Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dakota Pauls




 * 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. Peter 14:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Dakota Pauls
As per NOT. Nymf hideliho! 01:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Many users display information about themselves on their user pages, and our user pages guideline allows a fair amount of latitude there, provided the material is not "likely to bring the project into disrepute" and also not "excessive unrelated content" or "extensive self-promotional material" – none of which applies to the material on this user page, a single paragraph plus an info box. It is fairly common for users to choose to style their user pages as articles (Aeidein, Aero Kaizer, Allenj172, ... Zliljoemz). I don't know of a policy or guideline discouraging that, and more than a few of those users are consistently productive and constructive editors (e.g. Cabrosa, Coocooforcocopuffs, Gameyoung18, Headdymann, Isadora1234, Meow, Saksjn, Scubeesnax, Sogospelman). If user pages styled like articles are deemed undesirable, the solution should be to add a  tag, not to have the page deleted.  --Lambiam 13:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The user is not even active. If you look at the edit history, it consists mostly of an IP editing it. The last edit (outside of the userspace) by the account itself is done about 4 months ago. Looks to me like it is done merely to promote, and that is my issue with it. Nymf hideliho! 15:00, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Largely per Lambiam - Formatting a user page like an article isn't unusual, and is not AFAIK, discouraged. User doesn't have a lot of edits, but has some. It might be a closer call if there were no edits other than to the user page. I concur that adding the user page template would be a good idea - in fact, I'll do so.-- SPhilbrick  T  14:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - a reasonably short user page of a marginally notable person, per Aero K. I can't see the problem with it. If there are no more edits in another 8 months, then we can delete it. Bearian (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not a rquirement for a userpage to have information about the user in any case. The Order of Canada is actually sufficient . As for "not even active" I regard edits made in April 2010 to be sufficient evidence of activity   and would be astonished if he showed activity in May 2010 already! Collect (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The OC and OBC titles are obviously a sham. 15 year olds aren't bestowed with such titles. I just wanted to point that out. My issue wasn't with the person being notable (which he isn't) anyway . Nymf hideliho! 12:44, 22 April 2010 (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.