Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Afghanpolicy27


 * 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 user page, remove offending contents from talk page. The user page gets deleted because there is nothing worth keeping, and the talk page is only blanked because there has been legitimate uses of it. @harej 22:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Afghanpolicy27
User page and talk page using Wikipedia as a soapbox. Wikipedia is not the place for publishing opinions or original research, especially if potentially controversial. Kotiwalo (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Also nominated: User talk:Afghanpolicy27


 * Delete as per nom. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 11:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. We are, after all, "Wikipedia, the Free Attack Site Against Afghanistan". --erachima talk 12:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you're being sarcastic, please don't, because someone might actually get confused. In case you're not being sarcastic, well, see WP:ENC. Kotiwalo (talk) 13:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, you put a Keep here, but the edit summary said Delete - which one is correct? --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 13:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep the user page. Blank the inappropriate content on the user talk page but leave the appropriate comments from other editors. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you explain why the soapbox userpage should be kept? Kotiwalo (talk) 16:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Because the political comments there are not excessive in amount. We can allow a little of that sort of thing under WP:USERPAGE. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:USERPAGE also states that user pages should be related to improving Wikipedia. Experienced, older contributors should be given more leeway, but this user has made very few edits outside his user page and talk page. The user is using Wikipedia for publishing his opinions, and that is not allowed, no matter how political or not they are. Kotiwalo (talk) 17:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But I do agree that blanking the talk page is a better option than deleting it since it will be recreated anyway and the messages from other editors should be kept. Kotiwalo (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * keep so what. I really miss 2004-2006 when editors simply stated theit opinions and didn't have to have an accompanying rule acroynm to be taken seriously. It is the users talk page, there are various conversations about wikipedia all the time on talk pages that have nothing to do with wikipedia. He is a new user WP:BITE, lets welcome him. Ikip (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I warned the user politely about inappropriate content and gave time to fix the user page to meet the policies and guidelines. "So what" is barely an argument against rule violations. The user is new, and having made very few edits in the article space, is likely using Wikipedia as nothing more than a vehicle of promoting his opinions and political views, also known as a soapbox. Kotiwalo (talk) 07:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to point out a short quote from WP:NOHARM: "Note that in miscellany for deletion debates, whether or not something is harmful is often a relevant issue, since the rules provide that inherently disruptive pages, for instance, may be deleted. The argument "it's not hurting anything" is less persuasive, however, when WP:NOT clearly prohibits the content in question (e.g. a full-fledged blog in userspace) from being hosted here." Do you see my point? Even if the page isn't disruptive, it is not allowed since it violates WP:NOT by being used as a soapbox and a publisher of original thought. Kotiwalo (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, What Wikipedia is not and User page The user has been editing for 3 months but don't have other contributions except for a few confused mainspace edits which were removed. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Soapboxing page in blatant violation of WP:NOT.  Triplestop  x3  15:31, 16 August 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.