Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Rajah2770

 __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  keep. I will advise this new user of our userpage policy. JohnCD (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Rajah2770
Passes WP:FAKEARTICLE, this is a completely inappropriate usage of userspace. I thought about PRODding this, but I feel the tag would have been removed.  ArcAngel    (talk) ) 15:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * See Please do not bite the newcomers. This is a new user making substantial good faith contributions.  Writing a bio for his userpage is not so obviously unreasonable.  Calmly and gently, we should explain that details biographies are sometimes read as attempts at, and so we say that new users must keep them very brief.  On the other hand, it is very good to have users describe themselves in detail as it declares all sorts of possible Conflict of interests.  The userspage needs editing only to make it brief.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I fail to see how 19 edits to articles in 9 days is substantial. I'm sorry, but why should new editors be singled out of the guidelines?  Where do we draw the line on WP:FAKEARTICLE?  If the page used the proper infobox (Infobox user instead of Infobox person), and there as "limited autobiographical content" (which there isn't now), then this MFD wouldn't exist.     ArcAngel    (talk) ) 21:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 19 decentish edits for a newcomer is a good start, and is far better than is normally associated with a sudden fully fleshed autobiography. This user has got a wrong idea of what belongs on a userpage, but I think MfD is a bit bitey for a first conversation.  What I am hoping for is that Rajah engages us here, and agrees to tone down his userpage to something more in keeping with his level of editing.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Clearly this is WP:FAKEARTICLE. -- Klein zach  00:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - per SmokeyJoe. There does not appear to have been any attempt to explain the problem to the user (beyond the Mfd notice).  It is possible that, were he aware of the problem, he would modify the page to fit policy.  --E♴ (talk) 02:01, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep but remove the stub templates and add a notice there stating that this is not a real article. If someone wants to introduce himself in WP format, why not?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil 14:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The more time I've been spending at MfD recently, the more disgusted I've been getting with users' actions towards newcomers. ArcAngel, why didn't you drop a note on his talk page asking him about the page and telling him about Wikipedia's policies? I know you meant well, but slapping on a deletion tag and telling them in highly bureaucratic terms to come to a deletion discussion doesn't exactly scream "welcome to Wikipedia"... no wonder we have so many troubles getting new members. Anyways, I feel as long as he removes the stub templates and puts something at the top of their page notifying that this is a user page, I have no objections. Nomader  ( Talk ) 20:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment You're right, I did mean well - but I now realize I went about it the wrong way. I have now informed the editor of what changes need to be made to conform to the guidelines.     ArcAngel    (talk) ) 01:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The page does, however, need to be seriously cut back. I looked at doing it, but it is not trivial.  So many sections, each slightly reasonable.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:06, 27 February 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.