Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Andrew O. Shadoura

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 of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:50, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Andrew O. Shadoura

Blatant advertising, vanity. This information was originally an article, listed for AfD. During the AfD vote, the AfD header was removed from the article, all of the AfD votes were blanked, and the AfD discussion was moved to an invalid page name. This certainly does not inspire faith in the article's author/the author of the software. The author has no other edits. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:43, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

• Can you please provide links to the original title of the article and the AFD discussion? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 05:33, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
  • BelAmp was the original article, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BelAmp was the original AfD page, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/` was the page to which the original AfD page was moved by User:Andrew O. Shadoura. Note that Mr. Shadoura is both the original author of the BelAmp article as well as the creator of the "BelAmp" program (a WinAmp clone, and the subject of the BelAmp article). The original BelAmp article provided contact information for Mr. Shadoura. Mr. Shadoura is also the one who moved the original AfD page to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/`. (The other vandalism mentioned above was performed by an anonymous IP, which may or may not have been Mr. Shadoura.) → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 11:09, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete with Anger Wow... that's quite a campaign waged by this troll. Xoloz 13:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

• Huh? This user is no longer causing disruption (knock on wood). How will "punishing" him by deleting his user page make things better? If anything, take it to his talk page and tell him he can't be doing things like that. Personally I like userfying pages as an alternative to speedy deletion or Afd. It's quicker and easier and causes fewer problems. If we start deleting userfied pages, a handy conflict-avoidance mechanism has effectively gone away. Friday (talk) 14:43, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't normally advocate deleting userfied pages. I do lots of userfying, but I don't think we should award this vandal by giving him free advertising. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:10, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose deletion for now, as this was apparently userfied by Friday in her admininstrative judgment, and not by the party in question. Really, just advise Andrew O. Shadoura to put something less spammy on his user page, and see how that works out. BD2412 T 04:24, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm going to guess that anyone who would go to the lengths undertaken by Mr. Shadoura to advertise his product in the main article space is unlikely to be interested in making their userpage less "spammy" if that turns out to be their only advertising venue within Wikipedia. But I fight spam for a living, so I am perhaps cynical and jaded in this regard. → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 11:40, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, advertising, not a real user. Radiant_>|< 22:56, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete User pages are supposed to be in furtherance of the construction of the encyclopedia. This is pure advertising, and an abuse of wikipedia. Moving this page to user space was an error, although i presume well-intentioned. This isn't even the classic vanity-bio, which is not unreasonable moved to user space, this is a pure product ad. wikipedia is not a free hosting service. DES ^(talk) 00:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This content belongs on a personal website and the edit history has nothing else in it. Once it's deleted, the user can if they wish create a new user page supplying information relevant to their role as an editor. I would normally give a "friendly reminder", but consider the means by which the content arrived here, it would be pointless. Deco 04:45, 29 November 2005 (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.