Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/User talk:Vít Zvánovec


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: keep. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:24, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Vít Zvánovec
I don't need this page. -- Vít Zvánovec 23:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Vote closed early. Result: keep (5 keeps; user signalled acceptance of page blanking). I suggested below that Vít Zvánovec signal his withdrawl of his nomination of this unorthodox talk-page deletion by removing the vfd tag from his talk page. He instead attempted to remove this discussion, which UDScott reverted (as might be expected). Given Vít's edit summary of "Jeff Q's suggestion", I am interpreting this as an honest attempt to withdraw this nomination, which is obviously not going to result in a deletion anyway. I take responsibility for the irregularities in this entire process. We should also consider this situation when revising Speedy deletions and Deletion policy; we don't currently have a "speedy keep" for non-controversial situations. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. I was going to revert this nomination, but perhaps we need a precedent for how we deal with such requests. Unlike general user pages, which (other than following Wikiquote guidelines on impermissable content) are pretty much up to the user what they wish to do with them, user talk pages exist for the purpose of communications between the user and the rest of the community. Deleting them (and therefore their history) is generally not appropriate. You can blank you user talk page if you wish, but some consider this unfriendly. Also, blanking may be reverted if the material removed is warning content. It is better to archive old talk-page material, but there is no firm consensus in this either here or at Wikipedia, from which we inherit many of these guidelines. Only in the case of libel are we likely to delete such a page, and probably block the libeler as well. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. If he doesn't need the page, he needn't use it; but others may need it at some future date, depending on user activity. - InvisibleSun 20:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. We don't presently have a policy allowing for deletion of user talk pages on request, and so my inclination is to not delete them unless there's some crucial reason to do so, and even then, I would aim to leave the page as intact as possible, with the deletable material removed from the page and page history. In this case, the only real content was the welcome message, which is about as innocuous as you can get. &mdash;LrdChaos 21:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. Everyone needs a talk page.For contacting and discussing.-- ~ ♥ * Cute 1 4 u  |talk to me! * ♥ ~  22:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. ~ UDScott 12:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Your behaviour is not bearable. Probably I have to ask Danny directly. Reason is obvious: Google. As everyone can see at User talk:Vít Zvánovec/history, there is only the unwanted welcome message, in other words a spam. -- Vít Zvánovec 19:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you don't want the welcome message, you're free to remove it from your Talk page; no one is likely to make a scene about that. I don't believe that Google archives through the page history, so the next time the Googlebot hit the site, it would pick up the new (blank) user talk page. &mdash;LrdChaos 19:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm rather confused about Vít Zvánovec's objection. There is nothing "obvious" about the Google search above. Within it I found only 3 en:WQ pages: the nominated user talk page (which had no welcome message, but did show the VfD notice he added to it) and this VfD page and the VfD category (which only hit because of his nomination). As LrdChaos pointed out, he has the ability to blank the welcome message, and Google will only retain that. Furthermore, welcome messages are not considered spam by the Wikimedia projects, but rather assistance to new editors that users are encouraged to post in order to help them avoid the most common errors that new editors make. Finally, I'm not sure who "Danny" is supposed to refer to, but I sincerely hope it isn't our steward, as this would be most embarrassing, not to us but to Vít Zvánovec. It would be like complaining to a head of state that someone insulted you by handing you a welcome card and then refused to put it through a shredder for you instead of having you just toss it in the trash. Just blank the page. In fact, I suggest that if this user removes the vfd tag that he put there, thereby blanking the page, we should consider that a withdrawl of the nomination, and just delete this awkward discussion (thereby avoiding the Google propagation of an unnecessary VFD archive that may further annoy the user). I feel now that my failure to revert this nomination has caused more harm than good, and that I should have just pressed the point of blanking one's user talk page on the talk page itself. But if the user wants to go through the process, we can do this, too, and I'll stand by my actions. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * 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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.