- 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The result of the debate was Nomination withdrawn (non-admin close) LightAnkhC|MSG 23:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"News section" breaks WP:NOT Wikipedia is not a blog/website hoster. LightAnkhC|MSG 17:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Whoa, Whoa, Whoa Not a blog. More of news. Wouldn't call it a blog. If this passes, let me delete myself. I don't want my real user page screwed up. --HPJoker Leave me a message 21:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep if the consensus is the news section should be removed, at least let him rewrite it instead of deleting it all together. There is some pretty important content (besides news), if you didn't notice. jj137 ♠ 21:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and cleanup - But the news section should be removed. --ChetblongTalkSign 22:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Agreed, if we decide to keep, then I think the News section should be removed. LightAnkhC|MSG 23:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Comment reply Hm, what if you would change "MLB News and Red Sox Free Agency News" into something like "Latest Red Sox News" and just leave one news entry from the latest team news, including the date, on your user page? It would look something like that: example screenshot. It wouldn't look like a blog any longer. How's that? LightAnkhC|MSG 15:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Once again, another reply =) Not one entry. How bout a months worth? There isn't much news going around anyway. When the season starts, I'llnarrow it down to each series (3 days on average) I can do """Red Sox @ Devil Rays: Game 1. Beckett vs Kazmir""". That sound fair? I can take off the heading and replace it when the season begins (Spring Training in March, regular season in April))? --HPJoker Leave me a message 17:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment reply Hm....then it would still look like a blog or news feed. Is it possible to give us an example like I did on how that would look like (just to get an idea)?. LightAnkhC|MSG 17:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply No, it would be too hard. I can give you a description. (Four =) Date:Red Sox vs Yankees:Beckett vs. Wang. Then below the box score, below the players and how they did (hits, BBs, SOs, RBIs, etc). Pitchers and their stats for the game, and some short conclusion on how I think they did or how well they did. Basically a recap. Can't create one. Don't have that much time on my hands. --HPJoker Leave me a message 00:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment reply If you'd do it by creating a subpage...yeah why not. Help on subpages is available here: Help:Link#Subpage_feature and this might also be helpful: WP:UP. If you still have questions on how to create subpages, feel free to ask me or any other editor. We can help you to create your subpage :-). LightAnkhC|MSG 09:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove and grant leniency What we have here is a well-meaning editor who has earned the assumption of good faith with an excess of nonsequitor information. This might slide on a subpage, but per WP:UP, etc., it should be removed from the main user page. With that bieng said, there is some merit of such musings if included on the "Events" section of 2007 in baseball. I do not think this is a total waste of energy and something can be salvaged from it.--12 Noon 2¢ 03:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply I'd be glad to create a subpage. I just need to learn how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HPJoker (talk • contribs) 23:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- RemoveNews/blog section. Per Wikipedia:NOT#WEBSPACE (a better link than BLOG to same content), "Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia." If the information was being compiled in a format for eventual inclusion in an article, that might be something, but unsourced entries with comments like "BREAKING NEWS" or "I'll be back tomorrow with the full list or as much as I can give you" clearly put it into the personal website/blog category in my mind. That being said, there is no reason to clear out his user/status boxes. MBisanz talk 04:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all per my reasoning in the essay Wikipedia:Editors matter, as well as WP:BITE. This user is a good-faith contributor; deleting his userpage, or even removing the news section, runs the risk of driving him away and therefore damaging the encyclopedia. In contrast, leaving the page in place is unlikely to cause any harm. WaltonOne 12:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Well, I don't want to drive him away or offend him with this Mfd...no way. But the "News section" really reads more like a blog or website and I fail to see how this section benefits or supports his good work on Wikipedia (for what we normally use user pages). I'm fine with the rest of his user page, this Mfd is mainly about the "News section". Hopefully the user takes no offense from this Mfd. LightAnkhC|MSG 15:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply to a comment You should see my work in WP:SOX newsletter. Wikipedia is not a job, it is a very enjoyable hobby, and I love writing on Wikipedia. I wouldn't contribute as much because WP:SOX and my user page (mostly my user page to tell you the truth) are my main contributions to Wikipedia. --HPJoker Leave me a message 17:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove News/blog section Keep the rest per my clarified nom and MBisanz. LightAnkhC|MSG 15:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Sounds like all this needs is a conversation on the users talk page about the concerns, not an MFD nomination.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a note that there was a discussion here [1], [2] that appeared to me at the time to be that the user was declining to eliminate the news-feed like feature. MBisanz talk 16:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment reply In this case the whole user page would have to go or another editor would have to remove the blog like news section...something like that. But let's see what he thinks about my idea. LightAnkhC|MSG 16:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the diffs, I looked but didn't see the conversation. I would just temper my keep vote as keep and continue discussion with the user, and encourage the user to note that there are users who have good faith concerns about the contents of the users page. (I know I used the word "user" way too many times, but think everyone can understand.) --Cube lurker (talk) 16:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, I just got confused and said newsletter in that. --HPJoker Leave me a message 00:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep If I can vote for myself, then this is my vote. Keep. It's not a personal blog. It's an archive of news that I've typed since early November. --HPJoker Leave me a message 23:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdrawn (Edit conflict :P...I was about to withdraw) I hereby withdraw my nom. After thinking a while about it, I came to the conclusion that there's no harm by leaving the user's user page in its current from (although it might look a bit like a blog and a subpage for this blog/news feed like content would perhaps be more suitable). Happy editing :-) LightAnkhC|MSG 23:24, 10 January 2008 (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.