Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon

 __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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon


WP:UP and WP:NOT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackmane (talk • contribs) 15:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: In prior MfDs like this, we've seemed to give leeway to established contributors to have page(s) about themselves if they wish to do so.--Milowent • talkblp-r 15:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I would prefer to keep non-WP personal stuff on a separate page from User:TonyTheTiger.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:53, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Seriously, this should be speedy closed. users are allowed leeway in their use of userspace to host material about themselves. This falls way short of anything that needs deletion. Spartaz Humbug! 16:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * apparently there's some drama going on about Tony at ANI, and this is a spinoff about it. I'm sure all this somehow is intended to improve wikipedia mainspace, right?--Milowent • talkblp-r  16:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm not familiar with what's been kept in prior MfDs, but this seems to me to pretty clearly cross the line set at User pages, which states that while "Limited autobiographical content" and "A small and proportionate amount of suitable unrelated material" (emphasis is in the guideline) may appear on a user page, "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project." Certainly establish contributors get some leeway in this regard, but this strikes me as the epitome of "substantial content on [a] user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia"! cmadler (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep As per Milowent and Spartaz. User pages is a guideline on how not to embarrass yourself, and I would encourage TTT to think about following it. But if there's a policy mandate to rip out embarrassing stuff from user pages -- well, I hope there isn't.   Sharktopus  talk  22:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete There is a limit to allowable self-promotion, and this is so far outside it as to be ridiculous. It is argued above that it is not our place to prevent an editor from appearing foolish, and I have accepted this argument in some previous discussions--but that we permit people to be as exceedingly foolish as this on-wiki indicates a  lack of seriousness and purpose.  With respect to other MfDs, I'm not aware we've ever permitted anything as extreme as this. Perhaps if Tony were to truncate it? But there is nothing to indicate he would be willing to. He's certainly had the opportunity.    DGG ( talk ) 08:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Its just seems like a pain in the butt to me to try to enforce a standard for this. All time spent at MfD, to me, is time wasted not spent on article improvement.  There's so much unseriousness on userpages that I am unfazed i guess.--Milowent • talkblp-r  11:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment I boldly posted this MFD as an offshoot from the ANI discussion (admittedly my comment on ANI re this page was probably somewhat insulting). I'm not deadset on it being deleted, but it could definitely do with a paring down to something less personally promoting. --Blackmane (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or remove the autobiographical contents. Per WP:FAKEARTICLE, "[u]serspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles [...] or deleted content". This page is based on content deleted at Articles for deletion/Antonio Vernon and userfied five years ago. Subsequent edits make no effort to address the reasons for deletion. Furthermore, a significant portion of this user's userspace was deleted recently at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:TonyTheTiger/Poker template as excessive non-WP related content. MER-C 10:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see what the problem is if he wants to tell us about himself. Perhaps it should be trimmed down a bit but I don't think editors posting a brief bio of themselves in their own userspace is completely unreasonable. In fact, I'd rather this than 5,000 userboxes like some people have. Qrsdogg (talk) 20:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * What he said. (points up.)
 * Delete per DGG and MER-C, he's not notable. I agree that a brief bio is fine, but this is blatant circumvention of deletion. He's been updating it for nigh on 4 years, it's unencyclopedic, it's self-promotion and it's gotta go. — James (Talk • Contribs) • 10:34pm • 12:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think the guy needs some in general socializing and learning how to play the team sport better.  So I signed on to the ban from FS because of his disruption.  That said, this is stuff that would pretty much float on a user page, so why not on a user subpage (even less prominent there).  Plus...it's actually pretty intrigueing.TCO (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a user (sub)page. It's not offensive in any way (unlike some user pages I have seen), and that much leeway should be okay. -- J N  466  17:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Not hurting anyone, clearly a user information page. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  20:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Stumbled across a reference to this while glancing through ANI. This seems to me to be a clear delete, based upon the fact that Wikipedia is not a webhost. Are we here to self-promote, or are we here to quietly build a good encyclopedia? This page does nothing to support the latter, and everything to support the former. Additionally, there are multiple files he has uploaded that have no encyclopedic relevance at all, but are simply personal photographs, charts he has made, etc., which is also in clear violation of what I linked above. I'm honestly quite surprised that anyone has recommended keeping it. LHM 04:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Quite a lot of Wikipedians have a biography written in mock-article style. It's not unusual; and it supports encyclopedia building by building community. It's nice to know a little bit about the people you work with. -- J N  466  17:49, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * If he used bullet points, such as "Tony enjoys playing online poker, and has achieved a modicum of success while doing so", perhaps that would fit into the "leeway" that people write about in the above discussion. However, he does not do this--or anything close to this. He uses Wikipedia as a webhost for a somewhat lengthy biography (including multiple image files) that is more appropriate for a place like tonythetiger.com, and not for Wikipedia, in blatant contravention of Wikipedia's policies regarding such things. LHM 14:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like TonyTheTiger seems to be regularly updating and maintaining his user subpage to see if there merits any notability to the article in question, and it is a fact Wikipedia and us the community do traditionally give leeway to established whether they want to or not to keep a short (keyword: short) autobiography about themselves in some hidden away user subpage. On the other hand, it flouts in the face of the the deletion discussion from which it spawned, and from which it should abide by the guidelines at User pages and Userfication. Added to the fact is the potential confusion to a mainspace article it could create for readers browsing Wikipedia because it is written in the style and MOS of one, when it is not in actuality an article. Because of these reasons, I will remain neutral for now. It could, however, be a little more acceptable as a short bio if it was trimmed down. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  00:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly self-promotional, going beyond what is relevant to being an editor on WP. Would change my opinion if all the unrelated material were removed. -- Klein zach  00:23, 21 June 2011 (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.