- 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: keep. The offending text has been removed, I don’t know why we need to keep this open indefinitely (non-admin closure) Dronebogus ( talk) 21:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Laughs at userbox
Needlessly inflammatory userbox inconsistent with the purposes of a collaborative project, per WP:UBCR. So-and-so "is harmful" went here. Unless it is the purpose to encourage a series of similar, e.g. 'This user laughs at Muslims and their terrorist ways'/'This user laughs at Jews and their moneylending ways'/'This user laughs at African Americans and their watermelon ways'.... how is it helpful for users to advertise their desires to laugh at other users based on differences, whatever their creed... might as well replace laugh with taunt or harass when they're at it. The Middle E 🐫 ( talk) 21:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Divisive content in userspace is counterproductive to a collaborative environment.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
21:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Following the change, I would like to reiterate my delete. This userbox is still divisive and harmful to a collaborative environment. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as quite inflammatory and divisive. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 21:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
:Delete I’m an atheist and I think this is funny for the wrong reasons (as if there’s right ones?). If a userbox makes you laugh at a user who has it it’s not conducive to a respectful environment. Keep post-edit as the original rationale is invalid, which I think should be grounds for speedy closure.
Dronebogus (
talk)
00:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I have rewritten the userbox content so that it no longer constitutes an attack. If the changed userbox is now permissible, and the creator (who has recently edited and does not appear to be blocked) voices acceptance for this change, then I support a Keep. If the creator does not comment on the change, or responds in opposition to this revisal, then I would support Delete.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
17:36, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Would like to additionally note that the move of this MfD from Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/subst:User:Dwscomet/My userbox creations/AntiAtheism to the current title, while amusing, appears to break the functionality of the WP:XFDVOTE tool, which initially resulted in my comment on the discussion being posted to the redirect page rather than this discussion page. Thankfully I caught this error, and manually removed and reposted my comment in the proper location.
- I've sought to fix this issue by linking directly to the discussion's current location in the MfD template on the userbox page, so hopefully no one else should have any issue voting with the XFD voting tool now, but I would like to voice that due to the discovery of this technical error in the tool, I would personally discourage users from making page moves of any other XFD discussions (which shouldn't generally be necessary anyhow). It would be pretty embarrassing and bothersome for everyone involved if someone's comment on a discussion got overlooked because it was left on a redirect page instead of the actual discussion. silvia ( User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 05:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment
The middle e, is there a reason you didn't notify the page creator about this discussion? That is typically done in deletion discussions and I think it is even more important when you are proposing that one of their User pages be deleted. They might have an opinion that is important to add to this discussion.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
07:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- What it looks like to me is that they did not use
Twinkle to MfD the page, which would have meant that the creator didn't get automatically notified, and did not notify the user manually after the fact. If
Dwscomet didn't know that this page was being nominated for deletion, that certainly would put a damper on my suggestion that we decide based on their response. I'll go and leave them a notification.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
07:36, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've gone and notified the userbox creator. silvia ( User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 07:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- What it looks like to me is that they did not use
Twinkle to MfD the page, which would have meant that the creator didn't get automatically notified, and did not notify the user manually after the fact. If
Dwscomet didn't know that this page was being nominated for deletion, that certainly would put a damper on my suggestion that we decide based on their response. I'll go and leave them a notification.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
07:36, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Users are allowed to say things about themselves on their own talk page within reason. BusterD ( talk) 07:36, 19 December 2022 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- 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: keep. The offending text has been removed, I don’t know why we need to keep this open indefinitely (non-admin closure) Dronebogus ( talk) 21:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Laughs at userbox
Needlessly inflammatory userbox inconsistent with the purposes of a collaborative project, per WP:UBCR. So-and-so "is harmful" went here. Unless it is the purpose to encourage a series of similar, e.g. 'This user laughs at Muslims and their terrorist ways'/'This user laughs at Jews and their moneylending ways'/'This user laughs at African Americans and their watermelon ways'.... how is it helpful for users to advertise their desires to laugh at other users based on differences, whatever their creed... might as well replace laugh with taunt or harass when they're at it. The Middle E 🐫 ( talk) 21:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Divisive content in userspace is counterproductive to a collaborative environment.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
21:43, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Following the change, I would like to reiterate my delete. This userbox is still divisive and harmful to a collaborative environment. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as quite inflammatory and divisive. — Sundostund mppria ( talk / contribs) 21:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
:Delete I’m an atheist and I think this is funny for the wrong reasons (as if there’s right ones?). If a userbox makes you laugh at a user who has it it’s not conducive to a respectful environment. Keep post-edit as the original rationale is invalid, which I think should be grounds for speedy closure.
Dronebogus (
talk)
00:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I have rewritten the userbox content so that it no longer constitutes an attack. If the changed userbox is now permissible, and the creator (who has recently edited and does not appear to be blocked) voices acceptance for this change, then I support a Keep. If the creator does not comment on the change, or responds in opposition to this revisal, then I would support Delete.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
17:36, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Would like to additionally note that the move of this MfD from Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/subst:User:Dwscomet/My userbox creations/AntiAtheism to the current title, while amusing, appears to break the functionality of the WP:XFDVOTE tool, which initially resulted in my comment on the discussion being posted to the redirect page rather than this discussion page. Thankfully I caught this error, and manually removed and reposted my comment in the proper location.
- I've sought to fix this issue by linking directly to the discussion's current location in the MfD template on the userbox page, so hopefully no one else should have any issue voting with the XFD voting tool now, but I would like to voice that due to the discovery of this technical error in the tool, I would personally discourage users from making page moves of any other XFD discussions (which shouldn't generally be necessary anyhow). It would be pretty embarrassing and bothersome for everyone involved if someone's comment on a discussion got overlooked because it was left on a redirect page instead of the actual discussion. silvia ( User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 05:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment
The middle e, is there a reason you didn't notify the page creator about this discussion? That is typically done in deletion discussions and I think it is even more important when you are proposing that one of their User pages be deleted. They might have an opinion that is important to add to this discussion.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
07:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- What it looks like to me is that they did not use
Twinkle to MfD the page, which would have meant that the creator didn't get automatically notified, and did not notify the user manually after the fact. If
Dwscomet didn't know that this page was being nominated for deletion, that certainly would put a damper on my suggestion that we decide based on their response. I'll go and leave them a notification.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
07:36, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've gone and notified the userbox creator. silvia ( User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) ( inquire within) 07:45, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- What it looks like to me is that they did not use
Twinkle to MfD the page, which would have meant that the creator didn't get automatically notified, and did not notify the user manually after the fact. If
Dwscomet didn't know that this page was being nominated for deletion, that certainly would put a damper on my suggestion that we decide based on their response. I'll go and leave them a notification.
silvia (
User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (
inquire within)
07:36, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Users are allowed to say things about themselves on their own talk page within reason. BusterD ( talk) 07:36, 19 December 2022 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.