Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Faustnh/A Theory On Five Critical Events


 * 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 delete. — Aitias // discussion  00:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Faustnh/A Theory On Five Critical Events
Original research that has no realistic chance of ever becoming an article. This user is using Wikipedia as a webhost to promote their own theories (see WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:UP). -- Tim Vickers (talk) 00:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know about Wikipedia (perhaps I'm wrong about this and it's not so), user pages are not "strict articles" of Wikipedia, and, with such idea in my mind, I have created the user page referred above. That is, I'm not intending that user page of mine be considered a strict Wikipedia article or something aspiring to become a Wikipedia article. And, as I have mentioned, until now I have understood that such kind of content can be included within user pages.

On the other hand, recently I have created the category "Evolution as biological change adapted to environmental change", and user Tim Vickers, who has criticized in the past some of my comments, if I can remember well, posted some minutes ago, on my talk page, the following question about that category: "what does this mean?". As this formulation is inappropriate in all senses, I simply deleted Tim Vickers's question, without even giving it an answer.

Now, a few minutes later, I find Tim Vickers communicates me he has started this nomination for deletion against the user page of mine he refers above.

He has also started a discussion against some of the categories I have created.

What makes user Tim Vickers's subjective motivations in Wikipedia quite clear, and I don't think user Tim Vickers forgets my existence, as I try to forget his existence, that easy. --Faustnh (talk) 01:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:USER where we read "Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project." The page in question is an extreme example of WP:OR and there is zero possibility of it having material suitable for an encyclopedia based on verifiable sources. The comments above about Tim Vickers are nonsense. Johnuniq (talk) 02:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, if we can read what you say about Wikipedia user pages, then don't worry, I will be the one who deletes the user page of mine in dispute, and I will also delete all my other user pages that could receive similar critics. Nothing more to say. --Faustnh (talk) 03:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom, and I have unblanked the page. Faustnh, sorry, but you need to pay attention to what the MfD notice says. If you wish the page to be deleted, please cut and paste the following onto the page: . →  ROUX   ₪  03:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Violates no rules. Specifically userspace is used for material which would not be used in mainspace, thus an argument that it is not a mainspace article is not valid.  Is the page spam? Hoax? Attack? Commercial? Excessively long?  Duplicating mainspace material?  And last I checked OR applies to WP articles -- not to userspace, nor to discussions, projectspace etc.  And user is not a "single edit" person on WP, thus should have some leeay to express his views. Collect (talk) 12:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * weak Keep. Has a realistic chance of contributing to mainspace, in some form, with significant development, although is more likely unrecoverable original research.  We are not experts to judge the truth of this.  Original research is allowable in userspace.  Warn user to not put any of it into mainspace without reliable third party referencing.  Ask the user to explicitly declare any conflicts of interests, on his userpage.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * weak keep, as per Gigs below. I am not sure as to whether it is kookish original research, or a fresh presentation of established knowledge.  Give the user a time limit to ensure that everything is sourceable.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete userspace is indexed on google. This is not the sort of stuff we want to be presenting to the world. He can get his own hosting. Gigs (talk) 14:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a host. Ironholds (talk) 11:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Userspace is for content related to contributing to Wikipedia, either telling other contributors about yourself to facilitate collaboration, or making content that will eventually improve the wiki. This issue is a no-brainer. The wiki is not a webhost for one's personal theories about life, the universe, and everything. Auntie E.  16:42, 19 July 2009 (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.