Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Grayghost01

 __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. Consensus is clearly against a full deletion or even a full blank. (non-admin closure) Dronebogus (talk) 04:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

User:Grayghost01

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

A large chunk of the page is pro-confederate soapboxing. Might need deleting as directly promoting historical revisionism under claims of “correcting” it. Dronebogus (talk) 08:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is nothing more than a misuse of userpage for pro-Confederate revisionist propaganda, with probable breach of WP:NOTWEBHOST. —Sundostund (talk) 09:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Blank, with Userpage blanked. Do not delete. For the record, I once edited with this fellow but don't have any personal strong feelings on the subject. It's a very poor precedent to set that we might delete entire userpages just because a portion of it offends. Delete the subpages and the userboxes and whatever else actually offends but if the userpage, written by the user, says "I'm immature" or "I hold untenable positions" then let it say that, in attribution history. BusterD (talk) 12:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: Well within reasonable leeway for a productive Wikipedian. SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Either partially blank or keep: The only sketchy part of the userpage in my view is the First things first section, but I still don't see that as cause to delete the entire userpage. I think discussing with the user first could have gone a long way, as this is beginning to turn into a crusade. I think just blanking that section is a much more logical alternative. Curbon7 (talk) 18:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep for now - The first part of it that I looked at is within limits. Maybe it needs a second reading.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:19, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Partially blank: Just remove the soapboxing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - most of this is perfectly fine, although personally I think the revisionism they decry goes both ways. Hog Farm Talk 14:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Partially blank Remove the soapboxing; otherwise it is fine. Sarrail (talk) 18:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep page essentially per SmokeyJoe. Our standard for deleting a user page outright is pretty high, and we give significant latitude for productive users to develop their views, even if one sided, in userspace. If there is something specific here that is sufficiently unproductively inflammatory, then go ahead and invite the user to remove it, or if absolutely necessary someone other than the author can remove it. But that is outside the ambit of MFD. Martinp (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep page - We don't do this sort of headhunting around here, or at least I hope we don't. People have latitude as to what they can have on their userspace, and more importantly, it informs as to the manner of their editing in a manner that is useful for administrators.--🌈WaltCip - (talk)  21:54, 7 October 2022 (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.