Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Riyas202

 __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 snow keep. Doc   talk  05:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Riyas202


Previous version looks like a fake article. User has sixteen edits to the userpage and only three to article space. Is he here to build an encyclopedia, or to promote himself? Dianna (talk) 06:50, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Per wp:user page, user is allowed limited autobiographical and personal content'. That's what they had. Their (few) article edits are helpful. There are 6 deleted edits that someone should comment on… Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 06:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I restored the page for ease of viewing during this MfD. Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 06:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There were two user subpages deleted at user request. The contents were experiments with templates. -- Dianna (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Routine deletion per WP:FAKEARTICLE. Either move it to the main space to face the notability standard for articles, or stop pretending it's an article with the section headers ripped off from actual articles. Doc   talk  07:12, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete ; regretfully, this is a social networking vanity userpage at best, and a WP:FAKEARTICLE at worst. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * STRONG KEEP; Completely harmless use of his talk page, and not deserving of so much admin attention. This user is being harassed. Leontopodium alpinum (talk) 14:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The fact that harmless userpages like this are targeted for harassment and deletion is what is ultimately going to drive me off this site. Well, no, I guess what will eventually drive me off is that people can repeatedly do this with no consequences. I miss Walton One. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Absolutely harmless, unlike some of the attitudes displayed toward it. BothHandsBlack (talk) 15:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep with userpage. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. With Floquenbeam's addition, the page is now in no way misleading, and therefore does not meet WP:FAKEARTICLE. It does provide "limited autobiographical and personal content", which is permitted. Its being written in the third person is odd, but irrelevant. The page creator has not attempted to remove Floquenbeam's addition, so there is no indication that the page creator will attempt to make the page misleading. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Neutral Floquenbeam's odd attacks aside, his addition to the page makes it clear. I still believe that this page is a creation by a user who wants to get his name out there and nothing more, but if y'all think it's suitable, that's cool with me. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:55, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Harmless. Nobody Ent 17:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Doesn't seem like something that should be deleted. So long as the page is clearly marked as a userpage, then it's fine. Silver  seren C 20:37, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't LinkedIn or Facebook -- thinking otherwise is a wrongheaded conceit and encouraging this misconception is most certainly NOT "harmless". --Calton | Talk 21:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Harmless. Seriously, what's the point of this entire discussion? I can have all kinds of BS on my user page and no one would bring mine up for deletion. Drmies (talk) 22:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Perhaps we can stop the harassment. Clearly, the page is not content that could reach a point where it can be included as an article. It says, "Riyas Majeed (December 05, 1988 - Present) is ... an active member of Wikipedia," has a userbox, and is focused on his early life, not his career. This page does not meet the 'look like an article' standard of WP:FAKEARTICLE. Also, the information is not excessive or substantial personal information unrelated to Wikipedia. There is nothing about this page that is advertising or promotion of an individual, business, organization, group, or viewpoint unrelated to Wikipedia. It is not extensive self-promotional material. The page now includes userpage. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 23:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - In terms of user pages looking like resumes, I've seen a lot worse. It does look like he's got wikipedia confused with facebook or something, but the user page seems OK. If I were in his shoes, I'd be more concerned about the risk of identity theft. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:38, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Editors matter. This MfD looks like harassment of an editor with a harmless userpage. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:02, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Dianna's nomination here is procedural. See Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for where this began. Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 23:51, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I understand now. Nevertheless, somebody has been harassing Riyas over the harmless content of his user page, and I think that having even a procedural nomination for deletion of the userpage is detrimental. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:02, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yup; that was User:Dave1185. That thread, above, is still open. Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 02:27, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that the above user is the indef-blocked user Jack Merridew (among other guises), who got special dispensation by the arbcom to start again here provided he didn't stir up any trouble. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Stop trolling and pulling bullshite out of your ass ;) Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 03:32, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * You first. :) Oh, wait... Are you saying you did NOT make this edit? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Can someone please Snow this as "Keep"? Support to keep it is overwhelming. I'm sure Riyas will be pleased to know this (should they ever return... and if Dave hasn't chased them away!). Modelling your user pages after WP articles as a FAKEBIO is a fantastic idea: one that needs further encouragement. We should all follow Riyas' example on this. Doc   talk  04:41, 18 June 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.