Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:NooProcess


 * 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 no consensus (but remove any non-free images).  нмŵוτн τ  21:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

User:NooProcess
Unclear how this user page is useful for improving the encyclopedia. Semi-frequent issues with non free images being placed on the page. WP:NOT. User has no edits outside of user space. I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

--Onorem♠Dil 13:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NooProcess (talk • contribs) 23:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Further insight into the mission to juxtapose philosophy and science jargon in such a way that neither philosophers nor scientists will be able to make heads nor tails of what is said. WP:NOT might fit as well...at User:NooProcess/Terrible Tripodism in particular. In any case, I don't plan to add any more here. I'll consider withdrawing the nomination if further keep !votes are made. --Onorem♠Dil 13:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep remove non-free images, but keep page. -Nard 00:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Egads, not banishment. I have deliberately confined myself to my user area in order to avoid any diminution of quality in the main topic areas, avoiding external references for the samae reason: so as to hone my editing skills without offending any other users. If this is not possible, what hope is there? ~ NooProcess (talk) 23:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Keep, although the non-free images need to go. Honestly, what exactly is the problem with this?  It doesn't violate any policy, certainly not WP:NOT.  It's a collection of links to Wikipedia articles the user obviously finds interesting.  There are people out there who don't edit Wikipedia, they just browse it (I was one), and they're certainly entitled to a userpage too. --UsaSatsui (talk) 09:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how it currently doesn't violate WP:NOT? "Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia." I don't see where it says present information that a user obviously finds interesting, even if they have no plans to actual edit Wikipedia. Whatever the outcome of this discussion, I hope the user will consider editing outside their user space. --Onorem♠Dil 12:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Pointing out under what one may have on one's userpage: "You can use your user page to help you to use Wikipedia more effectively: to list "to do" information, works in progress, reminders, useful links, and so forth. It is also good for experimenting with markup".  It assists in the first, and the user claims he's using it for the second purpose as well.  I don't see what it violates under "What may you not have on your userspace, except maybe some Polemical statements (so I suppose the "Terrible  Tripodism" page should go). I don't feel it's speedy anymore, at any rate. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, remove the non-free images and instruct the user about WP:USER and about contributing. --Core desat 12:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, the links provided by Onorem show that the user whose pages these are is trying to use his userspace as a complement to his/her personal wiki, which violates WP:NOT. The statements would then also violate WP:NOT. Soapboxing may be the user's only intent here; this was pretty tricky to figure out until I saw the user's personal wiki. --Core desat 15:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The links put them into context better, but I still don't see how the userpage itself violates Wikipedia. There's no soapboxing on the userpage itself, nor are there any links to his personal wiki, nor any evidence on his personal Wiki that he's using it as a compliment to his own space or to vandalize Wikipedia (sometimes cute philosophical statements are just that) With one exception, the page is just a list of Wikipedia articles.  Is that not allowed? --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not particularly useful to the project, but this is userspace and I don't see that it's violating any policies.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd like to add on a couple more pages from another account that was created a few days after this discussion began. User:CatosCat and User:CatosCat/European Cultural Roots. --Onorem♠Dil 13:53, 29 February 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.