Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Denim&Co.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy deleted by Tony Sidaway (unsuitable use of user page) --Tony Sidaway^Talk 11:57, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Denim&Co.

User page used for advertising. User has edited Big Bonanza Silver Day and is presumably identical to User:69.172.243.1 who created that page. Both have also edited QVC. Uppland 06:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, clearly not what a userpage is for. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:04, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, a userpage should be unique to the user, and changed only by the user. Would you like your Swedish links taken away? Denim&Co.
  • You are welcome to nominate my userpage for deletion. Do you think you will be able to convince anyone I am abusing the space by filling it with advertising? Uppland 05:29, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Advertising. --Carnildo 23:25, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, what does a user's profile matter to you? Tell me. Denim&Co.
• Delete advertising. JamesBurns 04:15, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I'm a little worried about the extent of notability of subject of the user's edits. But that's not what I'm here for. This is a userpage, for Pete's sake. Let's not waste our time here. --User:Merovingian (t) (c) 10:23, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - used for free advertising - Skysmith 09:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but this is a userpage, not an ad space.Gateman1997 00:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Normally however I am against messing with userpages as they are the user's business. However this user has been contibuting nothing but ads. Gateman1997 00:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

    See Wikipedia:Resolving disputes for the correct way to handle user behavior disputes. Gazpacho 03:08, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

    • If there were a dispute that might be helpful ;)Gateman1997 17:37, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

      Regardless, we don't discipline users by removing their user pages. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/User talk:HistoryBuffEr/Archived-Sermons. Gazpacho

    • Who is diciplining? The consensus so far has been "keep".Gateman1997 21:10, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

      OK, I misread the vote. My comments were intended for people who have voted delete, and the nominator. Gazpacho

• Keep, VfD has traditionally allowed users broad discretion over their own pages. Gazpacho 01:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. At least there is no ambiguity where this person's agenda is concerned. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 04:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertising. Eclipsed 09:57, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Delete. It's advertising, and as such, I don't feel it belongs in the wikipedia. On the other hand, it is his user page. --Blu Aardvark | ^{(talk) | (contribs) 10:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)}

• Weak keep: Though it may be an advert, users have discretion over the content of their pages. If someone has any issue, that should go to Wikipedia:Request for comment, not a VfD. --Ragib 02:53, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Advertising. --OntarioQuizzer 05:25, 3 August 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.