Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sikh-history


 * 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 debate was Keep as edited/archive talk page - The userpage as edited is fine and helpful in telling us about the editor and his or her potential biases. The information moved to the talk page is probably not acceptable - though some of it may have some acceptable use on the project; however, archiving is the simplest way to deal with it and the page is far to large now anyway. It will remain in history and the user can choose a different archival method if he or she wishes. The acceptability of the username is outside the scope of MFD; having a username that is the same as a url is not prohibited, though this smacks of being a group account, but those issues need to be addressed at WP:UAA if anywhere. Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Sikh-history
Clear misuse of userpage, per WP:USER. Tan  &#124;   39  17:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Blank all but userboxes. Statements like "We believe in publishing the truth, no mater how unpalatable that maybe for some" suggests intentions here that are not building an encyclopedia. Glass  Cobra  18:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I really do not understand the reason for the deletion for my user page? Why now? Why after all this time? What has brought this about? Please answer my question? --Sikh-history (talk) 19:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The reason for the nomination for deletion of this material is because the extensive personal opinion material on it is against the content guideline of WP:USER. "Now", because someone finally noticed you were improperly using your user page. This was brought about by, again, someone finally noticing that you had inappropriate material on your page. I hope this answers your questions. Tan   &#124;   39  19:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Blank all but userboxes and intro paragraph. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 02:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The user has simply given an itroduction of himself instead of hiding any facts. It seems to be OK. --Singh6 (talk) 03:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok read the current revision my purpose was only to give an idea of what I am about, what I have done in the past and an example of the sort of material I review for external sites.--Sikh-history (talk) 12:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh, you removed 170 bytes from a 79K file. All that material needs to be removed. Tan   &#124;   39  14:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * delete and request that the user change their username due to conflict of interest with the website of the same name. βcommand 21:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - the user has moved the offending information from his userpage to his talk page: and . WP:GAME anyone? -MBK004 01:47, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Misplayed as it violates WP:User talk, anyway.  Louis Waweru   Talk  14:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete:This is simply unacceptable. The user just changed occurences of "we" to "I". --KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 18:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Instead of trying to work with the user an ANI thread is started, then MFD is jumped on? WTF, guys? This is not how we handle these situations. You guys just freaked out because you saw he had a website talking about the same stuff. I could understand if he only had edited his userspace, but this is an editor in good standing. "STOP HIM, HE HAS A WEBSITE!" Next you guys will be after me because I have nedscott.com! -- Ned Scott 03:40, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note the reason put forth in the initial nomination. If you used your user page in the same was, I would start an MfD. Tan   &#124;   39  03:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You mean you wouldn't try to talk to me about it first? -- Ned Scott 04:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Though, to be fair, I really can't blame you for jumping on MfD right away, given the state it was in. Maybe I was too quick to comment here. -- Ned Scott 04:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep: Per the WP:UP guidelines, number three states Excessive personal information (more than a couple of pages) unrelated to Wikipedia. The information currently on this user page in not even one page. Per the What may I have on my user page? guidelines it states: Some people add information about themselves as well, possibly including contact information (email, instant messaging, etc), a photograph, their real name, their location, information about their areas of expertise and interest, likes and dislikes, homepages, and so forth. (If you are concerned with privacy, you may not want to and are by no means required to emulate this.). This user page, in its current form, does exactly that. Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: Before replying or making a decision, you might want to read what the other people said, or check out the history of the user page. It's one page - now. When this started, it was a 79K file. This is because user moved all information to talk page. Still violates WP:TP, which states, "Talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views." Tan   &#124;   39  23:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: What does the WP:TP have to do with the user page? This is an MfD for User:Sikh-history's userpage according to the nom, and that falls under WP:UP and What may I have on my user page?.
 * Because he just moved it to his talk page in an effort to Game the system. -MBK004 05:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Double Standards - MBK is the information of your page not similar to mine. Does it not represent information about you? The quotations you have used are they not "platforms for their personal views." --Sikh-history (talk) 08:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - admitting to being an SPA, not a good idea. This isn't a blog.  Grsz  11   →Review!  03:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments in response to tan and Grsz11: Please see Special:Contributions/Johnbuckman and it will show that the only work the Editor did on Wikipedia was to his own articles or articles on his authors/friends showing the editor to be a SPA making COI edits. Now look at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Johnbuckman and you will see that it was a clear "keep" and it was not based on edit history, notability or COI edits. That MfD is 100% relative because it was 100% "keep" because of the reasons I stated above. From what I see User:Sikh-history now has an acceptable user page that follows the exact same format that USER:Johnbuckman uses. Soundvisions1 (talk) 05:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So you want to abandon this MfD, and start up a new one for the material that is clearly unacceptable on the talk page per WP:TP? I thought that we could all agree that this discussion was for the material involved, regardless of where the user is currently keeping it. Halfway through that MfD, he'll move it to another subspace, you'll vote keep because his talk page is now okay.... where does it end? He's gaming the damn system. This isn't MySpace; this isn't a forum to espouse one's personal views. Tan   &#124;   39  13:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi I am not trying to GAME the system. I have moved the information that you wanted to deleted to my talk page till I figure out what to do with it. The information was meant to give an illustration (especially to some Sikh users), of some of the very controversial subject matter I try and deal with in a subjective and NPOV manner. I am open to suggestion, but please do not slander my name. I have always tried to be fair in my dealings with people here and have made enemies within the Sikh Community who would wish to post information here that is from a POV. Please tell me what to do and I will do it. --Sikh-history (talk) 18:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Strong Keep as it currently stands. Advocating the truth is the very essence of an encyclopedia, Truth-with-a-capitol-T is by its definition NPOV, and the user also states a dedication to preserving NPOV in articles related to his interest. While this may lead to inevitable editing conflicts, stated dedication to Wikipedia principles is hardly something to discourage. 69.210.56.62 (talk) 06:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as edited. Please keep in mind that the editor is active in editing the actual encyclopedia and so should be given some leeway as to what he can keep on a subpage. Let's try to offer some guidance about that rather than just negativity. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:44, 19 November 2008 (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.