Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Meow

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: speedy keep . Going to speedy close - at this point the user has removed the content that was problematic, so there is no longer a reason to delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:39, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Meow

This page is basically a blatant violation of WP:UPNOT and, as far as I can tell, has been so for (almost) its entire history. It consists precisely of "Inappropriate or excessive personal information unrelated to Wikipedia". The only things remotely related to her Wikipedia editing are in the "See also" section, and that only marginally so. 3 years ago, Juliancolton (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) attempted to clean up some of the content as "vulgar/unprofessional", but this MfD's grounds are broader than that. Even if his edit were redone, the rest of the userpage would still qualify as a clear-cut example of WP:UPNOT. Jasper Deng (talk) 06:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have removed all parts unrelated to Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects from the English, Chinese, and Wikimedia Commons pages except external links first. However, I will remember this day for what Jasper Deng has done to me. 🐱💬 07:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As an experienced editor, you should know well that it should not have taken an MfD to effect this. I will withdraw the MfD only if (not if and only if) your new version of your userpage is compliant with WP:UP.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you pointing a gun to my head now? 🐱💬 07:10, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. It should go without saying that your two comments here are a clear example of WP:ABF and WP:PA. No one is above community policies and guidelines.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aren’t you just using policies as a gun pointing to my head? Why didn’t you report this earlier? It seems like you are meaning to do this as I pointed out another person’s issue a day after Christmas Day. I am rewriting it, but not for you. 🐱💬 07:17, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And it shouldn't be for me. It should be for the community. The thing you did on Typhoon2013's talk page just reminded me to look at your userpage. If you have an ax to grind, stay away from the website for a bit. I can't tell what you're trying to achieve by WP:BAITing me, but I'm afraid that it's not achieving anything and further ad hominem remarks will result in a report at WP:ANI. You can't be this abrasive whenever someone points out a policy violation by you.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Meow, please calm down. And please don't make assertions that Jasper Deng is "pointing a gun at your head" or somehow gaming and twisting Wikipedia's policies in order to force compliance from you - he's following policy, and if there are issues with your user page or if anything on it violates Wikipedia's user page policy, it needs to be resolved. That's all he's saying... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have been to a great extent an off-wiki supporter of deleting your userpage as inappropriate and not serving any Wikipedia-relevant / constructive purpose, and I have discussed the issue with numerous others for at least the past few months (just the most-recent iteration; I've had issues for years with the earlier iterations). Your comments on the Typhoon2013 matter are irrelevant. Master of Time (talk) 07:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasper Deng: @Oshwah: @Master of Time: Aside from the conflicts, the new revision of my user page must not violate the policies now. I will repost it to Wikimedia Commons and translate it to the Chinese Wikipedia if the revision is passed. 🐱💬 08:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what others think, but the new version seems appropriate. Master of Time (talk) 08:08, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I personally would omit any mention of "furry fandom" and the ensuing related sentence, but yes, this is much more compliant now. Waiting to hear from others before withdrawing MfD.--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is basically a background introduction of the other field of my contributions to Wikimedia Commons, so I won’t be just like a meteorological editor. 🐱💬 11:48, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- I won't comment on what it was like previously, but there is nothing much wrong with it now. Reyk _YO! 10:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Now that the stupid stuff has been removed, it is only a fake article. The author isn't helping by wild rhetoric, but that isn't why to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that's because of Meow (talk · contribs)'s preference to refer to herself in the third person.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes. An article is written in the third person. A user page is normally written in the first person. The remaining material in the user page, in the third person, is a fake article and can be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - As you wish, I have edited it to completely first-person. 🐱💬 18:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- As the article name is User:Meow instead of Special:My page, why can't I use Meow to introduce? And what I mention in the article is real. 🐱💬 06:16, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep userpage is inoffensive as of this writing (it wasn't at the time of the AFD) and I strongly feel deletion since it uses third person is excessive. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 19:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with the userpage in this condition. But if any of the content returns, it should be deleted.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 19:30, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - We all have different tastes (for instance my userpage may not appeal to everyone) so I can't sit here and say "It's shit blah blah blah" however despite the comments above the editor has cooperated and improved the page so I feel at this point deleting would be overkill, Obviously if the content is readded then Jasper Deng is more than welcome to CSD (or open another MFD). –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 00:22, 31 December 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.