Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Markaci/Nudity (3rd nomination)


 * 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 Snowball keep. In the debate, many editors agreed that the reason provided for deletion didn't apply in this situation. Seraphim&hearts;  Whipp 10:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Markaci/Nudity
This has been MFDed once - more than a year ago.

The policy aganist this can be found here.

Also, why does there need to be a list of images like this? Mirroring a point from previous.. it is basically a list for vandals to use (if they find it). The  Helpful   One  (Review) 18:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep unless there's some better rationale for deletion than "I don't like userspace collections of nudity". There are other pages like this, they have been nominated before, and they have generally been kept unless the user agrees to delete them. In general, the community has rejected the argument that these sort of pages are deletable purely for content reasons. — Gavia immer (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, per policy as described here Prester John (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't think that WP:NOT is relevant here. That policy deals with what can/can't be in articles, not what can/can't be in user pages.  Metros (talk) 19:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per Metros' connent. WP:NOT specifically refers to "articles".  The page in question is not an article, so the policy is not relevant.  Many user pages are essentially "collections of links", such as "articles I've worked on" or "articles in need of attention".  No valid reason for deletion has been offered.  -- Coneslayer (talk) 22:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Per policy and nom. GizzaDiscuss  &#169; 23:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please place new entries at the bottom of the page. No policy has been cited that pertains to user pages, only articles.  -- Coneslayer (talk) 23:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The user presumably has some reason for maintaining a list such as this; perhaps they use it in some sort of vandal-patrolling activity. Also, the images are linked, not displayed, so no fair-use considerations come into play. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:NOT#REPOSITORY deals with articles, and to argue to delete the page because it violates this policy is a very poor argument. I'm not aware of any policy-based reason to delete. WODUP (talk) 04:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep for all the keep reasons already given... that pretty much covers it. (no pun intended) Mathmo Talk 06:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, that policy doesn't even apply (seriously, it's like no one ever reads the crap they link to). -- Naerii  ·  plz create stuff  13:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Clearly Keep
 * The policy being cited applies to articles, not to userspace.
 * What's the "problem" with a page of links to other Wikipedia content? Isn't that what the typical userpage is, information with links?
 * That Prester or Gizza or Helpful dislike the page/content is irrelevant, and no policies have been violated.
 * Without any actual policy-based rational, this page probably should be Speedy Keep.
 *  •   VigilancePrime    •    •    •  18:27 (UTC)  11 Mar '08


 * Keep - yes, I understand the rule, but I interpret it as a list of external links. Bearian (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Obvious Keep A list of internal links to images an a user subpage so he can find them when he needs them? Please. Relax, they're just bodies. Oh, and the policy explicitly applies to articles. Nice try. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 08:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:UP is the appropriate guideline and it doesn't cover a list of images - it would seem to me that this list could very easily be supporting a collaborative effort with respect to the images listed (it could even be used by some as a list of images to nominate for deletion if so desired).--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Ned Scott 09:52, 14 March 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.