at least in the mind of the closer, whose early close of a discussion that tended toward "endorse" but that was fluid and showed no firm community consensus, following from a supposition that "further discussion [would be] a waste of time", cannot [or at least will not, I expect] be viewed as disposing of the issue conclusively and is almost certain to be followed by a rehashing, if not full recontesting, of the issue at some future MfD, as, for instance, this one) endorsed, such that it might now be argued that a consensus exists for the proposition that WP:NOT#HOST operates to counsel deletion for user pages like that here nominated and that the discussion of the drive to rid WP of user pages long ago created by editors who have not otherwise been involved in the project has already been had (consensus for changes to policy, which is, after all, rightly or wrongly, descriptive rather than prescriptive, may be developed at insular deletion discussions rather than at RfCs or policy talk pages, but only where those discussions are community-wide, FSVO community-wide), at least for the moment (CCC); whether that consensus does in fact exist (and, for that matter, whether such a consensus might ever be reached at a single MfD/DRV, and whether, if yes, such a consensus could be reached at a DRV that was open for 60 hours and in which a useful discussion was ongoing at the time of an inexplicable closure) is, of course, a separate question, but the fact of its existence suggests that, as you suggest, it would be useful for the community to consider the issue at RfC or Wikipedia talk:NOT toward the determination of whether there might exist some general rule for cases as this that might command the support of the community. Joe 19:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per above. Not sure why the page needs to be deleted for the photo to be listed at IfD. Seems like the most common uncontested deletions there are "unencyclopedic, absent uploader". We aren't a web host. IF this user comes back (and remembers their password) I don't se why they couldn't just make another page. Protonk (talk) 23:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also noting that this user hasn't registered an email address, meaning that if the password is forgotten, there is no routine method to recover control of the account. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Can users who feel strongly tht such pages (user pages of contributors who have made no contributions beyond their userpage, and even there, none for more than a year) please help correct WP:UP. We should stop going over the same ground for random examples of a huge class of usesrpages. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Even if such pages are to be deleted, it would still be polite (why be rude?) to abide by the request in found at the top of this page:
  • User:
When a page in the User or User talk namespaces seems worthy of deletion, please explain your concerns using either a personal note or by adding "{{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~" to their talk page.
--SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If nominators should do this, it should be indicated on the MFD template. I just followed the instructions there. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy close as WP:Point. The nominator did not first attempt to talk with the user about his/her concerns regarding User:Pasquale Camporeale. The nominator's reason for the nomination include "There's nothing particularly wrong with it, but there's no use in keeping it and ... he clearly is not coming back." That is not the applied standard. Standard The guideline says "A user page being used as a personal web page may be nominated for deletion at Miscellany for deletion". Wikipedia:NOT#HOST says that a user page is part of Wikipedia, and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self-promotion. The nominator has not pointed to any elements on the page that would make it personal web page for self-promotion or identified anything else in WP:User that would justify listing the page at MfD. Application The page states in its entirety, "Hello, I am Pat. I live in Amsterdam. Thank you. More to come!!" and displays the free use image Image:P3280096.JPG. The page does not contain a resume or other advertising/publicizing material that is useful off Wikipedia. The page does not contain items such as an email address or encouragement that may lead others to spend their efforts outside of Wikipedia. There is nothing on this user page that violates WP:User or that will ever turn it into a personal web page for self-promotion. Comment Discussion is the preferred means for demonstrating the problem with policies or the way they are implemented. Listing a user page for deletion without first attempting to contact that user and without a reasonable basis is not a preferred means to demonstrate perceived problems with user page policy. -- Suntag ☼ 07:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was not trying to make a point--in fact, I have no idea what point I even could have been making here. Furthermore, attempting to contact a user who has essentially never made any contributions is a useless waste of time. The odds are about one in a million he is monitoring his userpage. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Following the precedent of the other five MfDs (links available somewhere above). --MZMcBride (talk) 16:06, 20 September 2008 (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.
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.  Sandstein  20:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:List of templates linking to other free content projects

This projectspace list would be much better presented as a category. Every template on the list was created using the same master template, {{FreeContentMeta}}, and it would be trivial to automatically categorise them using the template code. As-is this is prone to rot. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. Has the category already been made? "Prone to rot" can be said about a lot of things - it is not a reason for deletion. As per WP:CLS, categories and templates shouldn't be immediately considered to be exclusive. More navigation aids are better than less. Even if it becomes redundant, is never again used, there is little advantage in deletion. It doesn't free space, or consume less resources, but does make it harder if there is someone who one days wants it. If your sure it is of no conceivable future use, mark it as historical, or preferably convert to a redirect to somewhere useful. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - The category for these templates, Category:External link boxes, was created 14 May 2007. There doesn't seem to be a good reason to have a list as well. Historical seems correctly applied on List of templates by usage. However, the nominated list doesn't seem to have historical elements. Some WikiProjects using lists of templates are WikiProject Terrorism and WikiProject Biography. -- Suntag ☼ 07:10, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Contains additional information that a category would not, such as where the wiki is hosted and under what license. -- Ned Scott 04:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • As an alternative (though I don't think it would be necessary) this could become a subpage of WP:TRAN. -- Ned Scott 03:53, 26 September 2008 (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.

Closed discussions

For archived Miscellany for deletion debates see the MfD Archives.

2008-09-25

2008-09-24

2008-09-23

2008-09-22

2008-09-21

2008-09-20

2008-09-19

2008-09-18
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion&oldid=241250754"