Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Jeffpw/Memoriam


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Speedy Keep. Useight (talk) 02:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Jeffpw/Memoriam
The purpose of Wikipedia pages is work on creation of encyclopedia. WP:USER specifically says to keep user pages from turning into hosting service of various information. Also wikipedia is not memorial, nor it is a message board, for various private exchanges, like 6-month messages from Jeff's mom. The friends and relatives are free to set up a memorial in any one of numerous free webhosting services. Laudak (talk) 21:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - the memorial statement is meant to refer to article pages. Jeffpw was a valued contributor. – xeno  ( talk ) 21:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - per xeno. This is a perfectly acceptable use of userspace, especially for a contributor as valued as Jeffpw was. // roux   21:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Which policy says so? What his mother grieving has to do with wikipedia project? Who proves he is more valuable contributor than anyone else? What is his notability? He just happens to have plenty of buddies to maintain the page, who think he is valuable. Otherwise please write a wikipedia article about him. Laudak (talk) 21:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * An additional concern is verifiability of all information in this page. Laudak (talk) 21:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You're joking right? neither WP:N nor WP:V apply to user space. Pedro : Chat  22:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep this sort of thing does not have to pass WP:V as being in userspace talk. As long as it does not damage the encyclopedia. In this case it is an asset to the encyclopedia and should definitely be kept. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Laudak and Xeno. Frankly, it would be just mean to delete the memorial page. - Fastily (talk) 21:57, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Dear me, I'll chuck a few quid at the foundation for the bandwidth if need be. Honestly, has it come to this, that we disrespect our valued but departed contributors to the project so much? Also the nominator should actually read WP:NOT which specifically referes to the mainspace and is therefore invalid in this context. Pedro : Chat  21:57, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep (and help Laudak find a better use of time on Wiki). Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm not going to call out "bad faith nom" or anything like that, but it's basically misguided and seems to be more about finding something to delete through MFD than anything else.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 22:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. "The encyclopedia is important; the people are not" is how some people interpret WP policies.  That's not quite what our policies say, but I understand that the distinction is hard for some people to get. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 22:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Jeff was a hardworking Wikipedian, and it would be wrong to attempt to delete a memorial of him, and the thoughts of other editors about him. It doesn't damage the encyclopedia, and hardly violates NOT either.  Majorly  talk  22:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - sitting on the fence here a bit. But this is not a social networking site, and "harmless" is not a good reason to keep. Certainly no reason to close this debate after 80 min.--Scott Mac (Doc) 23:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you really think that keeping this MfD open will be productive in any way? --Conti|✉ 23:13, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is too early to say. Discussion is usually good (or at least harmless) if everyone keeps their cool.--Scott Mac (Doc) 23:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Emotive subjects like memorials are hardly likely to see people keeping their cool. Any non involved admin could close this as a speedy keep and I think the value in keeping it open is considerably less than the value of a pile on of "Keep" comments. Still, I'm not noted for my high opinion of your judgement Scott so I admit my bias. Pedro : Chat  23:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Editors matter.  This nomination insults a valued contributor and his memory.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - By the way, I will disclose that I was involved in the early events surrounding the beginning of this page. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Jeffpw was a well-respected and strong-conbributing editor to Wikipedia, and people cared about him. WP:NOTMEMORIAL is for articles, which this is not, and I really dislike WP:NOTMEMORIAL/MYSPACE being thrown around like this, especially to editors who are confirmed to be deceased, as it's insulting to them and to their contributions. Acalamari 00:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - and seriously recommend admonishment of nominating user.  Ceran  thor 01:23, 7 March 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.