Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Bestlyriccollection
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was delete. (Radiant) 16:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Bestlyriccollection, User talk:Bestlyriccollection and various subpages
This is the textbook example of what a user page should not be: reading from the TOC, contents include "Jours de garbage", "Cellphone Brands", "Cellphone Technologies", "LONG CITY news" which is quite descriptive of the content - a nonsensical mishmash of MySpace-ish content, external links, news reports and whatnot which violates every tenet of WP:USER by any reasonable definition.
Note that this user is especially egregrous because he has also copied his stuff to the Cantonese, Chinese, Min Nan, Spanish, and French Wikipedias. (The same page was probably on Chinese classical Wikipedia but was deleted.)
Also in this nomination are the equally unencyclopedic subpages User:Bestlyriccollection/beokguk and User:Bestlyriccollection/lyrics, and last but not least the equally trashy User talk:Bestlyriccollection. (He has other subpages which are copies of valid articles so I hesitate to nominate them too.) I would have speedied all these but this is not strictly advertising, so not CSD G11 territory. Kimchi.sg 06:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I warned the user but met with this in reply. Kimchi.sg 06:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Please see my proposal Wikipedia:Userspace abuse and the linked discussion for ideas how to get around the non-inclusiveness of userspace stuff in G11 and possible solutions. - Mgm|(talk) 12:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Good work. —Doug Bell talk 07:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, reverted blanking of userpage by user in question. MER-C 07:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Off-topic comment: It's only when you've to look for people for interwiki requests that you find Babel boxes useful; this is one of these times. :-) Kimchi.sg 08:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Tells us nothing about the user, which is the purpose of user pages. --Fred McGarry 10:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I wish to split my nomination into three depending on the pages concerned, as follows:
- Delete the following: User:Bestlyriccollection and User talk:Bestlyriccollection - fails WP:USER and WP:NOT#DIRECTORY miserably. I'd even push some parts of both pages as far as CSD G1 - patent nonsense.
- Speedy Delete: User:Bestlyriccollection/lyrics - CSD G1 - Page in Greek and Russian, possible copyvio too, but I can't be sure.
- Speedy Delete: User:Bestlyriccollection/beokguk - CSD G1 - Page in Chinese. --tgheretford (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- (×) 删除, 删除, 删除. - Mailer Diablo 06:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, inappropriate use of userpage, WP:NOT. Terence Ong 06:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Has no relevance as a userpage on wikipedia, English Wikipedia users can't understand it! RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or lets have banter 17:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, inappropriate for wikipedia.__Seadog ♪ 23:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- 无观点: 英文维基执意将我家页删除. 看来我在英维命运在所难免. 心想很大程度在于英文SYSOP, KIMCHI 的清教徒作风, 以及其他附和KIMCHI的英维会员的GROUPTHINK思想. 其实英维上投票大多数赞成删除, 也和本来不倾向删除者没有兴趣讨论或投票有关面目(也就是说并没有"站出来反对删除"者). 我不愿作出一个为自己利益力争的姿态. 但是愿意为删除会员本页的标准表表态. 我觉得我自己在自己本页的资料存放, 与很多别的会员大量耗费存量的"高密度本页"相比, 小巫见大巫. 而且我没有毫无节制地制造分页, 影响维基整体. 我自己的本页的规模, 在两年之内, 没有出现几何级数的增长, 而是维持在两页可维持的范围内. 我和我的各位参与维基编辑的朋友, 两年来很大程度上依赖我本页连接提供的信息. 承认我本人并不是一个娴熟的编辑者, 个人贡献不大. 也承认本人的主要工作语言是中文. 但是, 本人确是多语的, 所以不能因为本人"对英语或别的语言没有价值"而对本人在所有非中文维基进行清扫. 而且本人的本页的主要目的是为不少有联系的维友提供信息资料. 这并不是MYSPACE性质的"个人生活页面", 并且在信息匮乏的中国, 超出了你们可以想象的意义. 转移该页的目的, 首先是由于对KIMCHI所提出的清理措施的恐慌. 但并没有大量复制并几何级地制造非维基信息的目的. Bestlyriccollection
- No opinion: I am not trying to defend myself here. It seems like the English Wikipedia's will is bent on obliterating my account. However I do want to make an appeal to criteria for deletion. My own user page, compared to many extremely space-consuming user pages is quite moderate. I haven't so far been perpetually creating subpage after subpage that will innundate the Wikipedia. The scale of my user page, throughout its TWO YEAR tenure, hasn't been increased EXPONENTIALLY. It remained primarily within "User" and "User:Talk" within roughly the same, manageable size. Me and my associates on various Wikis have been relying on the limited, but valuable information provided by these links for thse two years. Admittedly, I am not a skilled contributor, unlike many of my friends. And admittedly my main working language is Chinese. But I AM a polyglot and there is no reason to consider my a dismissible, unimportant user to wikis other than the Chinese. I object to the categorization of my user page being "MYSPACE"-ish. It is certainly not a homepage on my personal life. It's rather valuable for many of my friends who live in China and consideres the links indispensible. They ARE Wikipedians. But due to the strict internet policy of the country, the sighting of Wikipedia only happens once in a blue moon. And my English user page is considered an unofficial portal of hyperlinked materials for some, but not all of my friends in China, who are advocates in certain causes. Only under such circumstance, can you appreciated my efforts to provide them the quick access they need for their composition of articles. I reacted to Kimchi's proposal out of panic. But I have no intention to exponentially increase my space consumption on wiki space. For two years I've had no need to do so, and I happily contributed now and then, some information on normal wikipedia articles that I deem valuable. Why no look at the whole thing and then make you judgement whether or not to sentence a person to death? Why the groupthink based on the accusation of one Sysop? Why the panic for the data innundation that I actually haven't caused? We know that Wikipedia, like a real world street, is no place for cookiecutter personality. Why prefer uniformity to heterogeneity? Bestlyriccollection
- 英文维基近来收到不少,不少的“宣传启口”及宣传链接集处 — 我们是要清除这类不助于建造百科的垃圾,请见谅。維基百科不是宣傳工具, 也不是免费網站空间。我们不是要你英维的头,只是求你了解维基的首目的是编写百科。若你可证明你家页的用途是助于编写百科,我愿换票保留。— 米乐· 地阿伯 11:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- You could have spared yourself this heartache by keeping this content where it really belongs - your own hard drive. Kimchi.sg 15:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, inaproperiate use of userpage.__Seadog ♪ 13:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- First of all I am more receptive to Mailer Diablo's comments than Kimchi's. The former is an invitation to discuss what Wikipedia is not, the latter is just a taunt. I am not sure if my userpager has ever helped you guys writing wikipedia articles. It certain has helped me and all those who are drawing from it. But primarily, it helps me. Like I said I am not a skillful, or regular, contributor as I do have many other priorities in life. But this is no reason to dismiss my work here as worthless (and I do honestly believe that I have been and will continue to contribute to Wikipedia articles in a serious manner). Another thing: I might appear to you as worthless, but subjective judgments are deceptive. In real life, this is often the case: we think of ourself---our own causes, careers, cultural concerns, habits, hobbies---as "serious" and dismiss activities by others---however serious they are in their own right---as trivial at the first glance. As a result anti-war protesters become "those f**ng lefties", feminists who seriously talk about their rights as "those f**ng feminists", environmentalists as "those f**ng environmentalists" and Native Americans participating in their own cultural activities "those f**ng Indians". Luckily, in real life, the only ones that hold the keys of legal exclusion and the means of violence are the State, and the extension thereof. As a result, personal prejudices don't usually take on the life of crusades that immediately perilize the liberties of "lefties, feminists, environmentalists and Indians". But on the Cyberspace, we derive our authority through a much easier channel than the State did in real life. And it is here that we should guard against the actualization of our ego- or ethnocentrism. If I did create subpage after subpage of "personal blogs", it would be a clear violation of my privilege here. And such is not what I have ever intended. However I did notice, many of the user pages of my fellow wikipedians par excellence (perhaps including a few of you who voted for my immediate bannishment), have taken the license to substantially "personalized" their userpage in a way they would never do on wikipedia articles other than their own userpage. It reveals to me a little truth: that in all society, including a cyber society like Wikipedia, there IS a "private" sphere vis-a-vis the public, however limited and disputably private it is. It might be just a theory but I do not intend to use this as an excuse to justify the "MySpace-ization" of wikipedia. I just want to bring to your awareness that, through our several years of practice as wikipedians, a culture that separates the private from the public has somewhat developed (however precarious it might seem against our constitution), and if we keep the "private" sphere within manageable limits, it can serve some positive purposes. Bestlyriccollection
- 忘了说,歌词的家页须删除是由于版权关注。首先,你不应该把家页抄到所有不同维基语言的启口,这很容易创造误会。看来你英维家页在这情况很难换救,但你还是随时欢迎编写白科。我只能说请细心地观读这个讨论,以后善用家页,不要重蹈覆辙。— 米乐· 地阿伯 05:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- 可以. Ok. Bestlyriccollection
- 忘了说,歌词的家页须删除是由于版权关注。首先,你不应该把家页抄到所有不同维基语言的启口,这很容易创造误会。看来你英维家页在这情况很难换救,但你还是随时欢迎编写白科。我只能说请细心地观读这个讨论,以后善用家页,不要重蹈覆辙。— 米乐· 地阿伯 05:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- First of all I am more receptive to Mailer Diablo's comments than Kimchi's. The former is an invitation to discuss what Wikipedia is not, the latter is just a taunt. I am not sure if my userpager has ever helped you guys writing wikipedia articles. It certain has helped me and all those who are drawing from it. But primarily, it helps me. Like I said I am not a skillful, or regular, contributor as I do have many other priorities in life. But this is no reason to dismiss my work here as worthless (and I do honestly believe that I have been and will continue to contribute to Wikipedia articles in a serious manner). Another thing: I might appear to you as worthless, but subjective judgments are deceptive. In real life, this is often the case: we think of ourself---our own causes, careers, cultural concerns, habits, hobbies---as "serious" and dismiss activities by others---however serious they are in their own right---as trivial at the first glance. As a result anti-war protesters become "those f**ng lefties", feminists who seriously talk about their rights as "those f**ng feminists", environmentalists as "those f**ng environmentalists" and Native Americans participating in their own cultural activities "those f**ng Indians". Luckily, in real life, the only ones that hold the keys of legal exclusion and the means of violence are the State, and the extension thereof. As a result, personal prejudices don't usually take on the life of crusades that immediately perilize the liberties of "lefties, feminists, environmentalists and Indians". But on the Cyberspace, we derive our authority through a much easier channel than the State did in real life. And it is here that we should guard against the actualization of our ego- or ethnocentrism. If I did create subpage after subpage of "personal blogs", it would be a clear violation of my privilege here. And such is not what I have ever intended. However I did notice, many of the user pages of my fellow wikipedians par excellence (perhaps including a few of you who voted for my immediate bannishment), have taken the license to substantially "personalized" their userpage in a way they would never do on wikipedia articles other than their own userpage. It reveals to me a little truth: that in all society, including a cyber society like Wikipedia, there IS a "private" sphere vis-a-vis the public, however limited and disputably private it is. It might be just a theory but I do not intend to use this as an excuse to justify the "MySpace-ization" of wikipedia. I just want to bring to your awareness that, through our several years of practice as wikipedians, a culture that separates the private from the public has somewhat developed (however precarious it might seem against our constitution), and if we keep the "private" sphere within manageable limits, it can serve some positive purposes. Bestlyriccollection
- Delete. As above. Inappropriate use of userspace. ><RichardΩ612 ER 21:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, inappropriate use of userpage space. feydey 03:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
*Weak delete The user has a large number of mainspace edits and we normally give more leeway in such cases but that's a lot of material that doesn't help the encyclopedia. JoshuaZ 04:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Changing to weak keep is a sub-optimal situation and I would encourage the user to find somewhere else to put this but the user has a large enough set of edits that I think this arguably falls under the discretionary use of userspace. JoshuaZ 04:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- In this case, I offer not to do any further "chunking" (adding sections of links that do not lead to present encyclopedic projects) and dedicate further changes on my user:Bestlyriccollection and User:Talk pages mainly to the purpose of current/immediate encyclopedic contributions. If the purpose of any further change is questioned by fellow wikipedians, they can request for my proof of relevance while questioning. I will keep any further change to "minor edits" or edits that do not increase hosted data, rather than adding substantially. I also agree to search for a wiki where the same software is used and where such links on user pages will be less problematic for fellow users. Bestlyriccollection
- 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.
