Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Thisbites/hema

 __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  keep. Nomination withdrawn. If no improvements have been made in six months, a renomination would not be unreasonable. Cunard (talk) 01:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Thisbites/hema
Self-userfication of a heavily promotional article of an entirely non-notable organization that's currently at AfD. I don't see any need to host this in userspace either. Gigs (talk) 05:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The article has existed for quite sometime and since it may be deleted, I wan't to preserve it, as I work on improving it and bringing it up to standards and citations etc.Thisbites (talk) 05:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not going to meet notability standards in the foreseeable future. You said yourself in the article that the website gets only 65 hits a day.  I see no need to host a draft of the article on the off chance that your organization might take off, especially not a heavily promotional draft. Gigs (talk) 05:55, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I do and it's not promotional, there are sources dude.Thisbites (talk) 06:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, the page is not a blatant advert and as the (renamed) user has explained they intend to continue to improve the draft and search for sources I cannot see this as an obvious breach of WP:USER. If we AGF, this user is open to discussion and would probably remove any text that might be objected to on grounds of being overly promotional if s/he were asked. If this were a regional hobby club article (that was written in an encyclopaedic style) we would give indefinite leeway. I note that the article was put up for deletion 5 minutes after userfication which seems a trifle bitey in my opinion and gave no opportunity for friendly discussion. Fæ (talk) 10:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a little bitey, I did consider that. The user's choice of new username doesn't really inspire confidence that they are here to do anything other than promote their completely unknown organization.  I can't find it in any 503c databases, so all we have is his word that this thing even exists as a real entity.  There's absolutely no sources, anywhere.  WP:MADEUP applies to this situation pretty well, and I see absolutely no value in keeping this around.  Gigs (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I understand and respect your viewpoint as an experienced editor. However http://hemanetwork.org/about does exist, the issue is whether it is notable under our guidelines, probably not. In balance with this point, it can be seen that was blocked because of the username policy, not because they were spamming or otherwise acting unlike any other reasonably well intentioned contributor (I certainly do not agree with all their contributions but when challenged they were prepared to discuss and improve). In accordance with WP:UPNO I would personally interpret that "the community" are "generally tolerant and offers fairly wide latitude in applying these guidelines to regular participants" as applicable here; note that under the name Hemanetwork over 1,200 contributions were made, so I would indeed class them as a "regular participant". I might be being overly nice or stretching AGF, but I would still prefer that we are seen to be generous with newer users, even those with an obvious possible conflict of interest or expertise that needs managing. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow. I totally missed that the original username was an active contributor.  The vast majority of orgname blocks associated with promotional articles like this one are SPAs, so I guess I made an assumption.  Feel free to close this as withdrawn. Gigs (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2010 (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.