Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zzz369/sandbox

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: delete . On the basis of the fact that his userpage has been deleted for the same thing, and that he has less than 20 mainspace edits this year, but over 100 edits to this sandbox, I think it's reasonable to suggest that this user may not be here. If the user would like to clarify to me or any other participant the encyclopedic purpose of this sandbox, then by all means I will undelete. Just ping me. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zzz369/sandbox[edit]

The main page of this user was previously deleted by the same problems. The user does not make significant contributions to this Wikipedia. It only connects to update "your supposed programming guide". Even though he was previously warned, he now uses a subpage to continue in the same. Philip J Fry _talk 20:35, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can write on my sandbox literally almost whatever I want. This is my sandbox, for god's sake. Please leave me in piece. --Zzz369 (talk) 20:57, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not voting but only commenting: If the page is related to Wikipedia, is non-promotional, does not violate WP:BLP, is not a stale WP:FAKEARTICLE, then sure. Otherwise per policy these may be deleted. —Paleo Neonate – 22:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Zzz369: your sandbox exists in User: space, appropriate uses for which are discussed at WP:USER. The lead of that guideline notes that "User pages are available to Wikipedia users personally for purposes compatible with the Wikipedia project and acceptable to the community; Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site." WP:UP#GOALS goes on to clarify that content in user space is unsuitable if it is "not closely related to Wikipedia's goals". It would be helpful if you could clarify how this list in your sandbox contributes to the encyclopedia and why it is necessary to maintain such a list in addition and in parallel to existing similar mainspace lists. VQuakr (talk) 01:26, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet persuaded to support deletion. Presumably this is related to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zzz369. He's moved the alleged TV guide to a subpage. At worst, this is better than having it on the main userpage. I can't easily and quickly agree with the previous MfD's !votes of "NOT a TV guide" and "NOTWEBHOST" because this user has a very long contribution history with TV program articles. This subpage looks like a very plausible notes page for the user to use for his own reference in support of his mainspace edits. Before agreeing to deletion, I would want to see the case made that the associated mainspace edits are not productive. Others' userspace notes pages are not required to make sense to third parties. I think the deletion rationale by the nominator both this time and last time is inadequate to justify deletion. I think an analysis of edits is important. The user's disdain for clear and polite communication and lack of appreciation of Wikipedia policy is not good. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:00, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now I wonder, how can this help enrich Wikipedia? Well, see the contributions of the user, in the main space does not contribute much to say, although so far this year, their editions are only based on your user page. And I think if you want to provide this kind of information, you can create a list that is remarkable. What the user did was move his homepage to a subpage to continue in it. Well, I ask; How important can this be in Wikipedia? And I repeat in everything that goes of 2017, the user only contributes contributions to his subpage of user and his main page.--Philip J Fry / talk 01:23, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks NOTWEBOSTy, but on a little investigation, it looks not so dissimilar to mainspace pages that he edits. It is plausibly a justified notes page. I think the onus is on you to better make the case.
"How important can this be in Wikipedia?" That depends on how important the user's related mainspace edits are. I reviewed many of his edits, admit to being unimpressed, I suspect I might !vote at AfD to delete those pages, but i got bored before deciding. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The user has an acceptable number of edits to namespaces 0 & 1 for him to be called an active contributor. The edits are mostly gnoming, which is OK. I see you have previously pseudo-deleted some of the articles he edited, List of telenovelas filmed in the United States for example. Sorry, I am still undecided. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are other editors speculating about what this user is doing with the page and how it might be useful? The user is here and can speak for themselves as to why this page is useful. Legacypac (talk) 22:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The user has already spoken up here. Not particularly eloquently, which doesn't make it easy. Eloquence is not required to authorise use of userspace to support your mainspace editing, which is plausibly justified here. Rather weak. I am not particularly impressed with the mainspace contributions, but as long as they are live, they justify the userspace resources for them, I think is the proper rule of thumb. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As of this date, the user still does not explain how useful this information is in Wikipedia.--Philip J Fry / talk 00:01, 16 November 2017 (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.