Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:MariusM/Heaven of Transnistria

User:MariusM/Heaven of Transnistria

Breach of WP:USER. Now-deleted Heaven of Transnistria was nominated by User:Francis Tyers for deletion and deleted by User:Mailer diablo successfully[1] after it passed a deletion review[2]. The author of the page then created it again on Wikipedia, this time in userspace, and refuses to delete it. He links to it from his main page. When it gets deleted, he immediately restores it.[3] He has been warned of the WP:USER infraction. Delete as per the results of the article's deletion review. A check of the page's history log reveals that the user has no intention of working on it, editing it, or improving it. He has not made a single edit to it (beyond restoring it) ever since it was created nearly a month ago. He has merely placed a copy in order to circumvent the AFD and he has no intention of improving it or/and other encyclopaedic purposes. Delete. Mauco 14:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not nice from you, Mauco. I created a sandbox in which I will try to improve my edits, before proposing to mainspace. Don't try to silence your opponents, Wikipedia is not Transnistria. You bullied User:Dl.goe "watch your step" [4], you asked veteran User:EvilAlex to be blocked [5], I see is one of your patterns, if you disagree with an editor you want him blocked. For issues with me, please follow WP:DR procedures. BTW, we have an open mediation where you are not active [6], it seems you don't like transparent procedures of WP:DR, you just like to pick admins at your choice and request punitive actions against people with whom you have disputes.--MariusM 01:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.--Húsönd 19:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Is a sanbox, and is in accordance with Wikipedia policies about sandboxes. The nomination for deletion was done in bad faith by an editor with whom I had many content disputes (check his block log).--MariusM 01:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Where is the Wikipedia policy on sandboxes? The article has been posted back on Wikipedia after it was deleted following an AFD. See WP:USER and WP:NOT for what Wikipedia is not. There has not been a single edit to it for nearly a month, since it was posted. It is hard to assume any good faith under such circumstances. - Mauco 01:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• KEEP for obvious reason:

Everything in userspace, except stuff posted in the User page and in the User talk page is sandbox. I have all my started but slowly moving projects in the same state: in my subpages I gather bibliography, info, cut-and-paste citations from sourses so I can use them later. There I practice to see how it comes out, not everyone wikifies so well from first try. I don't want everyone to read my rubbish as encyclopedic article. When my stuff reaches a good state, I put it up in the article, and people copy edit it. I surely will object if someone erases MY stuff before I decide what to do with it. Just to give an example:

1. I started in October gathering info about Maramures, and I put it gradually in my project subpages (there are two for that subject)

2. I started an article Northern Maramures and some of the stuff went there

3. various small stuff went to other articles

4. I still have a lot of stuff for the newcoming article History of Maramures, which I don't have yet time to get done

5. I had to gather bibliography and images, and wikify them properly, before puting in the articles proper.

6. I worked (in my userspace) with 2 other users on creating some templates . We had long discussions there on how to organize, and where else can we get sourses: We don't want to create stupid articles that we will later nominate for deletion, so we gave it a thought there. In which talk pages we were supposed to do this? The creation of those pages we were discussing!

I, of course, don't link any encyclopedic article to my user page. But apart from that, noone but me should decide about creation/delition of subpages in my user space.

So I guess it would be only fair to let this user do what he wants with his material in his userspace. The simple fact that someone considers that such a thing is not allowed is an atentate to common sense. It's like someone saying that I need written permission from the mayor to cross the streets. xxxx the mayor! :Dc76 02:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per Dc76. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 03:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP EvilAlex 15:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. "Sandbox" is when you prepare a draft of what has the potential of being a useful article, to be then moved to mainspace. Userspace is not for keeping political rants around that pose as articles, when they have already been rejected from article space. This page has no potential to be anything but a highly POV fork of Transnistria. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --  Mikedk9109  (hit me up) ^SIGN 18:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Terence Ong 12:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep seems to me that some place should be safe to do one's work (sandbox) where it does not get attacked by the opposition quoting all sorts of "rules" why it's a violation, etc., etc.. Just catching up on what people have been up to, have been building new PC for past couple of weeks. Personally, given Mauco is the first editor here, it's a bit of Wikistalking IMHO, as I've seen Mauco follow MariusM around berating him in various user talk pages as well. (And no, I have better uses of my time than providing 14 citations.) I would certainly use a sandbox to save content I've created for reference/etc. if it were "rejected" by others whom I believed were pushing their (highly biased and not supported by the international community at large) POV. "Rejection" in Transnistria is a badge of shame or a badge of courage, all depending on which side you're on. (My personal opinion is that MariusM is "in the right" and has been "rejected" by people trying to paint the Transnistrian PMR authorities as a legitimate government.)  —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 02:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• P.S. While the biting wit could use some grammatical polishing, I regard the article in question as a fair representation of the situation. "Mauco disagrees" is not Wikipolicy for auto-deletion the last I checked.  —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 02:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete it, I have seen many of these people on the Transnistria page, I sometimes hang out there, and both of them edit war but this page can not be a 'Sandbox' page, why, because he kept it for a month and he never edited anything on it, and from what I can see, it was just an article that was deleted. I am neutral, and I do not take sides, but if he wants free userspace then why does he go here, he can go to Myspace and get a free user account there....... 04:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)