Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Maureenpfleming/Maureenpfleming (2nd nomination)

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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  speedy delete per CSD:G12. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Maureenpfleming/Maureenpfleming
MfDs for this page:  WP:UP states: "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion." Because this page violates WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:UP, it should be deleted.

Since the previous nomination by a year ago, no edits have been made to the page. Because the article is a promotional, older copy of Maureen Fleming, it should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 08:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Autobiographical, promotional WP:STALEDRAFT. No improvement since the last MFD. MER-C 08:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Because this page exists in response to a mainspace page, WP:NOTWEBHOST doesn't apply. I do not agree that this page is promotional in any problematic way. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Similar to last time.  This is a special case beyond the scope of WP:UP#COPIES.  Essentially, this the subject's contribution to their biography in mainspace.  It so happens that the community rejected her changes to her own biography, but the subject of a Wikipedia should have a right to submit a statement in response to the article.  Doing so in userspace, where the text is Noindexed, is a very good way to do it, and is probably better than directly on the talk page for a few reasons.  The subject's invitation, even right, to contribute to her mainspace article should be at least stronger than the invitation given every person to edit it immediately.  Maureen should be welcomed and thanked for her attempt to contribute, and this userspace page kept live out of respect, if nothing else.  There are no copyright issues. Any WP:Copying within Wikipedia could be easily fixed, and as Maureen owns copyright in her own quote she was free to release it under our copyrights by posting it within this project.
 * There is no concrete evidence that confirms that this is the subject. Absent such evidence, the copyright concerns you raise remain valid. I reject the notion that subjects can post responses to their articles on their userpages, where it is hosted indefinitely. The potential for abuse through NPOV and BLP violations—e.g. unsourced disparagements of individuals who negatively affected their lives or the additions of promotional or fraudulent information to promote themselves—indicates that allowing such drafts is unwise. Cunard (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I just discovered that the entire draft is a copyright violation from http://www.hwwilson.com/currentbio/cover_bios/cover_bio_03_10.cfm. Whether is the subject is irrelevant since the copyright is owned by the H. W. Wilson Company. Speedy delete so tagged. Cunard (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2011 (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.