Misplaced Pages

:Miscellany for deletion: 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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:02, 18 August 2008 editSynergy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,794 edits file five← Previous edit Revision as of 04:04, 18 August 2008 edit undoSynergy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,794 edits new date header; uncomment markerNext edit →
Line 8: Line 8:
:{{purge|Purge the server's cache of this page}} :{{purge|Purge the server's cache of this page}}
<!-- PLEASE ADD your discussion BELOW this line, creating a new dated section where necessary. --> <!-- PLEASE ADD your discussion BELOW this line, creating a new dated section where necessary. -->
===]===

===]=== ===]===
{{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Evidence of burden}} {{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Evidence of burden}}
Line 17: Line 19:
===]=== ===]===
{{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tygew}} {{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tygew}}

⚫ <!-- Please uncomment when there is content underneath to indicate the mfd backlog-->
⚫ {{mfdbacklog}}


===]=== ===]===
{{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Hall of Fame (2 nomination)}} {{Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Hall of Fame (2 nomination)}}

⚫ <!-- Please uncomment when there is content underneath to indicate the mfd backlog
⚫ {{mfdbacklog}}-->


==Closed discussions== ==Closed discussions==

Revision as of 04:04, 18 August 2008


Skip to: Table of contents / current discussions / old business (bottom). Purge this page
Shortcut
Please do not nominate your user page (or subpages of it) for deletion here. Instead, add {{db-userreq}} at the top of any such page you no longer wish to keep; an administrator will then delete the page. See Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion for more information.
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:, Misplaced Pages: (including WikiProjects), User:, TimedText:, MOS: (in the unlikely event it ever contains a page that is not a redirect or one of the 6 disambiguation pages) and the various Talk: namespaces
  • Userboxes, regardless of the namespace
  • 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 Misplaced Pages:Deletion review, in accordance with Misplaced Pages'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 it is a userpage, or {{db-author}} or {{db-g7}} if it is a draft. 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 Misplaced Pages-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 Misplaced Pages. Before deletion of an inactive project with a founder or other formerly active members who are active elsewhere on Misplaced Pages, 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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages 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 ]
    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 ]
    replacing PageName with the name of the page you are proposing for deletion.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
  • 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 ]
    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 ] 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 Misplaced Pages 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 ]

    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 Misplaced Pages 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 Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
CfD 0 0 0 16 16
TfD 0 0 0 8 8
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 1 6 7
RfD 0 0 9 70 79
AfD 0 0 0 1 1

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

Archived discussions

A list of archived discussions can be located at Misplaced Pages: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

2008-08-18

2008-08-17

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 Userfy and make clear that this is merely an opinion and has no consensus. bibliomaniac15 22:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Evidence of burden

This states the opposite of the truth. The onus is, and must be, on those who seek to include disputed content, to justify said inclusion, a principle endorsed in some arbitration cases and essentially covered by WP:BRD. If the material is genuinely and unambiguously relevant then consensus will be evident. It is also the polar opposite of WP:BRD - essentially it enshrines the principle that anyone can add anything and then demand that others prove it is not relevant, a POV-pusher's charter - bold, revert, revert again and demand that the other party prove to your satisfaction that the moon is not, in fact, made of green cheese. Guy (Help!) 21:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Move to user subpage as detailed in {{User essay}}, its a page containing the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. Its the opinion of one user, so move it to some user`s subpage. --Pie is good 00:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

**Nope (as to the tag), {{User essay}} is a redirect to {{Essay}} where the language you cite comes from and it's not intended for personal essays. {{User essay}} is used for essays about users (see Category:User essays) and would be entirely inappropriate here.--Doug. 01:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC) (What the heck was I reading?! The proposed tag should be used.--Doug. 01:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC))

  • Userfy - A one editor essay with no apparent support from anywhere else in the community and adverse to core principles should not remain in the project space. Normally, personal essays aren't allowed; however, this essay does deal directly with Misplaced Pages and Wikiphilosophy and doesn't appear to violate either WP:NOT (the relevant policy), or WP:UP (the relevant guideline). It is disconcerting to see an essay that advocates a position that opposes a core policy (WP:V, esp. WP:PROVEIT), and which therefore seems to promote an anarchy, but censorship would be worse, so move it to userspace and put a {{userpage}} tag on it for clarity. --Doug. 01:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
{{User essay}} or simply {{Essay}} will both work and one of those should be used as suggested by Pie, in conj with {{userpage}} so there is no confusion in the event someone stumbles across it. I wish we had another essay tag to choose from as you may head it or not doesn't really apply here. Additionally, Category:User essays states: Essays in Misplaced Pages namespace that are mostly written by a single person, and not frequently referenced, are generally moved to the userspace of their author.--Doug. 01:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't see a particular use for this essay, even in userspace. The very premise, as JzG suggests, allows for POV pushing and runs counter to core issues as Doug points out. I see nothing good coming out of keeping something like this around. Synergy 03:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep or userfy. I'm not sure if I agree with every word the essay says, but it does make some very good points. It does need tweaking to avoid the POV pushing empowerment, but that's not really a great concern since this page has no authority. -- Ned Scott 06:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Move to User:Kendrick7/Evidence of burden. Should we have tags & categories for disputed and rejected essays? At worst, blank if it is misleading nonsense, mischevious, or something like that. In this case, it seems to be merely a good faith essay of hyperinclusionism. In any case, no good comes in the long run in deleting such things. It starts to look like censorship of your opposition. Better to archive, by blanking, tagging, or altering the introduction to clarify that what follows in one persons misguided opinion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Userfy I am seriously tempted to argue for the deletion of this essay, as it misrepresents established practice and is almost entirely copied from WP:ONUS, but Doug is right that censorship would be worse. Put a tag on it to indicate that it is the opinion of one user. Hut 8.5 12:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Userfy. This doesn't have the suuport of the Misplaced Pages community, and isn't going to have the support of the Misplaced Pages community; it shouldn't be in project space. It's fine in user space, however, provided that it clearly identifies as one user's opinion. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Technically speaking, essays in the project space are generally allowed to exist without support from the community. If it had support then it probably wouldn't be tagged as an essay ;) (which isn't to say I oppose userifcation, since, as Doug points out, this essay is primarily authored by just one user, for the time being). -- Ned Scott 06:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I realize that there are essays in project space that don't necessarily have broad support (plus historical ones that have no current support). Most of the are not problematic, if they're labelled correctly. Just to be clear, I don't think this one is useful to have in project space, even if labelled correctly; it's too far from what is actually accceptable practice, and presence in project space could dilute a proper understanding of that. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Userfy. Also, I get the feeling that what this essay says isn't exactly what the user in question means to say...I don't think it's meant to justify POV-pushing as it is to oppose removing established content from an article without good reason. Or maybe I'm just tired. It's hard to read it. Still, belongs in userspace regardless. --UsaSatsui (talk) 04:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete/Weak Userfy - per the many comments above. This would not appear to be anywhere near a "humourous" essay. Suggesting deletion because this has a possibility to mislead others. - jc37 01:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
    • It does have the potential to mislead, but censorship is alwasy bad in the long run. Instead of Delete, would you support blank and protect? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
      • What good would that do? It's the worst of all worlds...it isn't readily available, it can't be modified, and it's -still- there. Wouldn't "hiding it and making sure nobody can ever bring it back or change it" also be censorship? --UsaSatsui (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Hiding it behind a door that anybody can open (ie blanking)is not censorship because it is still there for anyone to read. It might be a good idea as a statement of disapproval. I don't support deletion, because that seems to deny that people can have this opinion, but I am worried that by merely userfying, we are failing to say that this opinion is not OK, and that in future someone might read it and this and conclude the converse. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
      • In this specific case, I don't in any way see the deletion of this specific page as "censorship". To call it censorship would presume that "publishing" original thought is acceptable on Misplaced Pages. There are several problems with such a presumption. Most of which should be fairly obvious, I would presume? - jc37 10:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Tag as Rejected. Isn't that how we avoid censorship and say as a community this is a really bad idea? I'd even go so far as moving this discussion to the talk page and editing the essay to say why it is a really bad idea. There's a bloody good guide to making essays somewhere which states it has to present both sides of a given view. Hmm, Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages essays seems to indicate userfication, but I really would be inclined to do otherwise. Hiding T 11:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, but with notification: The user must be notified to move this into a word document before deletion. DarkFireYoshi (talk) 01:44, 22 August 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 Page blanked and user blocked. Synergy 11:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Cookie8191

This userpage is a reproduction of List of Rugrats episodes with sections from the main Rugrats article added. The userpage is how the articles would look if they were vandalised. I've encountered similer pages before that were used for copy and paste vandalism. Now, this user has had all his edits reverted, but not for vandalism EDIT: Actually all his edits have been vandalism! This one was obvious!. I'm not suggesting this user is going to start vandalising. This page could only be served to vandalise them articles. And any vandals that find this userpage could also use it for copy and paste vandalism. I strongly believe that WP:DENY could be brought into play here. Finally, I requested the user blank the page and/or change it significantly via their talk page, but he actively chose to ignore my request. John Sloan (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Keeping the page's history would still allow him (as an IP) to do copy and paste vandalism. John Sloan (talk) 10:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • information Administrator note - upon seeing the discussion here, I looked into the allegation by the nom that all his edits have been vandalism and finding this true, blocked the user as pointed out by bd2412. Following standard procedure, I have now blanked the userpage and tagged it with {{indefblocked}}.--Doug. 11:12, 18 August 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.

2008-08-16

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. bibliomaniac15 01:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Neuro-linguistic programming

This portal is poorly maintained (not updated since May 2007), littered with red links and serves no useful purpose to the NLP related pages. It is an embarrassment to portals! The navigation box that appears on most, if not all, NLP pages, along with the NLP categories provide all the links necessary. Poltair (talk) 18:33, 16 August 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.

2008-08-15

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Tygew

Reads as excessively preachy. Userpages are not for personal essays or soapboxing. I've posted a friendly request to the user informing him that his userpage is against policy and asking him to remove it, to which he has not responded. Ironholds 20:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Which policy in particular is the page breaking? Avruch 22:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
And the answer to my own question is WP:SOAP, which applies to user pages. Avruch 22:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I'm not seeing the problem here. This guy is interested in bible articles, and has a small, non-offensive write up on his userpage on how he feels about that topic. I've seen this happen for many other topics, and I'm not sure we should treat this differently just because it's religion. -- Ned Scott 05:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - Needs a good SOAP scrubbing.  Asenine  08:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • And now, I shall read from Jimbo 2:24 - And lo, the he sayeth unto the community, "How doth thou feel about using thy personal pages as a pulpit?" And the people answerth, "Verily, we shalt not allow it. And we shalt scribe upon the Wiki this great commandment, so that the editors, far and wide, shalt know the truth". And therefore such pages were, and shall for all time, until the great event known as the Consensus Change, be deleted. And it was good. --UsaSatsui (talk), the Great Prophet of Wiki, 08:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
    • ah, the book of jimbo, good reading. 4:20 is an interesting one, he wrote it while stoned ;p. Ironholds 11:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm going to let you in on a little secret: there's a lot of people out there who are very religious, and they often talk the way this guy is, but they don't realize how they come off. The real point of his rant is about being speculative about terms used in the bible, such as.. how long is a "day" in the bible when it says God created the world in seven days. This is not a soapbox issue. -- Ned Scott 07:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Here's a secret in return: When people in real life talk like that, they're doing what we would call "soapboxing" on Misplaced Pages. Unfortunately, it -is- allowed in real life. This is not a user who is stating his religious preference in a concise, non-persuasive manner. He's preaching. For St. Pete's sake, this page even cites the bible verses he uses to back up his sermon! A bit of leeway might be in order if this were a user in good standing editing in good faith, but there's no evidence of that at all. --UsaSatsui (talk) 12:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I interpret the WP:USER guideline to forbid extensive discourse unrelated to the Wiki project. As Tygew is an active contributor, and his statements are less than one page, I see no reason to delete his userpage. Lazulilasher (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
    • His only contributions have been massive postings on the Antichrist talk page about why the version of the bible HE likes is the correct one, and how we should rewrite the page to conform to that, and removing information from the page "bloody mary" that attempts to explain a phenomenon in a rational way. Active is not the same as useful. Ironholds 20:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Yes, WP:SOAP does apply to userpages and yes, this page is borderline for paragraph one of WP:SOAP as it appears to be some sort of religious advocacy or propaganda, though I'm not sure what the point is so it's not very effective. In any case, userpages should be given fairly wide latitude in this regard as in others and we normally only proscribe the most extreme MySpace/Webhost-like pages, absent advertising. What concerns me most though is the nominator's: Reads as excessively preachy. That is pretty darned subjective and not the sort of standard for WP:SOAP that I would support. No one else has given any reasons that the current material violates WP:SOAP, merely stating that it does. Bare statements that a page violates a particular policy are hardly more helpful than statements that don't reference policy at all in determining what our policies require or proscribe.--Doug. 01:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep but fix excesses. User contributes, but seems to be fixated on one topic, and he doesn't seem to understand or accept core policies starting with WP:NPOV. If the user is disruptive and doesn't respond to attempts at dialogue, then he should be blocked. However, I don't see evidence of sufficient disruption. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, harmless. I'd also say nudge the guy to be productive in more areas, but I'd say that about most contributors. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - the entry is soap-y, and had it existed with other things on his user page, I would not have as much problem. My problem is, I see it being used (tho no way to confirm it) as a linkable essay not as a user page. Almost like webhosting space.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 19:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep with occassional watch: People should be able to express religious beliefs; however, the person may want to shorten the page if it becomes too long. DarkFireYoshi (talk) 01:30, 22 August 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.
Everything below this point is old business; the 7-day review period that began 04:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC) ended today on 26 December 2024. Editors may continue to add comments until the discussion is closed but they should keep in mind that the discussion below this marker may be closed at any time without further notice. Discussions that have already been closed will be removed from the page automatically by Legobot and need no further action.


2008-08-13

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. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Hall of Fame

Deadborn project. Sizzled. Has no relation to the purpose of wikipedia: creation of encyclopedia. `'Míkka>t 19:39, 13 August 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.

2008-08-16

2008-08-15

2008-08-13

2008-08-12

Category: