Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Elaragirl/Memory


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Keep WP:NOT doesn't really apply to userspace, especially in cases of long-time users where ignoring any rules also applies. --Aude (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

User:Elaragirl/Memory
WP:NOT we deleted the entire Sept 11th wiki, and any list of victims and at least those people have some claim to notability being as they were all over the news. ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 20:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Seems irrelevant now the user has left the project.  Majorly  (o rly?) 20:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep these deceased people might have been Wikipedians. Also this is a userspace page that does not need to be addressed in this deletion page. Let the dead rest in peace, don't disturb them. It is time for us to move on and not to bother the existing userspace memorial pages that are related to Wikipedians. Wooyi 21:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - Part of me sympathizes with Elaragirl, but the Wikipedia part says that Alkivar is right. PTO 21:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Seems relevant about why the user has left the project. I could suggest the complete deletion of Category:Wikipedia essays included in this nomination, since according to WP:NOT, personal essays are disallowed. On the other hand, Public domain image resources is clearly a directory. Or alternatively, we could just properly distinguish between mainspace and non-mainspace items for specific WP:NOT policies. When WP:NOT was created, it was clear enough that it applied to article space. I guess we can twist the spirit if we want to, but please count me out. Now a better argument for this article's deletion would be WP:USER. In this case, however, I think that this user subpage is relevant, since it details exactly why Elaragirl has retired from Wikipedia - personal stuff. If he wishes, Alkivar might also want to nominate User:JzG/Laura with the same reasoning. Grace notes T  § 21:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out... I'll nom that next. Oh and I want all of the essays gone, I've been saying that for weeks on IRC... I mean jesus Don't hand out panda sandwiches at a PETA convention we've got all sorts of random essays that need to go.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 21:24, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You don't like essays? Hopefully not according to WP:NOT, at least... Now, perhaps, I should motion to delete Don't stuff beans up your nose :) We each feel our own way about this page and JzG's page, but may as well let the community decide, if they can. Grace notes T  § 21:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Dealing with the loss of a friend or family member is something all of us can empathize with, but Wikipedia is not the appropriate venue for this sort of content, nor is there any evidence that any of these people ever contributed to Wikipedia. RFerreira 21:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's within a user's discretion to discuss reasons for leaving the project. Mackensen (talk) 21:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment besides my opinion to keep, I'd also note that the jurisdiction of WP:NOT does not entirely cover the userspace. I can give example such as WP:NOT, forbidding uncited information. However, there is no such requirement to cite everything on userspace. So invoking WP:NOT here to delete a userspace page is questionable in its legitimacy. Wooyi 21:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Clearly you didnt finish reading WP:NOT... because it states at the bottom WP:NOT Many of the policies listed here apply to your user page as well. Your user page is not a personal homepage, nor is it a blog. More importantly, your user page is not yours. It is a part of Wikipedia, and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self-promotion.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 21:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I read it, it said many of WP:NOT policies do apply to userspace, but not all policies. WP:NOT and WP:NOT certainly do cover userspace. However, there are many WP:NOT policies that do not apply to userpages, such as WP:NOT (userpage does not need to be cited) and WP:NOT (I can list all articles I created in my userpage). And I do not think WP:NOT categorically applies to userspace. Wooyi 21:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You could, of course, argue that by explaining the reasons for taking an extended period to reply to communications and to explain the reason you've left Wikipedia, your using the page exactly in line with the section of the policy which states "It is a part of Wikipedia, and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier..." -- Nick  t  21:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't understand, where does your above statement have anything to do with my previous comment? Wooyi 21:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Just me replying to the wrong person. Sorry. -- Nick  t  22:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Delete. The fact that all your friends have killed themselves is insufficient reason to memorialize them in Wikipedia. Quatloo 21:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, that's sensitive, isn't it. -- Nick  t  21:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and Delete. Mackensen makes a very valid point, the content is at least one reason for Elaragirl for leaving, and we really really want her to come back, I feel being insensitive about deleting this page might stop that from happening, but, knowing how much of a deletionist Elaragirl was, she might be rather disapproving of all these keep arguments and might just return if we show the maturity to delete stuff. In short, I dunno what to do. -- Nick  t  21:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; it may annoy a deletionist enough to return. ;-)  Only partially kidding.  I don't think it matters much whether it's kept or not, but it is interesting that she did not request its deletion.  Antandrus  (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Although I think in the case of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JzG/Laura that the correct application of policy is to delete, I think this rather modest list falls under the discretionary personal information normally allowed in user space. If four months from now she is still gone, then I can agree with cleaning out some of her subpages, but to list the page the same day she declares she is leaving—not in protest, but because of time and motivation—doesn't persuade me to delete this under the premise that she is no longer active. —Doug Bell talk 21:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Too soon. Garion96 (talk) 21:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, use common sense, don't be evil. Picaroon 22:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per other Keep comments. Newyorkbrad 22:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, this helps us to understand Elaragirl and what makes her tick. It is directly relevant to the project. She may be back.  I hope she will.  Guy (Help!) 22:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mackensen and also per Doug Bell. ElinorD (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2007 (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..