Home • Search • Translate
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 - users here have substantially re-written and cited the draft, tagged as {{ userpage}} and kept. Doug.( talk • contribs) 01:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC) reply

User:Pulsifer

This was speedy deleted and the deletion overturned at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 September 5. Per consensus there, it should be considered in a full deletion debate. There do not appear to be significant WP:BLP issues, since this is a very public figure and nothing here is libellous, but it is possibly an inappropriate content fork; user page policy does not allow rejected article content to be kept indefinitely in user space. Chick Bowen 19:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply

  • Delete or Blank or Remove - The information has no context, and that's for a reason - its purpose is to lead the reader to the conclusion that Gov. Palin believes in, or is sympathetic to, Alaskan secession. But there's no evidence that she actually believes that, so this is an attempt at "guilt by association", a.k.a. "McCarthyism". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Blank, which is what I do when I'm done with my own sandbox copies of other pages. -- Ned Scott 20:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Blank it's a reasonable compromise to leave it available for future work in the history, but keep it cleared to assuage the concerns of those that called for its deletion. This is also in-line with the userpage policies that allow the use of userspace for sandbox work, but not for soapboxing or permanent storage of rejected content. — Scien tizzle 22:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC) reply
    • See comment below...I think my cleanup removes any remaining BLP/NPOV concerns. If the content is rejected even after it has been improved, it needs to go. — Scien tizzle 19:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Blank - I don't see any reason to allow User:SimonP to use one of his user pages to host a website on Gov. Palin. -- Suntag ☼ 04:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Sorry. I saw the Simon Pulsifer article and thought there was a connection between User:Pulsifer and SimonP. I believe that it is ----------------------------------------> that away to WP:RFCN. -- Suntag ☼ 04:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • This hardly qualifies as impersonation (and there's obviously no intent to impersonate). It's a common last name. Chick Bowen 16:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Blank per above. While the issue is still being discussed, consensus at Talk:Sarah Palin seems to be that her 'connections' to the Alaska Independence Party are not significant enough to be included. As long as that's the case, they don't belong on a user page either. However, blanking is better than deleting, for two reasons: firstly, because Pulsifer seems to be a good-faith contributor, and might actually make use of his user page; and secondly, because it's worth keeping the history of this page, as a record of what was removed from the Sarah Palin article. There's no egregious BLP violation here that demands outright deletion. Terraxos ( talk) 01:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Blank or delete per above. Keeper ǀ 76 19:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Delete This material is thoroughly rejected by consensus, and is available in the archives of Talk:Sarah Palin. While the editor has one edit in 2005 and one edit in 2006, he otherwise has no other edits until he did a quick flurry of edits to reach the number of edits required to edit a semi-protected article, and since then has no contributions unrelated to Palin. This sure looks like a single purpose account. GRBerry 15:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • FYI though I've little interest in wading into the muddy waters of political articles, I've rewritten the content on the page in question to better meet NPOV/V/RS/BLP/etc. In fact, it may merit a new conversation on relevant talk page(s) regarding inclusion (if only for the fact that it's probably our obligation to report the relevant facts for any readers looking for it after receiving a "ZOMG SECESSIONIST!!1!1!" email). — Scien tizzle 19:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply
    • That pretty well covers the known facts and distances her from the organization, thus hopefully nullifying the McCarthyism. The only major reason I can think for including that neutralized version in the article, would be to try to pre-empt other editors trying to get away with the same guilt-by-association tactic, which might be easier to do if the article says nothing about it initially. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC) reply
      • Clearly the content (as it stands now) doesn't merit much space, where-ever it were to end up. The most likely landing spot I could see is Political positions of Sarah Palin. I tend to think that it's better to be straightforward regarding topics like this; there are likely people looking for this information who should get the clear story. Furthermore, the straightforward approach is the only actual counter to the inevitable screams of censorship from one side or the other. — Scien tizzle 00:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply
        • It would be interesting to get Mr. Pulsifer's take on it, but he seems to have flown the coop, having last edited 9 days ago. [1] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply
      • Well, I've put my money where my mouth is and started a discussion at Talk:Political positions of Sarah Palin#Alaskan Independence Party content. I welcome anyone to comment on the rewritten text in regards to appropriate inclusion. If the content is rejected by a reasonable consensus-determining discussion, I'll blank the userpage content myself. — Scien tizzle 17:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Delete And immediately NOINDEX all User:* space related pages to prevent this happening in the future to where it can be detected outside of our site or affect the wider world negatively as easily. There is no reason to include User: pages or sub-pages on Search Engines. This seems to be happening too often now, and it's a waste of our manpower to go hunt down all these problem pages, since we may never catch them all with millions of user accounts. NOINDEX them all, the whole User: name space and subpages, fix the robots.txt filtering to catch any possible combinations of URLs, and bang, problem solved. rootology ( C)( T) 16:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply
    • An excellent suggestion. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:57, 18 September 2008 (UTC) reply
    • While I don't disagree with this, I think the argument to NOINDEX all of Wikipedia's userspace would be an important discussion to have in a wider venue than this MfD... — Scien tizzle 17:00, 18 September 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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Pulsifer&oldid=1138554058"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE