Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dirty Cowboys

 __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  deleted by Orangemike. --BDD (talk) 17:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

User:Dirty Cowboys


This is a WP:FAKEARTICLE. T C  N7 JM  10:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete''' per nom, WP:SPA's promotion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:19, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't notice that this was a new article by a new user. WP:BITE applies.  Sorry, User:Dirty Cowboys.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete as a fake article. - Whpq (talk) 14:14, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Added References. - Dirty Cowboys (talk) 22:32, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Was this meant to be an article? -- Whpq (talk) 00:04, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It was and I have realized I've done it wrong. Delete away. Thanks. Dirty Cowboys (talk) 00:26, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. If this was month's old, we should delete. This was created two days ago however. Huge number of new users create drafts on their userpages rather than in a sandbox and then submit through AfC or move to the mainspace. I am not considering whether this does or does not meet notability is overly-promotional, etc. because this is not AfD and this appears nothing more than a new draft being worked on. Deletion under WP:FAKEARTICLE requires, as a condition precedent, that the topic's hosting in the userspace is being used as a long term method to avoid review of something that would not survive or does not belong in the mainspace. Yet, there is no indication here of any attempt to "indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content". I don't think WP:FAKEARTICLE can properly be applied to a two-day old draft and deletion under it would set an incorrect precedent. This nomination has even convinced the creator, in good faith, to agree to deletion, when all that should have happened is advice to him or her about submitting to AfC, moving, and that a dedicated sandbox would have been better.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well...uh...the page was deleted and the user was blocked. I admittedly should have specified a bit more on why I wanted this page deleted. It mainly came across as spam to me, seeing as the user's name was Dirty Cowboys and the subject of their userpage was seemingly the band. Anyway, I didn't mean to come across as bitey, but if I did, I apologize. Anyway, since the article was deleted, I'm thinking we should just get a close on this. T  C  N7 JM  10:48, 8 August 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.