Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ZAMDultra




 * 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The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn and no delete votes, so I am closing this one early.@harej 01:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

User:ZAMDultra
Blog-like usage of user page, violates WP:NOTWEBHOST. User's only contribution to the encyclopedia thus far. I have warned them prior to nominating for deletion, so they have time to save their work. BlazerKnight (talk) 02:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing nomination I am relatively new to XfD, and I thank you for your comments, it is clear that I had not determined the right threshold for inclusion/deletion of user pages. I definitely did not intend to bite any newcomers and will be more careful in the future. As such I am withdrawing my nomination. Sorry for wasting your time with this process. BlazerKnight (talk) 11:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep We should post a note on his talk page steering him/her in the correct direction. Its just a text only page and he may find it useful for the project.  A little redirection would be better in this case instead of needless process.--Adam in MO Talk 11:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I already did that. It does not set a good precedent if we let unproductive users do what they like with their userspace. BlazerKnight (talk) 11:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok we aren't in any danger of running out of server space and it isn't doing any harm. Should we stop users from making to do lists? --Adam in MO Talk 21:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That was a low blow. WP:UP clearly states "Your userpage is for anything that is compatible with the Wikipedia project. It is a mistake to think of it as a homepage: Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site. Instead, think of it as a way of organizing the work that you are doing on the articles in Wikipedia, and also a way of helping other editors to understand those with whom they are working." I have used my user page in a productive manner, while this user has not. BlazerKnight (talk) 04:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Does not read like a blog to me, nor does it seem excessively long. It does not appear to reflect badly on WP ... um, what real rationale is left? Collect (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment All I can say is that this is a very effective way at driving away a new user. Please let a new user respond to your notices before biting their head off. Vodello (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly. This probably won't pass, but we should make an effort to integrate new users before we execute unnecessary process on them.--Adam in MO Talk 00:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep seems like a reasonable user page to me. If the material were more extensive or promotional, it would be different. Gigs (talk) 14:23, 9 November 2009 (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.