Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Prof.feldman

 __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 per WP:NOTWEBHOST and related guidelines. --RL0919 (talk) 00:12, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Prof.feldman
Is an autobiography. Jasper Deng (talk) 02:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Abandoned, autobiographical, unsourced BLP WP:FAKEARTICLE. MER-C 03:15, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep WP has no rules against writing about oneself in userspace as long as it is not excessive. 4K is not excessive.  "Abandoned" means "no one has been here" - but edits as recently as yesterday belie that claim.   Are personal c.v.s required to be sourced? Nope.  Is there anything remotely "contentious" in it? Nope.  Reasons for deletion? None.  Collect (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not abandoned, but yes unsourced WP:FAKEARTICLE.  Users who are contributing to the project are allowed to add some autobiographical information on their userpage.  It helps establish COI's and allows users to get to know each other a little.  If, however, a user's only edits are to write an autobiographical userpage, then it serves no purpose to the project, and WP:NOTWEBHOST comes into play. Also, the fact that the page has only been edited by an IP for the last year implies to me that the user forgot the password to his account.  It doesn't look like he plans on using the account for anything other than hosting that userpage.--  E♴  (talk)  15:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you know of any rule that says "IPs are second class editors, who are presumed not to be capable of making any real articles"?  Of any rule that says "Registered users who forget their password are forbidden to edit on Wikipedia"?  I thought not.   Page is not "abandoned" which removes that from the table utterly.   Userspace is not requied to be "sourced" in any event.   And absent the remotest belief that anything "contentious" is in it (which would be proper grounds for removal), I fail to see acual grounds for deletion. Collect (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Most of the content was written by the user, not the IP.Jasper Deng (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The IP is welcome to edit whatever he likes. The editor, weather he lost his password or not, is welcome to edit.  The point I was trying to make is that the particular account User:Prof.feldman hasn't edited in a long time, and may never edit again.  With that in mind, does he need a detailed userpage?  He doesn't seem to be working on collaborating with other editors or establishing COI's or anything else related to establishing an encyclopedia.  I agree that the page does not qualify as abandoned.  However, WP:NOTMYSPACE says:
 * "Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, or amusement, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration."  (I added the bolding). --  E♴  (talk)  19:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I tagged it for deletion per WP:Autobiographies. I feel little of the page content is relevant to Wikipedia.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Collect, and, in fact, per nom. WP:USER says, "User pages mainly are for interpersonal discussion, notices, testing and drafts, and, if desired, limited autobiographical and personal content." Thus, being an autobiography is not a reason to delete a user page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:FAKEARTICLE 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." User:Prof.feldman reads like an unwikified, unreferenced Wikipedia article. An unsourced BLP would be deleted in the mainspace. The same ought to apply to an unsourced userspace draft that has existed since 20:33, 2 July 2010 (UTC). WP:USERBIO prohibits, "Inappropriate or excessive personal information unrelated to Wikipedia." The userspace draft includes promotional content such as "he received the ORT award for his creative ideas". The entire page reads like a résumé, which is prohibited by WP:NOTADVERTISING. Because neither  nor the IP addresses, , , , and  have shown an interest in contributing to the encyclopedia, the leeway usually given to established editors should not be given to this single-purpose account.  In February 2011, this page was viewed 61 times. In March 2011, this page was viewed 62 times. Special:WhatLinksHere/User:Prof.feldman includes the pages User:AlexNewArtBot/PhysicsSearchResult/archive11 and WikiProject Spam/COIReports/2010, Jul 2. (The remaining three links are Miscellany for deletion, User talk:Prof.feldman, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Prof.feldman. These three links to User:Prof.feldman existed only after this MfD was initiated on 02:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC). As such, they could not have led viewers to this page in February or March 2011.) The likely explanation this page has been receiving so many views is that it is linked to off-site and is used to store 's résumé. A patent violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST.  Because this page violates WP:FAKEARTICLE, WP:NOTWEBHOST, and WP:NOTADVERTISING, because the userspace draft is tantamount to an unreferenced BLP, because this unreferenced BLP has had deficient sourcing since July 2010, because the page was created and maintained to circumvent the deletion of Professor raymond feldman, and because the page is linked to off-wiki as a storage of the user's résumé, it should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 00:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the place where you keep track of your career achievements. Frankly, I don't see how anyone could read User pages and come to the conclusion that this page is fine. Pichpich (talk) 02:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per e2eamon, and Cunard, especially where he explains that it looks like the page is being hosted for external reference, and, Userpage content should be limited to be in proportion to the editors project contributions, which would mean noting the user's date of registration. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:18, 18 April 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.