Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:IveFoundit




 * 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. The deletion arguments entirely relate to the alleged spam aspect but the article survived with a relatively strong keep consensus at AfD. There is absolutely no need to preserve the history of a work created by a single editor and there is no precedent or policy to support placing an historical draft on a subpage of a talkpage (that is only used for clean copies of copyvio articles). This is a userspace draft and would be best tagged as such. Experienced editors should consult with the creator as to whether he or she understands sandboxes and whether there is any continuing need for this draft.

User:IveFoundit
Suspiciously like promotional copy. I'd recommend that the closing admin also examine this user's articlespace contribs. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a duplicate of Jaxtr, which I've just put up for AfD as spam. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Let Articles for deletion/Jaxtr run its course first. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see why the article can't be kept while this is deleted: if it belongs in articlespace so be it, but this isn't an appropriate use of a user page even if the article is kept. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * If the article is not deleted as promotion, I don't see that the userpage can be deleted as promotion. So far, the AfD is not supporting the spam allegation.  I'd like to see how it ends.  Perhaps you want to append additional deletion reasons to your nomination?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It triggered alarm bells for me. I would rather not see this prejudiced against the AfD, which is apparently what's happening. Were my user page to consist entirely of a draft copy of a product article I'd be unsurprised if someone took it to MfD. This is not about assumption of good faith; the article already exists in the proper namespace, so it isn't needed on the user page. I'd have speedied if that were an accepted rationale. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with the alarm bells. I'm thinking that if Jaxtr is kept, this paged should either be deleted, or history merged, or moved to a subpage of the article, depending on attribution needs.  If the article is deleted, I'd probably prefer to see the userpage blanked or edited to remove the promotional aspects at a minimum, and expecting a fair change that others would have it deleted.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Especially since WP is not a good place to use Catch-22 processes.  The editor appears to be writing about multiple companies, hence may not be advertisement, just what he is familiar with, and the user page may be his first sandbox.  Articles have attracted other editors to be sure, so AGF  also applies.  Collect (talk) 16:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep Let the AfD run its course. If the article is kept, this page should be deleted, and vice versa. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 06:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The AfD was closed with the result of "keep." This page therefore ought to be deleted to avoid violation of WP:FAKEARTICLE. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:46, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This is NOT a WP:FAKEARTICLE, but the initial draft of the mainspace article.  should preferably have moved his draft, not performed a copy paste.  The only editor involved was User:IveFoundit, so a history merge is not necessary.  Move the userpage to Talk:Jaxtr/Initial draft to preserve the full history of the article.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:14, 21 November 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.