Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Abce2/guestbook




 * 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 '''SNOW close; keep. (NAC) (yes I participated, am closing opposite to my vote, no COI)'''. → ROUX  ₪  15:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Abce2/guestbook
Per WP:NOTWEBHOST Naluboutes, NalubotesAeria gloris, Aeria gloris 19:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Editor "guestbooks" are common and consensus is that they are harmless. Heck, Jimbo has one. I suspect this nomination is not in good faith. The V-Man  (Said · Done) 19:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, with no assumption of faith. Guestbooks do more good than harm. decltype (talk) 19:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEBHOST, and Vicenarian, comment on content please. Naluboutes, NalubotesAeria gloris, Aeria gloris 19:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe I commented on the nomination itself, which you could call "content." Not sure why you picked out this particular guestbook when there are dozens and dozens out there. Pick an editor at random? Going to nominate them all? The V-Man  (Said · Done) 19:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Apologies to all for my rather harsh tone, but this sort of nomination - regardless of who nominates - irritates me. The V-Man  (Said · Done) 20:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep aside from what the V Man said about them being harmless/commonplace, WP:NOTWEBHOST (the quoted policy) says nothing about guestbooks being against said policy. --kelapstick (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:NOTWEBHOST, user pages should be about "providing a foundation for effective collaboration", and guestbooks help build a spirit of friendliness and co-operation on Wikipedia, just as stated by Jimbo nearly three years ago. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I find these stupid guestbooks pointless and tiresome, and 90% of the time they are used by MyWikiSpacers who contribute very little useful content, if any at all. While it may not violate the specific wording of WEBHOST, they certainly violate the spirit. → ROUX   ₪  20:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - If guestbooks were all this user did, then I'd probably say delete, but I know Abce2, and he is not a Myspacer. I see no problem with guestbooks. Hundreds of users have them. --  [midnight comet]   [talk]   20:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Confused. User:Download has one, but has his been nominated for deletetion? No. Why only mine? Also, If you look at my contributions, I don't treat this like Myspace or whatever it is. Heck, I barely know what it is. Abce2 |  This is  not a test  21:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Here;s a quote from one of the founders of Wikipedia about guest books.

Abce2 | This is  not a test  05:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Guestbooks contribute to a culture of welcoming and community, and so are good for the project.  These, and even dubious playthings are well within the leeway allowed in userspace for productive contributors.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Helps to build a spirit of cooperation and camaraderie between users which in turn is good for the encyclopedia. Javért  ☆ 21:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Whether or not there should be guestbooks in userspace should be decided by a general, well-publicized policy discussion, not by singling out an example for deletion. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per Hullaballoo Wolfowitz and per this and this. Dr.K. logos 23:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Naluboutes, Nalubotes what did he do to you? I don't see you nominating Jimbo's guestbook or anybody else's for that matter. This is obviously revenge. --Abc518 (talk) 00:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just saying, this is the first time I've heard of this user. Abce2 |  This is  not a test  00:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't like 'em, but it isn't fair that the nomination is focused on one out of a hundred guestbooks. Bring it to the village pump or something if you think it's really a big issue.  Zoo Fari  01:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I barely know the guy but no one seems to have a problem with anyone elses guestbook...? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 02:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep While I think Rouk is right, pointless and tiresome, but other point out "providing a foundation for effective collaboration" and editors work in improving Wikipedia. It's not a overly bad networking page and editor looks like (s)he is doing good work. If such guestbooks are common, picking this one as a test case is not right. Discuss that elsewhere. (V-Man, Abc518, agf) Duffbeerforme (talk) 13:38, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * This is beginning to blizzard. Would someone put it out of its misery? Thanks, The V-Man  (Said · Done) 13:41, 15 September 2009 (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.