Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Meerkat Manor more info

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 Delete all. — xaosflux Talk 18:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Fork of Meerkat Manor, an inappropriate use of user space. Corresponding user hasn't edited at all in a month. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I am adding the following pages to this nomination, and restarting the clock for comments. Each of these is a fork of the Meerkat Manor article. Most recent edit by any of these users is August 3. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on User:Meerkat Manor more info
[edit]
  • Nuke per nom, and keep an eye on it if he comes back to resurrect it. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 01:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete inappropriate use of userspace. Acalamari 01:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Frag per nom; clearly in violation of WP:NOT. David Fuchs (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, or if someone knows just what editor has been using this page, userfy it in their space. Not appropriate for a userpage (or a username). --UsaSatsui 07:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:USER has an entire section describing how forking articles into user space is discouraged. Editors who want to improve Meerket Manor should do so by editing the main article, not by maintaining a fork somewhere else. So moving this somewhere else in user space would be less than ideal. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's a fork? That looks like a re-working of the article to me. I could be wrong. I always considered forks to be things like "in popular culture" or "Meerkat views on politics" articles. --UsaSatsui 14:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sometimes people decide they don't like the way an article is going, so they just make a new version somewhere else. This user page starts with "i am re-Writing what has been deleted" and appears to largely duplicate what's in the main article. I use the word fork to refer to that sort of duplication. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments after addendum was added
[edit]
  • As nominator, these should be deleted. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nuke, inappropriate use of a userpage, especially if they're POV forks. If they were subpages (and not the userpage itself) we probably wouldn't be here yet. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • If they were subpages, they should still be merged into the main article. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as both content forks and WP:WEBPAGE. User:Meerkat Manor Correctly is especially egregious as it specifically declares the editors WP:OWNership of the article. --Farix (Talk) 20:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's one thing to copy/paste into your userspace to do an overhaul, which would be prohibitive for doing in the main article space; it's an entirely different thing to fork an article to preserve what general consensus has deemed unnecessary. Forks derived from "I don't like the regular version" attitudes should be nuked. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as per nom. --Kralizec! (talk) 04:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • On Meerkat Manor Correctly, this is not copying Meerkat Manor nor Kalahari Meerkat project. This is in the middle. This article has the people's own words and if copying happened we will rephrase it.Mitchmeerkat 01:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The issue is that the content on these user pages should be merged into those two articles. Having what is essentially an extra article in user space is bad for the encyclopedia. The function of user pages is to hae some sort of ifo on the user, not to host independent articles. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete All - highly inappropriate. Also agree with earlier comment, to watch for potential resurrection. Indeed...found another one (Meerkat_Manor_2), except this time it is in the MAIN space! Collectonian 05:24, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete All and Block all accounts as socks. For more, see this thread ad [AN/I. ThuranX 04:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Meerkat_Manor_more_info&oldid=1078952652"