Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Beanangel300


 * 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 Keep no consensus Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 22:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Beanangel300
Your user page is not a weblog. User pages are meant to be related to you as a Wikipedian. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - this is an appalling accumulation of gibberish apparently randomly plopped in from I-don't-know-where! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not sure exactly what it is, but I can see it isn't wikipedia. — Ched ~ (yes?)/© 15:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete just as the person seems to be actually starting off as an editor on other stuff? Nay. Often the person shows no signs of life otherwise -- but this one is a seedling in WP, and why not just view his initial stuff as Sandbox, which is permitted use, and bring him up to speed? Collect (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Was an attempt made to communicate with the user prior to initiating this deletion nomination? I realize that there is no need for this in many cases because the user is inactive, but this particular user edited as recently as yesterday. Also, while most of the user's non-userspace edits thus far fall into the category of 'off-topic discussion' on talk pages, perhaps the issue could be resolved with a friendly note... –Black Falcon (Talk) 17:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Edit to make more suitable.
 * I have done this.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Beanangel300 seems to have accepted my removal of a huge amount of stuff, and has added something reasonable. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I say maintain the page There is benefit to wikipedia as the supporters note as a way of being nearer wikipedia  being near wikipedia frequently has caused such wiki benefits as this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neHOXZ8Db-I about have wikipedia automatically generate quizzes at the article which could give wiki visitors a way to practice n thus remember more of what they read I've updated the page Also my frequent visits to the user page have made me aware of wikimania  I made what I think is a beneficial suggestion at wikimania volunteers http://wikimania2009.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Volunteers Thus a video promting a more effective wikipedia plus active volunteer writing are associated with this user account reading the material at the user account you will note some talk about government  I used the user page as a place for these writings as the keep previous versions aspect mattered when writing about material I might have been urged to change I think the actual physical burden of a few KB of text writing compared with the active wikipedia video as well as wikimania material favor Davis Keep the page up preference also I'd like it if you kept it there The current version directly treats wikipedia plus provides benefit beanangel300 Beanangel300 (talk) 00:31, 28 March 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.