Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Máirtín

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 keep. —Doug Bell ^talk 10:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Máirtín

Wikipedia is not a free web host. User has made few encyclopedic contributions and hasn't been seen since 2004. Contested prod. MER-C 02:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Weak keep User has made good edits to mainspace. Also, since we have the person's contact info has anyone bothered asking them if they care? JoshuaZ 04:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - the user has not edited as that name since 2004 (although from the page history [1], he may be one in the same with User:130.209.6.41, who is a regular editor. Still, though, it is an unmaintained page that contains personal information. BigDT 04:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. What part of this article violates policy? The article merely lists a small amount of contact info, none of which is against policy. User pages aren't deleted just because the user has left the site. The personal information on this page is not really any different than the info that can be found on Jimbo's page. --- RockMFR 05:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Breakdown of the information on the page:

• Real name - not a violation of policy
• Occupation/location - not a violation of policy
• Phone numbers - not a violation of policy
• Email/website - obviously not a violation of policy, useful contact info --- RockMFR 05:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

And he would need to be contacted -- 2-1/2 years after his last edit -- WHY, exactly? --Calton | Talk 07:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep This is clearly not a vanity page, it's just a normal user page with a bit of extra contact information. The guy isn't a vandal, and might come back some day, so deleting his userpage is pointless and abrasive. --tjstrf talk 07:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • He has four article contributions and hasn't been here for 2.5 years. Why is it abrasive to delete his userpage? BigDT 07:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Nine edits (four of them to his own pages) 2-and-a-half years ago? Not even CLOSE to being an active editor. If he wants the contact information, let him update it if and when he ever returns. --Calton | Talk 07:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. So what if he isn't active. He made good contributions when he was and the userpage is in no way violating any policy. Inactivity alone is no reason to delete someone's userpage. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Good contributions? Five total edits, which consist of three sentences and a wikilink on Selkirk and a sentence on Mogwai. So four or five sentences gets you a permanent "Get Out of Jail Following WP:NOT" card? --Calton | Talk 00:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Probably out of date info by now, but harmless and not in violation of any policy. Orderinchaos78 13:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Mgm. Mackensen (talk) 16:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Here is the extent of the "good contributions," the most recent being over two years ago. Don't really care if this is deleted, but this discussion is already several times the total of this user's contributions outside his user page. —Doug Bell ^talk 00:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. So we're into deleting perfectly OK userpages now? Definitely not. Yuser31415^@?#&help! 02:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, user makes encyclopedic contributions and this userpage is ok. Just a Wikipedian who just appeared here for a short time and just left. It's alright to keep an inactive user's userpage. Terence Ong 09:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, wtf Ashibaka tock 20:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep , we can concentrate on the total vanity pages and the like rather than this. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 17:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. We need to be vigilant to stomp out resumes and other crap on userpages, but this doesn't seem to qualify. I would expect to see information vaguely like this on a lot of userpages, and this doesn't seem to be soliciting anything. --Improv 20:08, 7 December 2006 (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.