Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ScottAHudson's subpages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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, with the exception of User:ScottAHudson/2008 Weight Loss, which is to be deleted. Encyclopedic sandboxes are considered mostly harmless. ➪HiDrNick! 20:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:ScottAHudson's subpages

User:ScottAHudson has a history of using his userspace for non-Wikipedia purposes. I previously nominated his user page for deletion; during the MfD he promised to adjust his editing habits, but has utterly failed to do so. ScottAHudson continues to use his userspace to host formatting forks of articles on various reality TV programs. A few weeks after his user page was cleaned after the MfD, ScottAHudson created a number of subpages appearing to serve a similar purpose. After consistently placing fair use images on these pages, and proceeding to harass User:BetaCommand after his bot removed them, ScottAHudson was blocked for 72 hours. ScottAHudson claims that these subpages are "test pages," but on the rare occasions that he has contributed to articles he has shown that he has no interest in discussion or consensus. As a result, he was blocked for a month in November 2007. At that point ScottAHudson had his user page and his subpages deleted, but less than two weeks later decided to return and continue his behavior. I would now like to quote User:Rjd0060's message at ScottAHudson's talk page last month, which I feel captures the situation rather well.

"Looking at your contribution summary, it shows that you still would rather be editing your own personal subpages, rather than working anywhere else. As you know, WP:USERPAGE states that "While userpages and subpages can be used as a development ground for generating new content, this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia." . The content within your subpages isn't helping the articles that they correspond to; they only contain your preferred versions of articles. Wikipedia is not a free web host and I fail to see how these subpages benefit the encyclopedia. Also, your recent contributions show that the concerns I raise are active concerns."

To emphasize, ScottAHudson has made over 500 edits to his userspace in 2008, and 54 to the article namespace. Beyond the subpages devoted to seasons of reality TV shows, he also has a single page devoted to various useless tables, and a page on which he records his weight loss for this year. Even more than the others, these subpages definitely do not contribute to the creation of an encyclopedia, and should be deleted as well. Maxa megalon 2000 22:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

So your argument is basically, the editor sucks so his contribution is invalid? Strong keep, completely normal to keep article forks for work in progress. Continued encouragement/pressure towards mainspace editing and discussion would in my opinion be more beneficial than taking his subpages to XfD. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 11:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
~~Keep~~ - most of these seem to be encyclopedic content which is under development in his userspace. Deletion is not punitive; we don't delete legitimate userspace content just because of the user's behaviour. Userspace content should only be deleted if it's a blatant misuse of userspace, or actively harmful to the encyclopedia. Those editors who have concerns with the user's behaviour should continue discussing it with him, and if no improvement is seen, should take the issue to ANI or another appropriate forum. Walton^One 12:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- I should clarify. I'm not citing his behavior so that his subpages can be deleted as punishment; I'm citing his behavior as evidence that the subpages are not meant as works in progress for the benefit of the encyclopedia. The encouragement/pressure towards mainspace editing and discussion that has already occurred has not accomplished anything. The pages are a blatant misuse of userspace: this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content or indefinitely archive permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia. "Under development" implies that these pages will eventually contribute to the encyclopedia, but ScottAHudson consistently states that upon completion the pages will merely be deleted. --Maxamegalon2000 15:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  - Fair enough, you know the user better than I do. If the pages are simply to be deleted on completion, then this constitutes abuse of Wikipedia as a webhost, which is not acceptable. |~~Delete~~, unless some reason for keeping the pages can be suggested. Walton^One 00:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
    - Changing to Keep again per arguments presented below. (Sorry to be a flip-flopper.) Walton^One 07:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep: The editor Hexagon 1 is right when he says that the editor sucks and I don't. So, I don't I should be punished because I feel that I don't suck. ScottAHudson (talk) 20:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Strong keep. There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping forks of works in progress in userspace. Dragging in negativity completely unrelated to the issue at hand will not help the nominator's argument. --WPholic^(user)(talk) 09:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Like the above user says, I think forks or works in progress do not need to be deleted.ScottAHudson (talk) 20:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Each editor only gets one vote. When you say "forks or works in progress," are you saying they're not the same thing? Because if your forks aren't works in progress then I'm not sure why they should continue to exist. --Maxa megalon 2000 20:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it was just a typo. --WPholic^(user)(talk) 10:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep - I agree with WPholic, Hexagon1 and Walton's first response. Personally every once in a while I look at his pages to see how he does things with tables. I have to admit that because of his pages, they have helped me in learning more about them. The talk here is to delete or keep the pages. Past or present issues with the editors performance on Wikipedia main space should have no value in whether the pages should be kept or deleted. Maxamegalon2000 above did state "I'm not citing his behavior so that his subpages can be deleted as punishment". But yet he/she did bring it up in his/her argument for keeping or deleting the subpages. There are many other user pages/sub pages on Wikipedia that probably should be also deleted (like can you find my hidden user page). I am truly sorry for saying this, but this looks like nothing more then a witch hunt (The term "witch-hunt" is often used to refer to similarly panic-induced searches for perceived wrong-doers other than witches.) to me. --_pete 23:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I think we close the debate because it looks like three votes are STRONG KEEP, which means the consensus was strong keep. 98.17.116.65 (talk) 01:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

— 98.17.116.65 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Additionally, two other IPs from the same ISP (98.17.118.37 (talk · contribs) and 98.17.116.219 (talk · contribs)) tried to close the discussion early [1][2]. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

This debate is bogus because we already have a consensus. Let's just say it is a keep, although there seems to be a tie between keep and strong keep. ScottAHudson (talk) 13:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

This debate is over, do not attempt to make any more votes. ScottAHudson (talk) 22:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

MfD discussions are normally held for five days. Five days has yet to expire, so the debate is not over. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Delete some Comment on others - User:ScottAHudson/2008 Weight Loss should be deleted per WP:NOT#BLOG. I was going to say Weak delete on the others as to me it appears that Scott is keeping a forked copy of the articles on his user space in violation of WP:USER#Copies of other pages. An example being the copy and paste of the episode descriptions I wrote into User:ScottAHudson/SurvivorMicronesiaTest using a format that is no longer used for Survivor articles. Similar issues exist with User:ScottAHudson/BigBrother9(US)Test and User:ScottAHudson/TheBiggestLoserSeason5Test where whole portions of the mainspace article have been copied into Scott's test pages with just minor formatting changes. Instead of deleting, I really encourage Scott to participate in the writing of articles in the mainspace instead of maintaining a fork. Scott, pete left you a good piece of advice on your talk page and I strongly encourage you to think about that piece of advice. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment The MfD messages were removed from all of the pages. I have restored them. --Maxa megalon 2000 00:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep Sandbox pages in teh userspace!? what will they think of next? -- Ned Scott 06:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Strong Keep These pages act as sandboxes, what is the problem! Close the debate, it has seemed to have surrpassed the five day mark. 75.89.232.128 (talk) 02:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

— 75.89.232.128 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Same ISP as 98.17.116.65 (talk · contribs) above and again attempted to close debate [3]. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

~~Strong Keep~~: Again, nothing wrong with having these pages, they act as sandboxes. I was just asking if this debate has passed five days. It seems that it has been six or even seven days. ScottAHudson (talk) 14:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)--An anonymous editor with an IP address similar to the other IP addresses used changed the signature to User:Survivor1992, User:ScottAHudson's alternate account. --Maxa megalon 2000 21:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted the attempted signature [4] change by 98.17.117.235 (talk · contribs) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Strange that all the anonymous ips on this page are all coming from

Hostname

h128.232.89.75.ip.alltel.net

Geo-Location Information

Country United States

State/Region SC City Lexington

Latitude 33.9434

Longitude -81.2445

_pete 02:23, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

That's where ScottAHudson is from. See User:Survivor1992 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Knoll High School. --Maxa megalon 2000 17:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

No One's commenting!!! Shouldn't we close if no one is voting anymore!!!!!!!ScottAHudson (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it should be closed. However, neither you, nor I, nor these sockpuppet anonymous IP addresses should close the discussion as there are inherent conflicts of interest in closing it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 01:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

75.89.238.54 (talk · contribs) attempted another sockpuppet closure [5]. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2008 (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.

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ScottAHudson's subpages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] User:ScottAHudson's subpages

[edit] Strange that all the anonymous ips on this page are all coming from

Views

Navigation

Interaction

Search