Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Three-quarter-ten/Fleeting thoughts

 __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  no consensus to delete. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 08:56, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

User:Three-quarter-ten/Fleeting thoughts


Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Excessive unrelated content duffbeerforme (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Never realized that a User namespace subpage was subject to this level of content restriction (User_pages). That's OK. I can move it to somewhere like Wikia or Google Sites or something, then just leave a link to it on my User page. Give me a week or two to move it. — ¾-10 23:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. The page is large, and the thoughts many, but they are small compared to the user's substantial contributions to the project.  Given the productivity of the user, the page is well within reasonable leeway.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * More Keep. Looking though the page, having highlighted every occurance of "wikipedia", I see that more than have of the sections make direct reference to wikipedia or some aspect of wikipedia.  Other sections are tangential, but I read them as from the wikipedian editor point of view.  This is clearly a committed Wikipedian journal page, and is entirely proper.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Deleteper WP:NOTMYSPACE - this goes beyond the permitted use of userspace. The user is happy to move it off-wiki, so I say let him do so, then delete it. Robofish (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTBLOG. Though the author should be given an opportunity to resurrect the (roughly) dozen comments that may be suitable for a Userfied Essay. Achowat (talk) 16:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "The (roughly) dozen comments that may be suitable for a Userfied Essay" I found interesting to read, and it would be sad to loose them. clever link  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. per SmokeyJoe. Keeping notes for the purpose of WP contributing seems perfectly OK, and length in itself should not be a reason for deletion. -- Klein  zach  03:35, 9 February 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.