Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Janismurillo


 * 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 - the page is stale and the user inactive (at least as an editor, no requirement to edit to have an account), however, the page is not a duplicate of an existing page and a reasonable argument for a separate article on addictive personality could be made. There is no requirement that users have a usersubpage for a sandbox or draft and WP:UP makes no distinctions between what is allowed on the user's main page and on subpages. We can delete userpages just fine, there is no requirement that drafts in userspace be able to meet the mainspace test. In other words, none of the arguments on either side have the weight of policy on their side. Doug.(talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Janismurillo
Non-notable article (with sources/dead links not meeting WP:RS) on user page Flowanda | Talk 05:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. If this is an article in progress, this should be moved to a user sandbox. However, the info in this article seems to already exist at Addiction in one form or another, and so if this article ever made into mainspace it could very well be deleted or merged as superfluous. Given that this has not been touched by the user in over a year and has been his only contribution, this is unlikely. Bettia   (rawr!)  11:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. User page. Causing no harm. Wilkos (talk) 20:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - you can't really delete their user page, has asking the user to move the information elsewhere been discussed? --Truco 01:15, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This wouldn't survive mainspace so it's not viable as a sandbox. Leave him a note that says what happened and provide him with a copy of the material if he wants it. - Mgm|(talk) 13:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - the article hasn't been worked on in over a year, and the user appears to have left Wikipedia. Given that it's not going to make it into article-space in its current form, it should be deleted rather than kept around forever (unless anyone else wants to rescue it). Terraxos (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - those are college sources, why not RS? Wandering Courier (talk) 23:09, 8 January 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.