Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Leeharveyoswald


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 delete Tito xd (?!? - help us) 02:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Leeharveyoswald
This is an odd situation. Editor User:Leeharveyoswald (last edit Nov 2004) has posted a POV fork, his own preferred version of the Lee Harvey Oswald article, on his user page. While that's all well and good, but given his username and that there's nothing to distinguish this and a regular encyclopedia article, there's the potential for confusion for the novice WP user. It seems that already at least two or three editors have confused this with the real thing. I think we should delete it, or failing that, move it to a subpage or post a disclaimer. Gamaliel 19:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak delete due to risk of confusion and POV-ness. Stifle 21:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Delete. As can be seen from this user's contributions, the account appears to be made for the sole purpose of preserving the preferred version of the article, and has made no other contributions. Perhaps we should wait a few days, and if that user hadn't made a proper contribution, then delete. &laquo;  Lord  ViD  &raquo; 08:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless user comes forward with an explanation. All his contributions were to this year-old page.  Unless a good argument is made, this POV article is little different than an ad for a service in userspace.  Users with very few contributions have less latitude with their userspace, as they have not demonstrated knowledge of, or concern for, the project, other than using it as a web host. Xoloz 20:06, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as user has been gone for a year and email doesn't work to contact him/her. Appears to be nonconcesus rendition of personal opinion and per above.--MONGO 03:13, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * either delete or move to another name so as not to confuse people. BL   kiss the lizard  23:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This user page has even attracted newbie editors thinking it was the real article. xaosflux  Talk  / CVU  18:18, 17 December 2005 (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.