Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/TalibanBounty

 __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 no consensus to delete. JohnCD (talk) 22:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/TalibanBounty


Userpage which has not been edited by subject editor since September 2007, and contains no text other than a caption for a picture; five years is far too long to save something in userspace.  Horologium  (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible for you to explain which portion of WP:Userpage, or any other policy you think this page did not comply with?
 * Yes, I updated it. When actual articles are nominated for deletion, and those who have weighed in on the discussion agree the reasons offered for deletion have been successfully addressed, those articles are kept.  WP:Userpage says "Traditionally Wikipedia offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit."  Although, there have been some mfd where this principle was ignored, and where the original problem has been addressed have nevertheless been deleted -- based on a claim some earlier version had a problem.  This is a much higher standard than we apply to articles.  Personally?  I regard this kind of closure as both inappropriate and counterpolicy. With regard to the specific objection stated in the nomination, that the page "hadn't been edited in five years" -- if a contributor has been working on a topic, for years, then why is it a problem for them keep using policy-compliant notes, for years?  Geo Swan (talk) 11:37, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Question Is this the only five-year-old user page on Wikipedia?  How many are four years old?  Unscintillating (talk) 04:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. This page contains a table of images (posters mostly) and captions of potential use in articles in the area of interest of the editor. I see no policy violations here. Tijfo098 (talk) 05:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems compliant, no logical need to delete.  --Nouniquenames (talk) 06:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * An image gallery that nobody could seriously argue has potential as an article. Those opining to keep haven't given a valid argument between them so far, including the author's insistence on not hearing the argument (which has been on ANI for over two weeke now) that his userspace is not granted him to host his own personal shrines nor as an indefinite storage locker for deleted or inappropriate content. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Which policy requires that every page in user space must be a potential article? You yourself host User:Thumperward/tropes, which doesn't look like a potential article to me. Tijfo098 (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a work page: I use it to track poorly-sourced trivia / fiction sections (or at least did, until I forgot about it: thanks for the reminder). I'd consider a rather good example of an appropriate use of userspace other than drafting articles, actually. I'm still waiting for any coherent argument as to why the page actually nominated here is an appropriate long-term use of userspace, especially given the background under scrutiny at ANI. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 18:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * How do you figure that this is a "personal shrine"? Unscintillating (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There is copious evidence on ANI that Geo Swan uses his userspace as a scrapbook for Guantanamo / terrorism-related material. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 08:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know, exactly, what you would, and what wouldn't consider a "scrapbook". But I think you are perfectly entitled to keep using policy-compliant work pages -- and so am I.  Could you clarify for me, after looking at this particular page is it your position it does not look like something you would consider a policy compliant work page?  If so, why not?  Thanks.
 * On May 29, 2009, I spent something like two person-days creating User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/inprocessdates, which contains information from the two sources for when captives arrived in Guantanamo. I went over a year without editing this page, but I used it dozens of times a month.  I bring this up because it demonstrates that whether a page of notes is or isn't being actively edited shows nothing about whether it is being used.  Geo Swan (talk) 15:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. It seems to me the user subpage is being "useful for organizing and aiding the work" of the editor, to use the wording in WP:USERPAGE Thincat (talk) 22:41, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - per excessive content unrelated to Wikipedia. User space is not a place to post personal opinions on external webpages such as psywarrior.com that are unrelated to Wikipedia. User space is not a place to promote viewpoints unrelated to Wikipedia (such as commercial sites). -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Reference catalog of graphics in userspace; strikes me as quite appropriate use of the space. Carrite (talk) 17:51, 10 September 2012 (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.