Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sotuman/fan-group

 __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. Lots of "neutral" comments, but also lot of observations that these pages appear to be aimed at complaining about other users and support for deletion on this basis. Thus this is a delete per WP:POLEMIC. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:46, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Sotuman/fan-group

 * Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:54, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

These probably don't fall under WP:G10 and unsure about WP:U5, but appear to be unsourced personal opinion about editors, some not necessarily praise. These are also linked directly from the short main user page. — Paleo Neonate  – 10:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - As nominator implies, clearly inappropriate. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:20, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Borderline. Negative material about others is not OK, as per WP:POLEMIC.  I'm not sure if this is "negative".  Not use if it is useful.  Not sure if this sort of thing is best driven off, as driving it off may mean driving if offsite to another site, with less accountability for the author, and ability to fix.  Leaning to "delete" if any of the following users have any objections to it.
 * User:Guy Macon
 * User:Tgeorgescu
 * User:Theroadislong
 * User:Doug Weller
 * User:Dlohcierekim
 * User:Bishonen
 * User:JzG
 * --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * User:JzG
 * --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)


 * neutral Flattered. Honored by the company. Probably a harmless, non-policy violation. On the other hand, it's a little webhosty. For comparison,see User:Bibliomaniac15/Today/Archive-- I'm an "Awesome Wikipedia" with my own day. In terms of colegiality, this is just another way of recognizing our colleagues. (I'm sure there are other examples not seeping past sleep deprivation into my mind.) You can't really expect me to !vote to keep or delete a page that calls me a god, though.Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * PS My "new page creation" stat is misleading. Those are from creating new user talk pages when welcoming or admining.Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Recuse: I have a COI regarding a page that talks about me. I will support whatever the consensus is. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Neutral although I can see the point of recusing. I agree with everything User:Dlohcierekim says in both of his posts. I don't actually see a real need to delete it but I don't care. Doug Weller  talk 14:15, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:54, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete all I don't recall the details but I saw the disruption concerning Sotuman's edits at Flood geology and I recognize the user names highlighted by Sotuman in the pages at MfD. The AE log shows two of those named, and user talk has a request for Sotuman to stop pinging for attention. This diff shows conflict with another named person. The other names are sure to be parties to the dispute (examples: 1 + 2). What the parties want is not relevant. Keeping a creepy list of users violates WP:POLEMIC no matter how subtly it is done. Johnuniq (talk) 10:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * He did make some rather unhelpful edits at WP:GOODBIAS... --Guy Macon (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2019 (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.