Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sidhartha Shankar

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 keep given unanimity among commenters. Non-admin closure by Skomorokh 09:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sidhartha Shankar

Blatant self-promotion. Way over the top of what is acceptable on a user page. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "Clueless user syndrome" strikes again - we need a means of actually discussing problems with new users instead of having "deletion notices" being the first contact he has with WP. Collect (talk) 11:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is, sort of. In the introduction above, "When a page in the User or User talk namespaces seems worthy of deletion, please explain your concerns using either a personal note or by adding "{{subst:Uw-userpage}} ~~~~" to their talk page. While this step is not required, it does assume good faith and civility; often the user is simply unaware of the guidelines, and the page can either be fixed or speedily deleted using {{db-userreq}}." Toliar (talk) 15:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Users can promote themselves on their own page, This page may need some labelling to make it clear that it is a user page and not an article though. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep -- this account is only three weeks old. Yes the user page is very self-promotial and there are very minimal contributions outside of the user page, but I think education rather then deletion is the appropriate action here. Note: the deletion notice was removed from the page by an anon user - I reversed it. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and communicate - new user, we shouldn't bite at this point. — Ched (talk) 16:26, 14 February 2009 (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.