Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimbo Wales/Facebook/Wdefcon

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 discussion was deleted by Jimbo Wales. Deli nk (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimbo Wales/Facebook/Wdefcon[edit]

Added later:

Pages in Jimbo Wales' userspace created by other users. The purpose or use of these pages is unclear. 103.6.156.167 (talk) 11:56, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Σ/Facebook, formerly at User:Jimbo Wales/Facebook shows how they were meant to be used. Without all the deletion tags, of course. Reach Out to the Truth 12:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not a social networking site, and doesn't contribute to the Wikipedia. Also out of date... EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 15:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep On the basis of no rationale given for deletion - and it's userspace anyway. Waste of time nomination. There's no harm people trying things like this in userspace. If you object to it being in Jimbo's space instead of the person making it, get it moved, or chat to the author. Why are we here in MFD? There's nothing offensive, nothing copyright... how is deleting this helping to make wikipedia better? 88.104.22.30 (talk) 00:24, 10 May 2015 (UTC) — 88.104.22.30 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

I've made two edits. The link you gave says, "A user should not be tagged as an SPA just because they only have a handful of edits. While all users with one edit are by definition an SPA, users with as few as 3 or 4 edits are not necessarily SPAs if those edits are in a diverse set of topics and do not appear to be promoting a "single purpose."". 88.104.22.30 (talk) 06:06, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AN IP editor with a handful of edits to one area is a textbook single-purpose account. Though on the other hand, given your immediate leap into an MfD on unused parts of Jimbo Wales' userspace, "identity-hiding sock" would be a more apt description, as it is quite unlikely a genuinely-new editors would be commenting here. Tarc (talk) 13:28, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't have a "handful of edits" though - just two. One to Jimbo Wales' talk page, the other here. How is that a "textbook single-purpose account"?

My first edit was in User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Disaster_relief_donations. On that page, there was a notice about this discussion, hence my 2nd edit was here. Is that really so incredibly hard to accept with good faith?

I hate constant unfounded accusations when you really should know better - you know where SPI is, otherwise, don't accuse.

In any event, I have edited random articles since, so I hope that is satisfactory and that you will strike out the nasty-looking 'SPA' thing. 88.104.22.30 (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*snrk* 'edited random articles' — literally a bunch of articles with 'Random' in the title.→StaniStani 17:52, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Some long-abandoned Facebook junk. Toss it all. Tarc (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - These look like bits of some effort to make a Facebook-like page for Jimbo on Wikipedia, and the obvious root is User:Jimbo Wales/Facebook, which appears to be a since-deleted redirect to a since-deleted page now at WP:Articles for creation/Facebook. The contents of that page might be informative if you want to resurrect. But it's also possible that the deletion discussion for that provides authority to delete the rest of the bits. In any case it doesn't look like it was really being used, just a format experiment. Wnt (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - Routine housekeeping. Carrite (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you have a bunch of pages in your own userspace.

Extended content

- should be delete those as 'routine housekeeping' too? 88.104.22.30 (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All - Obsolete junk.→StaniStani 17:52, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted them all to save people some time. I had never seen these things as far as I can remember!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:48, 11 May 2015 (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.