Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ikkyu2

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 Deleted no need to retain, it's a user requested (CSD applicable) deletion. If anyone wants the essay, I'll recover them and post them where you want. John Reaves (talk) 21:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Ikkyu2

I requested deletion of my userpage some time ago, which was carried out. Recently an admin undeleted most of the page, citing the GFDL and the "expert retention" project. What was undeleted was a series of polemical essays in which I attacked other Wikipedia editors and campaigned for impossible changes in the structure and administration of Wikipedia. However, I then used Wikipedia:User page as a guideline; the section "What can I not have on my user page?" plainly reads "in fact, using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea" - Jimbo Wales. Jimbo is right, of course; I was also right when I asked for my userpage to be deleted in accordance with his guideline. If the expert retention project wishes to archive my essays, they can do so in their own pages. -ikkyu2 (talk) 07:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, without archiving elsewhere. I'm sorry he's gone. But if he wants to disappear and for us to forget what he wrote, let the guy have his wish. The views expressed weren't so original or notable as to warrant breaking that. Colin°^Talk 08:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Incidentally - and I can't see that it matters here - I'm not "gone." I chose to start editing from the anonymous userspace instead, after my involvement with Wikipedia came up - unfavorably, I might add - in not one but two job interviews. For the record, I am not now nor have I ever been a "problem" editor; I tend to edit articles that don't find a lot of controversy. -ikkyu2 (talk) 17:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete just because someone decided they agree with what Ikkyu2 said doesn't void his/her right to disappear. I don't see any legitimate reason to void the user's wishes. Koweja 15:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete just because someone decided they agree with what Ikkyu2 said doesn't void his/her right to disappear. I don't see any legitimate reason to void the user's wishes. Koweja 15:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, with archiving, first. I am sorry that Ikkyu2 has left WP submerged, I wish he would update his thinking on his "polemics" and relate his experience at Citizendium, at least in brief. While I respect Ikkyu2's right to "disappear" his User page, I will point out the fundamental copyright problem of transfering an article or essay to a publisher that one later recants. One can update or publish modifications, but the original work remains out there, subject to the ownership and whims of the publisher. I think the essays are somewhat notable in the evolution of Wikipedia's culture reflecting the real time experience of a relevant WP editor. However, editors should consider expurgation on overdetailed personal information. Best wishes to Ikkyu2.--I'clast 18:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete the personal page but archive essays with administratorial discretion the essays are under GFDL, the user no longer own them, and those which are determined valuable to wiki community should be preserved. Wooyi 20:40, 21 March 2007 (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.