Misplaced Pages

:Miscellany for deletion/User:NickOrnstein: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:15, 22 December 2014 editNickOrnstein (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,678 edits →User:NickOrnstein← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:41, 23 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(28 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>{{Delrevxfd|date=2015 January 27}}</noinclude>
{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion|{{mfd top collapse|1=''']'''}}|}}<div class="boilerplate mfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #E3D2FB; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
__NOINDEX__
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to nominate a miscellany page for deletion, you must manually edit the MfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->


The result of the discussion was Active user working in longevity-related topics. The point that unsourced assertions about living people might need to be removed is legitimate, and I'll bring it to the user's attention. ]] 10:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
====]==== ====]====
:{{pagelinks|User:NickOrnstein}} :{{pagelinks|User:NickOrnstein}}
Line 7: Line 14:


*'''ABSOULETLY, totally Keep''' - This is my page; I don't understand why that after SIX YEARS that all of a sudden a random nobody wants to shut my page down. I have had lists on my page for years. Aren't there more important issues to tackle, in regards to vandalizers to pages, besides my page that is absolutely no burden. This is NOT an article; no harm is being done to anybody except yourselves. TONS of other users from WikiProject: Oldest People have lists of the oldest people in the world on their page. I don't care about how high you rank (whether general or private) on Misplaced Pages; worry about yourself, pal. It is a website with information about older people, not a Hit List. Leave us fantastic contributors to the Oldest people articles alone. Thank you. --] (]) 21:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC) *'''ABSOULETLY, totally Keep''' - This is my page; I don't understand why that after SIX YEARS that all of a sudden a random nobody wants to shut my page down. I have had lists on my page for years. Aren't there more important issues to tackle, in regards to vandalizers to pages, besides my page that is absolutely no burden. This is NOT an article; no harm is being done to anybody except yourselves. TONS of other users from WikiProject: Oldest People have lists of the oldest people in the world on their page. I don't care about how high you rank (whether general or private) on Misplaced Pages; worry about yourself, pal. It is a website with information about older people, not a Hit List. Leave us fantastic contributors to the Oldest people articles alone. Thank you. --] (]) 21:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
::This was one of many other pages in userspace that contain content that violates ]. We aren't allowed to keep whatever we want; there are guidelines about what's acceptable on userpages over at ]. ] (]) 02:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

*'''Strong Keep''' It's quite clear from the giant notice at the top of the user page that it is not a real article, so ] does not apply. It's also clear that the users proposing these changes have a vendetta against the several users who are interested in developing articles on human longevity. ] states that people should use common sense and not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point - and this is exactly what is being done by the desructive attitude against people's userpages. ] states that they can be used for "organizing and aiding the work users do on Misplaced Pages", which is precisely what this page does. Secondly, the nominator has not used correct procedure since they have not been advised first on the talk page as stated by ]. This appears to be a personal vendetta to me and I would refer the above users to ] to learn more about the principles of Misplaced Pages etiquette. ] (]) 17:28, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' ] has the mfd tag. I have replaced it both times with an edit summary asking them to not delete the tag until this discussion has finished. ] (]) 02:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' and direct the user to work at the project page (]) or elsewhere. -- ] (]) 05:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' As per nom. If this was taken to mainspace it would violate ], ], ], ], ] and, IMHO, ]. ] <sup>(] ])</sup> 06:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I pity all of you wanting to be like a bunch of Chiefs over this great website. I will pray for all of you. God Bless all of you and please spend some Christmas Time with your family and more time away from the computer. ] (]) 02:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' It's one thing to delete articles, but user pages aren't meant to be articles, they're meant to be what the user is interested in. Interests are very much about the user. It's like SimeseTurtle said: "It's quite clear from the giant notice at the top of the user page that it is not a real article, so ] does not apply. It's also clear that the users proposing these changes have a vendetta against the several users who are interested in developing articles on human longevity." I truly believe some people's goal is to delete the pages of people interested in human longevity, which I don't understand, so they'll have an easier time deleting articles on human longevity, namely supercentenarians. I know they're trying to delete ] (]) page because he dare make a list that interests him, therefore telling us about him and helping make biography's about future titleholders and supercentenarians. ] (]) 19:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
::Still violates ] and the user is clearly ] as little (if any) edits are made outside their userpage. ] (]) 10:07, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
:::I've looked through his list of contributions and quite a few of his edits are to articles. Yes a lot of his edits are to his user page, but that's his right. ] (]) 22:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' {{u|Longevitydude}} has also with the edit summary "(Undid revision 639420549 by Ca2james (talk) I mean no disrespect, but please, stop harassing my friends. Our user pages are our business and we do use them to improve the encyclopedia" and I have replaced it again. Userpages are not the personal property of editors per ] and Misplaced Pages is also ]. ] (]) 04:55, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
**You do remember the three edit revert rule, don't you? I had to give my friend the same kindness he gave ] a few years ago. ] (]) 14:29, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
:::That argument is not valid. You're not supposed to be removing the MFD tag in the first place. I note that Longevitydude has once again, . I've reinserted it and on his talk page telling him to not remove the tag. ] (]) 14:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
*'''Selectively blank''' The lists of oldest people should be removed and, as Ricky81682 noted, Nick can still help maintain similar lists elsewhere. The userboxen are fine, and deleting them seems overly drastic. --] (]) 20:54, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
:*I'd be fine with this solution provided that there's no restriction against nominating the page for deletion if the material is re-added. ] (]) 16:37, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Please keep my page. ] (]) 19:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
**NickOrnstein is exactly right, it is HIS page. ] (]) 00:21, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
*::'''Reply''' - Read User:Ca2james's reply above and also read through ] which clearly states that "''They are not a personal homepage, and do not belong to the user.''" ] (]) 06:54, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>

{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion|{{collapse bottom}}|}}

Latest revision as of 07:41, 23 February 2022

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2015 January 27.
For an explanation of the process, see Misplaced Pages:Deletion review.
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 discussion was Active user working in longevity-related topics. The point that unsourced assertions about living people might need to be removed is legitimate, and I'll bring it to the user's attention. WilyD 10:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

User:NickOrnstein

User:NickOrnstein (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Another page in the same line as Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Verne2000 or Misplaced Pages:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Luathos. WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:FAKEARTICLE concerns Ca2james (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

  • ABSOULETLY, totally Keep - This is my page; I don't understand why that after SIX YEARS that all of a sudden a random nobody wants to shut my page down. I have had lists on my page for years. Aren't there more important issues to tackle, in regards to vandalizers to pages, besides my page that is absolutely no burden. This is NOT an article; no harm is being done to anybody except yourselves. TONS of other users from WikiProject: Oldest People have lists of the oldest people in the world on their page. I don't care about how high you rank (whether general or private) on Misplaced Pages; worry about yourself, pal. It is a website with information about older people, not a Hit List. Leave us fantastic contributors to the Oldest people articles alone. Thank you. --Nick Ornstein (talk) 21:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
This was one of many other pages in userspace that contain content that violates WP:NOTWEBHOST. We aren't allowed to keep whatever we want; there are guidelines about what's acceptable on userpages over at WP:USERPAGE. Ca2james (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep It's quite clear from the giant notice at the top of the user page that it is not a real article, so WP:FAKEARTICLE does not apply. It's also clear that the users proposing these changes have a vendetta against the several users who are interested in developing articles on human longevity. WP:POINT states that people should use common sense and not disrupt Misplaced Pages to make a point - and this is exactly what is being done by the desructive attitude against people's userpages. WP:USER states that they can be used for "organizing and aiding the work users do on Misplaced Pages", which is precisely what this page does. Secondly, the nominator has not used correct procedure since they have not been advised first on the talk page as stated by WP:USER. This appears to be a personal vendetta to me and I would refer the above users to WP:EQ to learn more about the principles of Misplaced Pages etiquette. SiameseTurtle (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete and direct the user to work at the project page (Misplaced Pages:WikiProject World's Oldest People/Future supercentenarians) or elsewhere. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delete As per nom. If this was taken to mainspace it would violate WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, WP:MOSFLAG and, IMHO, WP:TRIVIA. DerbyCountyinNZ 06:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment I pity all of you wanting to be like a bunch of Chiefs over this great website. I will pray for all of you. God Bless all of you and please spend some Christmas Time with your family and more time away from the computer. Nick Ornstein (talk) 02:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep It's one thing to delete articles, but user pages aren't meant to be articles, they're meant to be what the user is interested in. Interests are very much about the user. It's like SimeseTurtle said: "It's quite clear from the giant notice at the top of the user page that it is not a real article, so WP:FAKEARTICLE does not apply. It's also clear that the users proposing these changes have a vendetta against the several users who are interested in developing articles on human longevity." I truly believe some people's goal is to delete the pages of people interested in human longevity, which I don't understand, so they'll have an easier time deleting articles on human longevity, namely supercentenarians. I know they're trying to delete Craho's (talk) page because he dare make a list that interests him, therefore telling us about him and helping make biography's about future titleholders and supercentenarians. Longevitydude (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Still violates WP:NOTWEBHOST and the user is clearly WP:NOTHERE as little (if any) edits are made outside their userpage. CommanderLinx (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I've looked through his list of contributions and quite a few of his edits are to articles. Yes a lot of his edits are to his user page, but that's his right. Longevitydude (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
That argument is not valid. You're not supposed to be removing the MFD tag in the first place. I note that Longevitydude has once again, removed the MFD tag. I've reinserted it and have left a message on his talk page telling him to not remove the tag. CommanderLinx (talk) 14:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Selectively blank The lists of oldest people should be removed and, as Ricky81682 noted, Nick can still help maintain similar lists elsewhere. The userboxen are fine, and deleting them seems overly drastic. --BDD (talk) 20:54, 8 January 2015 (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.


Category: