Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Blehblah/xx


 * 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 will be advised that material may be retrieved if they wish. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 17:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Blehblah/xx
An apparent essay. Does not seem to be related to Wikipedia. Request for an explanation not replied to. User's only edits have been creation of essays in user space, appears to be using Wikipedia as a free web host. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep a user subpage from a new user. It is harmless. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's also useless. This user is not as new as it may seem. First edit was in October of last year, when they created a now-deleted dieting blog in user space. My point with this nom is that this user seems uninterested in actually contributing to the encyclopedia, but is using user space as a free web host, which Wikipedia specifically is not. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Versus22 talk 08:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom: Wikipedia is not a free webhost. The user has been active since October (visible in the deleted contributions) and all edits have been to userspace essays that are unrelated to Wikipedia. –Black Falcon (Talk) 03:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unlike the previously deleted material for this user, the material here could be worked towards inclusion in Wikipedia. We cannot second guess what the intention is, and we need to assume good faith as there is nothing harmful in the material (I have considered if the material is a copyvio, but have no evidence of that either). The appropriate course of action is to leave a message on the user's talkpage indicating curiosity regarding the material and offering assistance with editing Wikipedia. Unless it can be proved that the material is specifically disallowed in the guideline: User page, and I see no evidence of that (it looks like information on global warming - though, as the global warming article is already Featured, it is doubtful if the material would be needed, however, that is more a matter of guidance and polite discussion with the user rather than deletion of the user's notes), then there is no reason to delete.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I left such a talk page note and it was not replied to. My argument to delete is based on WP:NOTWEBHOST. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:25, 1 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.