Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gavinbrooks

 __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 Delete. -- Cirt (talk) 05:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

User:Gavinbrooks
Wikipedia is not a web host for your resume or to announce that you are seeking a job. (See WP:NOTWEBHOST) Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC) Understood, sorry, will amend. Gavin Brooks (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC).
 * Delete per nom, WP:NOTWEBHOST. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 14:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Gavinbrooks's removal of the resume. Given that this is an active editor, maybe you should have asked him to remove it rather than nominating the page for deletion. Reyk  YO!  01:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the user's only contributions have been to his userpage and to this MfD page. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * He's been for two days. I think we can hold off making judgments for a while. Reyk  YO!  02:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This MfD really doesn't matter now that the user has removed the resume. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTRESUME. The userpage still contains promotional content and a spam link. Because this user has only edited this MfD and his userpage, and because the userpage has no Wikipedia-related content, this page should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 11:26, 15 December 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.

It would have been more polite and professional if I were asked to make changes in the first place. I think the person who submitted me for immediate deletion either misunderstood my good intentions or perhaps enjoys attacking innocent new comers and dictating on what you can do or cannot do. Funny you should see the persons own profile page which was already marked for deletion. Anyway I feel I was personally attacked and wikimedia should review their rules with regards to minor mistakes. Pity I thought this particular page was for own use and for anyone who wanted to know more about a contributor. My links was to prove I was a real person not inteded to be a resume. My apologizes for any errors but I felt it was my right to respond to this issue in order to defend myself and express my disappointment with the way my talk page was criticised. I consider this case closed as I have reviewed my own involvement with this site where I considered giving over 200 photographs to wikipedia which I own copyright to (due to their appeal for more images) but since this issue came along I decided that as I may be targeted for deletions unfairly I shall not contribute any such images and shall only stick with very minor edits or addition of useful brief text only. Gavin Brooks Gavin Brooks (talk) 06:50, 18 December 2010 (UTC)