Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mohaaden

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 Delete. Deleting this is not newbie-biting. The newbie in question clearly needs help in understanding what Wikipedia is for; this deletion should motivate him to seek that help. G1 could rightly apply here. Xoloz 16:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Mohaaden

User has not made any lasting contributions and current user page appears to be an essay/resume. ... discospinster _talk 03:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete this and the talkpage. No encyclopedia contributions and Wikipedia is not a free webhost. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - this and talkpage are basically just taking up bandwidth. no contribs and besides, the pages are both in violation (were it a normal page, not a user) of CSD G1. --tennisman 16:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Abstain, courteously These should be brought to the attention of the user in question first to make them aware of the policies. By bringing straight to MfD, we are not assuming good faith nor welcoming a newbie. The user has no history of blatant vandalism or side-stepping the rules. Nomination is not appropriate at this time; please reconsider discussing with the user in question first.--12 Noon 17:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep for Now We should keep this for 1 or 2 more weeks, then delete. I strongly believe, that if we delete this now, it would be bitting a newbie. That is not good. We can temporarily use WP:IAR here. IAR states that if a rule keeps you from improving wikipedia, then ignore it. Though WP:NOT does not allow this on user pages, enforcing the rule now could indirectly hurt wikipedia by scarring away a user who might become the next Husond. That is how I believe IAR applies here. We can delete it after a few more weeks though

As for 12 Noon saying that deleting this would be assuming bad faith, I strongly disagree. Lets say someone made a test edit. You can believe it was not made out of bad faith, and yet revert it. Cheers!--SJP:Happy Verterans Day! 17:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Article page → clean up; User page → let sit. Apples ≠ Oranges.  :) --12 Noon 18:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

What???--SJP:Happy Verterans Day! 22:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• My comment is applicable to userpages (be patient); your comment applies to articles (clean up), which I also agree with. But you were comparing the two, which is like comparing apples to oranges. Apples are too dissimilar to oranges to be a reasonable comparison, so therefore I reject the argument. I would not revert a userpage without discussion with the user; I would revert an article without discussion. Apples to oranges. You understood my good faith reasoning, but misapplied it to an article page. But I digress, I am getting too far off the topic at hand.--12 Noon 00:22, 11 November 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.