Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eric444/Sandbox

 __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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Eric444/Sandbox


Archives of positions on the Canadian Country chart which is listed on WP:BADCHARTS. Editor has been absent since October, so there is no foreseeable use of these. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I formally merged all of those pages into this nomination. Best Regards, — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 13:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Just because the nominator doesn't see a use for these doesn't mean (a very productive editor of music-related articles who was not notified of any of these noms besides his sandbox) doesn't. I see no reason for or benefit of deletion - the pages are entirely non-problematic. I also think the idea that it's okay to clear out the userspace of editors once they go 3 months without editing is kind of amusing. A2soup (talk) 05:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is that he is using the pages to archive information that is in no way verifiable (chart positions from a chart that, as far as anyone can tell, has never been reprinted anywhere), in blatant violation of WP:WEBHOST. He's made no attempt since making these pages to find any way to source the content; he's just hosting it. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 07:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * What specific part of WP:WEBHOST is this in blatant violation of? Like can you point me to the relevant wording on the policy page? A2soup (talk) 08:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * "Don't store material unrelated to Wikipedia". There is no way any of this can be related to Wikipedia since it's totally unverifiable. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess I am happy to leave it to the discretion of the closer whether archives of chart information in the userspace of an editor with tens of thousands of live edits to music and chart-related articles could plausibly be "Wikipedia-related material".
 * I would also note that that updates these pages regularly, suggesting they are important to his workflow. Clearing them out would run a significant chance of alienating a productive editor, so we need to remember that editors matter and weigh the cost of potential damage to Eric's enthusiasm for the project against the benefit of deleting these pages (whatever it is). A2soup (talk) 18:23, 2 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Relates to the contribution interests of a contributor, and so relates to Wikipedia.  Ask teh user about the pages, and if he doesn't answer due to being inactive, you may if you think there are NOTWEBOST concerns (do pageviews suggest this?), as an editorial action, replace with Inactive userpage blanked.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:15, 3 February 2017 (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.