Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Richardmarx/sandbox

 __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. JohnCD (talk) 10:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Richardmarx/sandbox


Appears to be a WP:FAKEARTICLE. Was declined at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Suleman Malik. Lacking any notability, it's not going to article-space any time soon, and we're not here to host vanity pages. bobrayner (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a free web host. The page is promotional, not even subtle that it's promoting its subject, and does not belong in the userspace.--SGCM (talk)  21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not facebook. Let's kill the AFC submission too while we're here. MER-C 02:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Valid experimentation in user sandbox. I think "if we want better quality in the long term, it's vitally important for the community to welcome good new editors (not just get rid of the bad ones), even though they might be disheartened when their first few edits are rejected." --Surturz (talk) 12:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with the importance of helping promising new editors. However, let's review this new editor's first steps:
 * Try creating a vanity article at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Suleman Malik hacker. Declined.
 * Try recreating the same vanity article. Declined again.
 * Try creating the same vanity article over at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Suleman Malik. Declined again.
 * Tried again at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Suleman Malik. Declined again.
 * Now the same vanity article is at User:Richardmarx/sandbox.
 * I do not think that keeping this latest iteration of the WP:FAKEARTICLE on display furthers their learning experience. If this editor is to actually join the community and help build the encyclopædia, they'll have to do that somewhere else, on different articles. Our social policies are not a suicide pact; if somebody is only here to promote a non-notable person then at some point we have to stop the spam. bobrayner (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - pages that look like articles but have no hope of moving into the Article namespace should be considered an inappropriate use of User namespace. Achowat (talk) 13:53, 26 July 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.