Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Bryancalabro

 __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 keep. Page has been trimmed and is now acceptable, user understands WP:UPNOT even if he doesn't like it. JohnCD (talk) 15:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

User:Bryancalabro


WP:NOTFACEBOOK, WP:NOTLINKEDIN, WP:NOTPACMAN. Shirt58 (talk) 09:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * NOTE Following a name change, the above page has been moved to User:BryanCalabro. - Voceditenore (talk) 14:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Two choices- Delete, or preferably clearly mark as "not an article"; remove any promotional links, images, and information (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 11:20, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Move to article space.-- Auric    talk  11:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * He's not notable so why should we?— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 15:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Because this is not the proper place for what looks like an article. Of course, I predict a speedy if that happens...-- Auric    talk  16:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 *  Delete  or drastically truncate to three or four sentences, clearly mark as a non-article, and remove all links, except possibly his own website. Even leaving his official website on the page is a push. He is clearly using this page (and his time on Wikipedia) solely for advertising himself. He even links to this page on his website complete with the Wikipedia logo, implying it's an article. His sole edits to Wikipedia apart from his user page have been to add his images to existing articles. Note that most of the images are currently up for deletion on Commons, where he is also advertising himself on his user page there . Moving it to article space is a complete non-starter. He's still in college and has zero coverage in any independent sources. In fact, the only stuff about him on the web are his various websites and social media pages. Voceditenore (talk) 13:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've struck my delete after the changes made by Bryancalabro. But like Kudpung, if attempts are made to use it for advertising again, it should be summarily deleted. Voceditenore (talk) 14:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I and deleted all links embedded within. It is my user page. I am sure I can share my user page with whomever I so chose, Voceditenore. --Bryan Calabro (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There are limits to what is and what is not allowed. A user page is meant to be a means to determine how you can help the project. It is not your personal profile or CV.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 15:40, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Bryan, UPNOT explains in detail what you may not have on your user page. And yes, of course you can link to it, but you should not be doing so to a user page which is simply a further means of advertising your business and yourself. Your use of the Wikipedia logo on your web site in these circumstances is also skirting the edge of the appropriate use of Wikipedia's trademark. Finally, contrary to your advertisement here, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not "social media" (although you have attempted to use it as such). Voceditenore (talk) 17:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Delete G11  This is a completely unreferenced piece of self promotion, wholly inappropriate use of a userpage and it certainly seems to qualify for G11 to me. Honestly, if the user that created it has any interest in being a Wikipedia editor, as opposed to self promotion, he should just blank it and start over with an appropriate page. Gtwfan52 (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought it was my page to do with what I wanted. Maybe if it was acceptable to do what I did, more people would use this service. Why can't anyone have a wikipedia page? What makes someone's life more important than another's life. Why can't it be a personal profile? Because people like you say so Gtwfan52, Voceditenore. UPNOT is dumb; it needs to be revised. Wikipedia would gain so much more in popularity and I may even be able to cite it someday on a research paper.--Bryan Calabro (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This appears to be where the problem lies. Wikipedia is not a service - see WP:NOTFACEBOOK, WP:NOTLINKEDIN - it's an encyclopedia (and one that you should not cite in research papers, but that's another story). Perhaps you might be interested in the services of MyWikiBiz? --Shirt58 (talk) 03:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment He has changed the content of the page to something acceptable. Can an administrator close this please? BTW, how do you equate popularity with accuracy, which is what is needed for an acceptably reliable source?Gtwfan52 (talk) 22:16, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - for now, and keep an eye on  the user's edits. If  it  reverted back  to its previous state it  can be summarily deleted. Brian  should be encouraged to contribute to  articles on  Wikipedia and not inappropriate content to pages about  himself. If he can't  understand this he must  expect  warnings to  be the next  step. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Gtwfan52 - What good is "accuracy" if no one believes Wikipedia is accurate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง - My name is Bryan with a Y. --Bryancalabro (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2013 (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.