Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Pendulum Dowsing

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 G12'd as a copyvio, the WP:SNOW here notwithstanding. If oversight is needed for the deleted edits, that can be dealt with through the proper channels. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:54, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pendulum Dowsing

User page way outside of user page guidelines. Editor appears to be using Wikipedia as a webhost for a soapbox covering their opinions on various matters. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wow. Just... wow. Yunshui (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, also totally violates WP:UP, per Gogo Dodo. But seriously... wow. Yunshui (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete er, right. Very long personal essay expounding the author's views on, well, everything, including the fact that he is Jesus Christ reincarnated and that you can be advised by a "dowsing pendulum". Not remotely appropriate for a user page or an encylopedia. As an aside he gives his National Insurance number at one point in the text, which probably isn't a good idea. Hut 8.5 21:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not related to the project. At best, it contains an expression of personal opinions way out of propotion to the number of constructive edits. Refer teh user to Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The editor's non-user space edits are not very constructive either as it added personal commentary along the lines of their user page to Safia Farkash and Social science. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. I normally read these things in full —but regrettably not in this case. --Klein zach 23:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and block user. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no-brainer. Seriously, when I see user pages like this one, which have nothing at all to offer to Wikipedia, I wonder whether WP:CSD needs to be expanded. Super Mario Man 17:43, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-Looks like a use of Wikipedia as a free webhost. As an aside, the National Insurance number should probably be Oversighted.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:40, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Just... Wow... delete page per WP:NOTWEBHOST and block user as unconstructive. He iro 23:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just read through a few of the other posts above, looks like I'm not the only one with the "Just wow" reaction, lol. He iro 23:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant as it's copyvio and being retagged. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 23:44, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Page deleted as copyvio. ROBERTMFROMLI | ^TK/_CN 23:52, 19 October 2011 (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.