FANDOM


Deletion of user page

Dictionary through lens

Through a lens darkly

Please let me know where I should file a request for my user page deletion to be undone. Vapmachado 00:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


For what purpose? When you do not participate in wiktionary, there is no reason to have a user page. Wiktionary is a dictionary, not a web page hosting site. --EncycloPetey 00:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


My sincerest apologies. I had no idea there was a requirement of a certain number of edits to be entitled to have a user page in this Wikimedia project. I never heard of such requirement in any other Wikimedia project. If you would be so kind as to direct me to the policy where such requirement was approved by the Wiktionary community, I'll be most obliged and I'll certainly evaluate my meager capabilities vis-a-vis the task of fulfilling it. If and when I meet that requirement where and/or to whom should I apply to have a user page? Do you have a review, censorship board or peer review system for user pages?
I'm a bit surprised by the content and tone of your answer. The administrator that deleted my user page wrote that the reason was "vanity page". I assumed that he personally didn't like the content of my user page. My participation in this project was not questioned. Would there be any other objections from other editors?
All my user pages, pretty much standard fare in all Wikimedia projects in the English language, where created to enable my participation in any project as the occasion arises and to allow others to know me, if the need for some contact occurred.
Warmest regards,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 01:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


Wiktionary does not rely on endless written policy, in the way that Wikipedia does. We do have a draft / guideline at Wiktionary:Usernames and user pages, but do delete user pages as "vanity pages" when the editor does not participate, for the reasons previously described. --EncycloPetey 01:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


Thank you so very much for you kind attention. I reviewed very carefully your guideline at Wiktionary:Usernames and user pages and I am convinced that my user page met squarely all the stated criteria. If you have access to my deleted user page, please be so kind as to enlightening me as to where I have failed. If not, you may access my user page in any other Wikimedia project. They are all similar in content and appearance. You do refer again to "participation". Could you be more specific? Where is participation in Wiktionary defined and/or quantified? Forgive me for my insistence, but how does a user knows when he has "participated" enough to be entitled to have a user page in Wiktionary? I'm very sorry you didn't consider my motives to have a user page in Wiktionary to be worthy of such a privilege. Let me assure you that had I learned that such requirement existed I would had make sure I met it before creating my so called "vanity page" or would have simply passed Wiktionary. It was never my intention to trouble one of the project administrators with the deletion of my page and mostly you with this lengthy exchange about nothing. Let me assure you that I was very pleased and flattered when I saw my user page classified as a "vanity page". That is certainly a compliment that I strongly recommend that you continue to use. It does encourage people to participate in Wiktionary, making them feel right at home and most welcome.
Warmest regards,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 02:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


The only edits you have made in this project are the creation of your user page and in these requests to have it restored after deletion. That is not "participation". You created your user page in July of 2008, but have made no contributions to Wiktionary content at any time in the nearly two years since then. --EncycloPetey 02:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


So what? What is your point? Did you think I didn't know that? You should give me a bit more credit. Was there any claim on my part that I had made any other kind of edits in Wiktionary? If so, please show me where. Please, point it out to me. Again, and for the third time, does Wiktionary has or not an objective criteria of participation entitling an editor to have a user page? Again, "Let me assure you that had I learned that such requirement existed I would had make sure I met it before creating my so called "vanity page" or would have simply passed Wiktionary." Let me also point out to you that Wiktionary is stirring things up by deleting user pages and calling those users, albeit indirectly, "vain". That is way beyond addressing anybody in a civilized manner. That's certainly not to be expected from persons with a higher education who live in civilized societies. But I digress. Please let me know if Wiktionary has an objective criteria of participation entitling an editor to have a user page or restore my user page. I might even entertain the thought of contributing to Wiktionary.
Warmest regards,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 04:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


Re "I reviewed very carefully your guideline at Wiktionary:Usernames and user pages and I am convinced that my user page met squarely all the stated criteria": No. The first criterion is that user pages "should be constructive toward the goals of Wiktionary". Yours was not. (I can see deleted pages.) While some of the information you give on the page is very relevant on a Wiktionary editor's user page (e.g., the information about what languages you speak) and some of it may be relevant on a Wiktionary editor's user page (e.g., your professional training and profession, which may be relevant to the content of the user's edits), you're no Wiktionary editor. However, you now say "I might even entertain the thought of contributing to Wiktionary". That'd be nice. If you do wind up a Wiktionary editor, let me know (I won't keep an eye out) and I'll personally and with pleasure restore your user page. (Or you can in that case restore it yourself, inasmuch as you claim — I haven't checked — that your user page is similar to that on other projects.) All the best.​—msh210 15:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


Fine. Tell me how many edits you want me to do and a deadline.
Warmest regards,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 04:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


It would be a judgment call. We like quality work and enthusiasm. Michael Z. 2010-04-09 05:24 z


I am not able to see what it was in the "vanity page" (can't see deleted pages without restoring, am I missing something?). Some users may prefer to fix their user pages, state some goals or introduce themselves but two years of inactivity and no previous activity is too long, I wouldn't blame the person for deleting it. Some users only create user pages after many edits or are not bothered at all. In my opinion, a user page should state user's language skills, if the only language is English, it should say so. --Anatoli 05:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


His user page is a complete résumé, a curriculum vitae, including telephone numbers, hobbies, education, likes, dislikes, the whole shmear. It is a Wikipedia-style vanity page. We don’t make pages like that here. If he wants to edit Portuguese entries on a regular basis from now on, perhaps 50 edits per month, then a user page that lists language skills and country of origin would be okay. But he wants to list his autobiography and doesn’t want to make any further edits after he gets permission to have the page. —Stephen 08:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


He-he. Wiktionary definitely shouldn't serve as a place to post résumés or something like that. --Anatoli 13:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


I'm no longer a bit surprised by the content and tone of your answers, which now cover the following:
1) Derogatory, false, repeated and badly worded comments (His user page is a complete résumé, a curriculum vitae, including telephone numbers, hobbies, education, likes, dislikes, the whole shmear.)
2) A discriminatory remark based on country of origin (If he wants to edit Portuguese entries on a regular basis from now on, perhaps 50 edits per month, then a user page that lists language skills and country of origin would be okay.)
3) False and baseless comments (he wants to list his autobiography and doesn’t want to make any further edits after he gets permission to have the page.)
4) Despicable laughter (He-he.)
You "like quality work and enthusiasm"? So do I. What a shame that you feel entitle to express your opinions about your likes and I'm not allowed to do the same.
Two years are nothing compared to current human life expectancy. "Too long" is a subjective opinion.
You're all so smart. How come you're unable to answer a simple and direct question:
a) What is Wiktionary criteria of participation entitling an editor to have a user page?
(Sorry I'm not asking for anybody's personal opinion.)
Even when I tried to make it easier, so far nobody has given a straight answer:
b) Tell me how many edits you want me to do and a deadline.
(Watch for what you write concerning beginning and continued edits, before someone starts deleting a lot of user pages. Despite your thousands of edits, eventually both you and your user page will both be deleted. I wonder if you will have anybody left to care or be bothered by that.)
Hint: Anybody wants to risk being completely honest and straightforward about what is really going on here? Please feel free to use "E-mail this user."
Warmest regards,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
Vapmachado 02:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


None of our admins is naive enough to send a direct e-mail to someone whose only edits are wiki-lawyering. Since you seem to be disruptive only, and not show any actual inclination contributing to Wiktionary (despite the hint that we could bribe you into a small token bit of editing before going completely inactive again), your account will be blocked if you continue to do nothing but argue. The community has more important things to do than respond to pointless arguing, empty whining, and wiki-lawyering. --EncycloPetey 02:41, 10 April 2010 (UTC)