Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:CoolKatt number 99999's sub pages

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 no consensus/default keep. Straight tally here is 9 del., 5 keep, 1 ambiguous vote, which is not sufficient to override the natural courtesy extended to regular users of allowing relative userpage liberty. Xoloz 17:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:CoolKatt number 99999's sub pages

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Grudges in the Pokemon anime

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Cultural references in Pokemon

User:CoolKatt number 99999/List of power ballads

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Louisville, Whore

User:CoolKatt number 99999/KNBU

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Ultimate Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/KATV Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/KNXV Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/KTUL Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WBMA Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WCPO Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WEWS Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WFTS Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WMAR Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WTSP Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WXYZ Post-Group Deal

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WSTR

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WLWT

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WKRC

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WXIX

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KSAZ

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KTVK

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KNXV

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WDAF

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KMBC

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KCTV

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History KSHB

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WBRC

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WVTM

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WCFT/WJSU

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WGHP

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WXLV

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WFMY

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WXII

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WNBT

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Alternate History WTWB

User:CoolKatt number 99999/The SF Television Network

User:CoolKatt number 99999/WPSG-AM

User:CoolKatt number 99999/More Fox VHF O&O's

User:CoolKatt number 99999/Musical Chairs of Station Ownership

• Delete Wastes WP bandwith and not constructive to creating an encyclopedia. --CFIF (talk to me) 20:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep People make pages like this for many reasons. Why can't you just leave me alone CFIF? CoolKatt number 99999 20:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Then explain to me what good these do into making an encyclopedia. Not only are they false, some, like "Louisville, Whore" are ridiculous, vulgar, and definetly NOT NEEDED. --CFIF (talk to me) 20:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
    • A lot of them have disclaimers at the top. You are getting nowhere with this. Wikipedians need stuff to do when they are NOT editing regular pages. CoolKatt number 99999 20:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Uh... Wikipedia is not a free blog, webhost, etc, as stated on WP:NOT. It's generally not taken well if you speedy keep your own pointless pages. -- Chris Ccool2ax contrib. 22:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete.Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Kafziel 20:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Nice try, but that only applies to actual articles. CoolKatt number 99999 20:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Um, no. That applies to everything on Wikipedia. Even you do not have complete domain over the contents of your user page, and that includes having 100 subpages. Kafziel 21:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete. Not even in question, this is a pure abuse of user space. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a webhost. Userspace is provided to us for the purpose of writing the encyclopedia. We are allowed a little personal use. Wholesale creation of fiction is way over the line. Rossami (talk) 22:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete for reasons stated above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccool2ax (talk • contribs)
• Comment. This is silly. I want an admin to speedy keep this now. CoolKatt number 99999 22:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• It's obvious that everybody who voted (besides yourself) wants this deleted, because it breaks guidlines. Good luck finding an admin who will go against a 5 to 1 vote count. --CFIF (talk to me) 22:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• Erm, when did the vote count ever matter? The closer makes a decision based on the arguments given and what he (or she) feels to be the closest thing to consensus amongst the community after reading an xfD discussion. If the tally is 5 to 1, but the majority are making stupid arguments, then '1' will win. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• Response This does not qualify for a speedy keep in my book, please try not to take the mfd too personally (even those it's your subpages). A consensus is required for a deletion here, and the default is to keep as no consensus. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep some, delete some, choose yourself. Could you agree to reduce the number of subpages in your user space to some reasonable number? I think about 5-6 should be enough, a whole alternate history with dozens of articles goes a bit far against WP:NOT a free webhost. I believe there is middle ground here that can be found. Please choose yourself what you wish to keep and tag the rest with {{db-owner}}. Kusma (討論) 00:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. God, this is a hard case. Nominator is right that this page does violate the spirit of WP:NOT. However, contributor is well-established and the pages are small and don't consume great space (I've seen much, much worse get kept). I really don't like this practice; but, courtesy and good faith still count for a lot, and I need more evidence of malice before I'll delete something from a regular contributor's userspace.--Firsfron 01:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep please for the love of Bob no one look at how many subpages I have. I use them to practice table layout, understand how transclusion works, play with different coulours and displays. I sometimes ask for them to be deleted when I'm finished, but hey guess what: That doesn't do anything. Space is not saved by deleting pages. I'm unlcear on what the problem with these is. Silly and pointless and edges up on "Not MySpace" territory... but deleting them against the user's wishes? Whoa, why?
  brenneman^{L} 03:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Among other things, these "articles" are bad because they show up very high on Google results. The #1 search result for "WGHP history" on Google is not our real article on the topic but this fabriacted one. Ideally, when people see Wikipedia as a top result for a reasonable search, they should not click on the link and discover "Disclaimer: This stuff is entirely made-up. It did not happen (yet). Therefore, this is not a real article." In case you haven't noticed, Wikipedia is in the business of publishing factual information; it would be undesirable for us to establish ourselves as a clearinghouse for fiction. Plus, I don't think we want people who search for "louisville whore" to find Wikipedia as the #2 result. Christopher Parham (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    • • Just want to point out that its possible the Wikipedia versino would not even show if it was not for CoolKatt's subpage. The standard article is given a high rating because its a subpage on the same network as CoolKatt's page. In this case her page which clearly states "alternate history" has helped a Wikipage get placed higher in the rating on google. The only real remedy to further differentiate the articles would be to rename them to "Fictional History of XYZ"? but Alternate History accomplishes the same goal. --Zer0faults 17:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Oww oww oww... stop kicking me. ^_^ Ok, while that aspect of this hadn't been discussed before (at least not here?) I can certainly see why it would be considered sub-optimal. But, call me crazy, did we try just talking about it to CoolKatt first? Forcing someone to delete subpages should really be our last resort. And again, that information would have done well to go in the nomination for deletion. - brenneman^{L} 11:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
      • CFIF did try to "talk" with CoolKat, but from what I saw, the majority of "talking" was notes in the form of "This is worthless!", "This is crap!", "Answer me!", "Answer me now!", etc. I can understand CFIF's wish to keep this encyclopedic, but I can also see why CoolKat wouldn't respond well to that sort of note.--Firsfron 11:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment looks like CoolKatt has gotten sneaky and combined this false and inaccurate info into 5 subpages. User:CoolKatt number 99999/Subpage 1 User:CoolKatt number 99999/Subpage 2 User:CoolKatt number 99999/Subpage 3 User:CoolKatt number 99999/Subpage 4 User:CoolKatt number 99999/Subpage 5. I think we should delete those also. --CFIF (talk to me) 10:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Right, perhaps if we didn't say things like "sneaky" in response to at attempt to compromise, we could keep this from going off the rails? Please try to be nice - brenneman^{L} 12:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• keep This all seems to be stemming from a vendetta it seems. I think CoolKatt's attempts to create subpages to condense their work was in good faith in attempts to reach a compromise. There is now even a RfC against CoolKatt, perhaps everyone just needs a break? --Zer0faults 17:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a free webhost. Stifle (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as above. Yes, the disputes here may need some settling. But these untrue articles can sometimes show up above the real articles on Google -- see this Google search for "WGHP history". As such, these subpages are dangerous and may be a misuse of userspace. Remember, Google indexes userpages too. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • OK, per Firsfron's new evidence, keep the top three pages. I stand by my previous vote for everything else. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per above. pure abuse of user page. --Ebb 00:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I bet a lot of you have done pages like this. Does this make you any better? CoolKatt number 99999 00:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. I'm a TV nut, done stuff like this before, but I wouldn't even think about putting it on Wikipedia. Kirjtc2 04:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Have to say I'm glad that CoolKatt at least has those disclaimers at the top of these subpages now. When I first encountered them I was horrified to see an article that had a such inaccurate information about WCPO-TV (that's a station in my hometown). And then I found that page. One thing I'd like to point out is that many of these subpages contain fair use logos; it might behoove of CoolKatt to remove them from the subpages, since Wikipedia hosts these images for educational (that is, nonfictious) purposes, and their inclusion on these subpages probably doesn't fall under fair use. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 08:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment The top three pages on the list, User:CoolKatt number 99999/Grudges in the Pokemon anime, User:CoolKatt number 99999/Cultural references in Pokemon, and User:CoolKatt number 99999/List of power ballads do not appear to contain any misleading information, tagged or untagged. Why were these included in the list, other than to remove all this user's sub-pages?--Firsfron 19:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep CFIF's just mad at CoolKat. If having a few too many subpages meits deletion, then you should delete that one user's page that looks like a GIF-ridden GeoCities site. (sorry, the username just slipped my mind). Basically, User namespaces are for whatever as long as you don't take up too much room. Wikipedia is not paper, and as Wales says, "hard disks are cheap", right? -- Chris Ccool2ax contrib. 06:31, 21 May 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.