Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Oscar Junker

 __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  delete. — ξ xplicit  00:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Oscar Junker


Has nothing to do with the encyclopedia (it's meant to be a biography) and if meant to be an article does not meet WP:Notability either. AndieM13 '' (Leave a message!) 11:04, 27 March 2012 (UTC) "Principle #5: 'Reasonable efforts to discourage children from disclosing identifying personal information are appropriate.'""Proposed remedy #3: 'Users who appear to be children editing in good faith who disclose identifying personal information may be appropriately counseled. Deletion and oversight may be used in appropriate cases to remove the information.'" "There is enough information on this page for someone (who is willing to do the research) to identify this user (or at least narrow down the pool of candidates to a few people)" (quoted from at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BennyReyesReturned/Class images). This is summarized in Protecting children's privacy. See also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vsimon94 and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Andrae L. Knight as two examples of related discussions. Cunard (talk) 06:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. User created account a few days ago. If he wants to help with article writing, having a bio in userspace seems harmless. Is it a little early to delete the page? Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 07:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete From Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy:
 * Delete - and quickly. Our child protection policies, and the fact that we haven't used them yet, but the Foundation, and far, far more importantly Oscar, in jeopardy. Identifying information should be deleted and oversighted, and user should be required to chose a non-identifying username. User has made no other edits, but I'm going to try to engage the User on his talk page anyway, just so he understands why this is happening, if he ever returns. This may seem like the "nuclear option" (delete, oversight, and block username) but there are some things I will not tolerate, and that is endangering self-identified children. In the meantime, I am boldly blanking. Achowat (talk) 12:27, 3 April 2012 (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.