Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sporks.Are.Loverly


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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. No immediate issues. El_C 06:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Sporks.Are.Loverly
User's only edits are to namespace; using userpage as social networking site in violation of WP:NOT. -- Merope Talk 15:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC) "The preceding unsigned comment was generated from a web location which has also been recently used to edit the userpage of User:Elfred, very likely by that user. If that hypothesis is correct, then I would strongly encourage the user to try to cease in indulging in such pointless personal attacks as have been used above." I can heartily and fully swear to you that mentioned comment was most surely of someone other than myself. I know for fact that several separate people edit the page of User: Elfred and I used to be one of them. However, it was most definetely by someone other than myself, perhaps User: The.Almighty.One or User: Futbol2. Sporks.Are.Loverly 02:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)Sporks.Are.Loverly
 * Delete per above. I also note that the user who created the page either has not yet actually created an account or has yet to edit his/her own page while logged in. Badbilltucker 16:01, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; Wikipedia is not Myspace; activities such as this should be actively discouraged. Antandrus  (talk) 20:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. That is what MySpace is for. -- Nish kid 64 23:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how this user is no longer contributing, what is the intended purpose of deleting this page? It's not going to save disk space, and in the event that this user returns, wouldn't a nicely worded message be more likely to change them into a productive contributor? -  brenneman  {L} 00:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...I do not actually use my userpage as a social networking. And I do contribute, I just forget to log in whilst doing so. Besides, I see no reason why you're bothering yourself with my page, it doesn't affect you in the least, doesn't take up disk pace, and in the event that I return a nicely worded message would be a much more pleasent way of persuading me into contribution than deleting my page. And I thought, I suppose this was just a false assumption, though, that we were allowed to do with our userpage as we desired. I guess I was just misinformed. 139.55.14.163 00:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Sporks.Are.Loverly
 * I know this user in real life. Please, she's my friend and I'd hate to see her page deleted. Plus, some people just want a place to talk about themselves! Don't delete a User Page just because they stopped editing for a while! Elfred 00:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I can verify that the page above has been edited several times. Unfortunately, it has been edited from several locatiions (possibly on wi-fi), so that there was in fact no way to be certain that there actually was a real user by this name. And there's no real reason to keep a userpage for a user that it is at best hard to verify actually even exists. I strongly urge the above user to try to remember to use the account by this name when doing edits, so that the rest of wikipedia can know that there actually is a real continuing user who goes by this name. Also, one of the primary purposes of a userpage is to function as a place where a given user can be contacted regarding edits they have made, comments they have made elsewhere, articles or projects they may be interested in, etc. It kind of defeats the purpose of having a userpage if the user never edits under the name on the userpage. I doubt very seriously if there was any malicious intent (as it were) in nominating this page, simply a move toward housecleaning for an editor who, so far as we could tell, never returned after creating the userpage. Badbilltucker 14:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, and hopefully set some sort of precedent that this kind of use of userspace is unacceptable. -- Cyde Weys  22:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not appropiate to use deletion as a method of "sending a message." - brenneman  {L} 23:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Why the hell not? -- Cyde Weys  16:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do review blocking policy where is says in big letters, "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia. They should not be used as a punitive measure." - brenneman  {L} 01:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Why delete it? Here's what you gain from deleting this page: You get to know that you made another person unhappy, and, in your twisted, little minds, I suppose you get a bit more disc space. Who does it help? NOBODY! Is it that hard to get that through your THICK SKULLS??? Come on. When it comes down to it, what exactly ARE Userpages? They're 100% non-encyclopedic! If the page is non-offensive (it is), why delete it? If you delete one, delete 'em all. Or better yet, delete yourselves.
 * Comment - The preceding unsigned comment was generated from a web location which has also been recently used to edit the userpage of User:Elfred, very likely by that user. If that hypothesis is correct, then I would strongly encourage the user to try to cease in indulging in such pointless personal attacks as have been used above. Also, if he could encourage his friend to actually use the account she created, so that people actually have reason to believe that editor does actually continue to contribute to wikipedia, then such discussions as these almost by definition would never happen. I myself have on occasion been in a situation to propose a speedy delete of an obvious vanity page by someone who had no other edits, and it is reasonable to think that the proposer of this deletion may have thought it was some form of vanity page. Also note that, unlike me, a regular deletion request was filed to allow more likely response, such as perhaps both that the above editor has made. I would also recommend to the above user that his attempt to attack those who have in good faith contributed to this discussion is itself not only unencylopedic, but contains clear violations of wikipedia policy. If he, and his friend, could actually comport themselves according to wikipedia policy and guidelines, I think that this entire discussion most likely would never have been begun. Badbilltucker 14:37, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I simply fail to see what deleting my page will gain anyone. Deletion, as is stated above in an anonymous arguement, is not appropriate for sending a message to anyone. Simply leaving a message on my talk page would be a much more efficient way of communicating to me that I need to sign in more and contribute more often. And, combating a statement that this page has been edited from several different IP addresses, I swear this is no fault of mine. And besides, userpages are entirely un-encyclopedic, as I thought the point was. I perceived they were a tool to express more about the person that the wikiUser is and that is what I used my page for. Indeed, it was twisted and stupid, but I am a twisted person for most of my life and that's what I wished to convey. I also have several friends with wikipedia accounts who get a big kick from editing my page. I have no idea why, but I fail to comprehend how this is offensive to anyone or anything related to wikipedia. Sporks.Are.Loverly 01:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)Sporks.Are.Loverly
 * Also, in retrospect, I see that I have been abusing my userpage and using it to my advantage in a way incompatiable with the wikipedia project. I'm sorry I did not realize that. However, I also see a fault in your rushing to have my page deleted with no prior warning that I was either not contributing enough to taking advantage of my userpage. Yes, I made a mistake, but it will benefit no one to rush ahead and try to ban me just because of an ignorant error. Sporks.Are.Loverly 02:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)Sporks.Are.Loverly
 * And (terribly sorry for so many posts, but it is my page that is up for deletion) but I noticed this:
 * Keep - User is now very visibly active, and there seems to me to be no good reason to delete the userpage of an active editor. And, specifically to User:Sporks.Are.Loverly: I believe, and sincerely hope, that the page will be kept, on the basis of your recent activity. My apologies for having not "corrected" my delete vote earlier. And no one expressed or implied that the unsigned comment was from you; at least, I know I didn't, and I'm the person you quoted. There are occasional procedural votes like this when editors see, correctly or incorrectly, that a user page is used solely for social purposes and nominate them. As you have seemed to do some real editing, you do not qualify under that, but I can see how someone might make mistakently think otherwise on the basis of the lack of editing done by you while logged in in your account. Like I said, I have reason to think now that you are still involved in editing wikipedia, and see no reason to delete your page. And deletion of a page and banning an individual are completely different things. At no point was it ever even suggested to ban you, partially because you had done so little under your name. The only thing under discussion was keeping the page, based on the idea that you had disappeared from wikipedia already. I would simply urge you to try to remember to log in before making any edits, so that people can know who it was who was making the edits, and, possibly, either indicate where what you put in the article or page might be questionable or perhaps ask you if you would be interested in perhaps doing some additional related editing, perhaps on a similar subject. However, there is a predetermined amount of time such a discussion will go through before a final decision is reached, and I don't think we can make the process end any more quickly. If you wished, you could maybe copy the contents of the page into some other account or disc. Then, if the unlikely does occur, you can create a slightly modified name and recreate your user page with the same information. Sorry for any undue stress the, I now firmly believe, regrettable proposal for deletion may cause you. Badbilltucker 15:05, 12 October 2006 (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.