Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Google box

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. An odd page, so to say. - Mailer Diablo 15:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Google box

This is an account used only for a specific template/userbox, apparently for User:Nathan nfm. (See Special:Contributions/Google_box.) This possibly may be a confusion about "userfication" of a userbox. So another possible solution could be to move the page to an appropriate sub-page of the "main account" of the creating user. I am also interested in whether blocking the account would be appropriate or not. - jc37 11:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Userfy and delete, but I don't see the need for a block. There's no rule against having multiple accounts, only against using multiple accounts to vandalise, pack votes, evade blocks, or the like. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Userfy? It's already in the userspace. MER-C 13:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps User:BD2412 commented without actually looking over the links, and presumed that this was merely a userbox issue? (If it was, if nothing else, it would have been a WP:TFD discussion : ) - jc37 14:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, perfectly reasonable userfied userbox. Nardman1 09:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• Userfied to a main userpage? And to the userpage of a user obviously created just for this purpose? I think that the creation is just due to confusion. Rather than create a sub-page, the user created a whole new account, in order to just use the userpage for the template. - jc37 10:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• We have User:UBX don't we? And I don't see anything in the rules prohibiting this. Nardman1 15:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, but what I think you're not understanding is that account places such userfied userboxes on sub-pages. - jc37 07:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

• That account has many useboxes, so it needs to use subpages. This one only has one userbox, so it doesn't. Xtifr _tälk 13:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Keep unless the user wants to change this (i.e., if he was confused). Most people store userboxes on subpages; this guy stores them in his socks. So what? WP:UM is not policy, The userbox is in userspace, and that's what's important. The only compelling reason for putting userboxes in subpages is so that you can use your main page for other stuff (like using userboxes). This guy found a different way, that's all. He absolutely should be blocked or chastised or anything. At most, we should enquire if he wants help reorganizing this is a more standard manner, and if not, we should offer him a minor award for creative weirdness. :) Xtifr _tälk 13:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Except that this user isn't using them, at least one other user is. Are you suggesting that you have "no trouble" with the idea of users transcluding someone else's main user page? - jc37 09:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have absolutely no trouble with someone transcluding a user page that was clearly designed and intended to be transcluded. Why on earth should I care whether it's a main page or a subpage? Please explain. Xtifr _tälk 22:48, 28 April 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.