Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JohnLeoWalsh


 * 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 debate was Deleted. I have speedily delete this as it does not conform to WP:NOT and WP:USERPAGE. I have also notified the user on the delete. Oversight is NOT needed as it contains no personal names, phone numbers or any such personally identifying details. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  09:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  09:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

User:JohnLeoWalsh
This is a bizarre collection of names and birthdates on a user page under the heading "God's People/Pets". Most of this user's edits are to this page, and yet is is an indiscriminate list, not helpful to Wikipedia, and it appears to violate at the very least the spirit of WP:USER. An alternative interpretation is that this is a collection of information about real living persons, in which case the description of the "type of person/pet" may prove offensive to the individuals concerned. I am in two minds about all of this, but I feel it warrants community attention as to whether it should be deleted Fritzpoll (talk) 22:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Definitely delete, and perhaps speedily, with oversight, as with the birthdays, ages, et al that it includes, if these are real people--and they rather appear to be--this shouldn't just be deleted, it should be oversighted, and the user warned that re-created at the risk of his/her being banned. S. Dean Jameson 22:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's either unencyclopedic fiction that violates WP:NOT or it's genuine personal details of various people that should be removed. In either case it does not belong here. ~ mazca  t 23:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per S. Dean Jameson. This kind of stuff should just be gone quickly. JuJube (talk) 00:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and oversight Totally inappropriate and Wikipedia is not a webhost. The user is additionally not here to contribute constructively, and that should be taken into account.  Enigma  message 01:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per all. Shapiros10  contact me My work  01:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note My guess is that this user is autistic. Shapiros10  contact me My work  01:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep because no one thought to ASK THE USER what the hell was going on. Is that really so hard? I'd be completely willing to consider deletion if that step is at least attempted. -- Ned Scott 07:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 *  Enigma  message 07:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So he's a newbie.. -- Ned Scott 07:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That does happen to be true, although that's not what I was getting at.  Enigma  message 07:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Blank as inappropriate content. No need for delete and definately no need for oversight because there is no reason to believe that information is a damaging revelation of personal information, in the content, or in the edit summaries, and even if maybe it is, it is certainly not so bad that the information needs to be hidden from admins.  Tell user that imformation posted must relate to contributions to the encyclopedia, that a limited amount of information about himself of OK, but certainly not personal information (eg names and birthdates) about other people.  Blanking of this sort of thing should be done on sight, allowing for easy reversion if the user diagrees.  Ideally, you should encourage the user to blank his own bad content, and request deletions within his own userspace if that is necessary.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:53, 27 July 2008 (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.