Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Achidiac

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 debate was Keep, and marked more explicitly as a userpage to satisfy worries. A redirect would be cross-namespace, which would violate policy. Xoloz 15:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

NOTE - Achidiac (talk · contribs), Rdpaperclip (talk · contribs), T3Smile (talk · contribs), and 60.241.91.14 (talk · contribs) have been blocked as sock puppets. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Achidiac. -- Jreferee t/c 16:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Achidiac

Violation of Wikipedia:User page#Copies of other pages. As there is a article called Anthony Chidiac. nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 20:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Redirect until the user makes a proper userpage. Is redirect a proper thing to do? The user claims to be the person described in the article... -- Ben 22:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I mean, I don't need it, really, but its nice as my userpage. I will likely edit it down to the bone shortly, so it will look more like my userpage instead of a bio. Thanks for highlighting it though. I have an idea, I think I might link it to the published article and leave the user stuff below it...--Achidiac 00:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep biography of user in question (per AGF) should probably be edited not to look like an article but shouldn't be deleted outright. Eluchil404 07:45, 21 October 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.