Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/AmiraWattar

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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  delete all. JohnCD (talk) 21:59, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

AmiraWattar
6 pages in userspace: unattributed copies from normal articles (i.e. they don't have the editing history with them), abandoned directly after creation in September 2009. Pages serve no purpose. The nominated pages are User:AmiraWattar/Dr. Seuss, User:AmiraWattar/Adolf Eichmann, User:AmiraWattar/Acid, User:AmiraWattar/تشى جيفارا, User:AmiraWattar/Six Sigma and User:AmiraWattar/seven deadly sins. Fram (talk) 09:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. The editor made six edits total, and that was to copy those pages over.  Perhaps to work on them later on?  The editor just did this, and vanished it seems.  Unless they edited them to be different, but at first glance, they seem to just be the regular articles.   D r e a m Focus  09:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. September 2009?  Way too early to consider abandoned, or being kept "indefinitely".--Epeefleche (talk) 19:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:FAKEARTICLE says, "Wikipedia is not a free web host and private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion." These unattributed userspace drafts that have been created by a single-purpose account who has no contributions to the mainspace should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:22, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Why, pray tell, did you fail to read ... or was it just that you failed to quote ... the rest, which says: "this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of ... content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a free web host  and private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion."  Either your reading skills are lacking, or your are seeking to mislead other editors who assume that you would have sufficient good faith to quote the relevant parts of the guideline.  I apologize if it is the former, which -- on second thought -- assuming good faith it must be.  Apologies for being bitey.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for being direct. Not bitey at all; much better than beating around the bush. I assure that both possibilities (lacking reading skills and misleading editors) are untrue. Let me quote the entire section of the guideline:"While userpages and subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content, this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a free web host and private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion. Similarly, pages kept in userspace should not be designed to functionally substitute for articles or Wikipedia space pages. If you find that your user subpage has become as useful as a normal article or project page, consider moving it into the appropriate namespace or merging it with other similar pages already existing there.  One should never create links from a mainspace article to any userpage, nor should a userspace essay be used as the primary documentation for any Wikipedia policy, guideline, practice, or concept." The reason that I did not quote the first sentence of the guideline you mentioned above is that those parts (the first paragraph) are inapplicable. The content is not the "preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content" (mine emphasized) because as far as I know, User:AmiraWattar has not had any disputes over any of these pages; nor have any of these pages been deleted. As to the "indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia": I did not quote this sentence because these are real articles; they are meant to be part of the encyclopedia and they are: Dr. Seuss, Adolf Eichmann, Acid, Che Guevara, Six Sigma, and Seven deadly sins. The "being used solely for long-term archival purposes" quote applies to the pages being discussed, and I did include it in my argument for deletion. I consider this to be "long-term archival" because eight months have passed with no changes being made. Now, the pages are outdated because many changes have since been made to the six articles I mentioned in the previous paragraph. As such, those userspace drafts are useless for editing and can only be considered useful for "long-term archival purposes". Because this userspace draft is outdated, using it to make further draft edits would be harmful in that it would override the changes made to the live article. It is best deleted. Cunard (talk) 03:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, one of us has better reading skills than the other. Because, as it is material that an editor wishes to maintain, and you are seeking to delete it, I view that material as disputed material.  I think this is just what is meant by the guidance, and the language left out therefore of more than moderate interest in construing the guidance.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I interpret the "disputed material" part of the guideline quite differently but it seems that we will have to disagree about that. Cunard (talk) 03:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Reasonable people might disagree.  I would suggest that all the policy reasons behind the use of the temporal terms in the material apply here.  People, especially thoughtful editors, could do more good by communicating w/some of the POV warriors, and those of lesser capabilities, out there who are doing damage.  All IMHO.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete all per Cunard. Samwb123T (R)-C-E 23:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all Not helpful to the encyclopedia. Copying articles to user space then disappearing fails WP:UP. Johnuniq (talk) 07:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. --The Evil IP address (talk) 11:38, 22 May 2010 (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.