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.
This essay itself, ironically, is disruptive, as people have been quoting it in assorted arguments around Wikipedia as though it's some sort of policy. Time for it to go away.
Jtrainor (
talk)
19:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep, and TBAN filer from XfD. A cursory review of their recent nominations shows that the vast majority of what they nominate is kept, indicating a clear ignorance of things like BEFORE. Nominations seem to be solely
WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and this is another example. Exactly zero evidence has been provided to support the nom's vague assertions it's "disruptive". How would you even know, Jtrainor, considering your last edit before this was in January?
Trainsandotherthings (
talk)
19:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
I've seen your AfD nominations in the past. You'll find my analysis entirely correct. This should be procedurally closed as you haven't even provided a valid reason to delete.
Trainsandotherthings (
talk)
20:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep, obviously. If an essay is mistakenly quoted as policy, that's not the essay's fault. It clearly indicates at the top that it is an essay. Not a valid reason for deletion.--
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
20:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. As Pawnking says, misuse of an essay is not the fault of the essay. In any case, "Hate is disruptive" is a pretty anodyne sentiment to want to argue against. It's right in line with civility, the
fourth pillar. If the nom really disagrees with the idea, they are free to write up a response essay in line with their own attitudes. I would personally be very interested in seeing what the title is. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)20:41, 20 October 2022 (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.
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.
This essay itself, ironically, is disruptive, as people have been quoting it in assorted arguments around Wikipedia as though it's some sort of policy. Time for it to go away.
Jtrainor (
talk)
19:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep, and TBAN filer from XfD. A cursory review of their recent nominations shows that the vast majority of what they nominate is kept, indicating a clear ignorance of things like BEFORE. Nominations seem to be solely
WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and this is another example. Exactly zero evidence has been provided to support the nom's vague assertions it's "disruptive". How would you even know, Jtrainor, considering your last edit before this was in January?
Trainsandotherthings (
talk)
19:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
I've seen your AfD nominations in the past. You'll find my analysis entirely correct. This should be procedurally closed as you haven't even provided a valid reason to delete.
Trainsandotherthings (
talk)
20:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep, obviously. If an essay is mistakenly quoted as policy, that's not the essay's fault. It clearly indicates at the top that it is an essay. Not a valid reason for deletion.--
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
20:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. As Pawnking says, misuse of an essay is not the fault of the essay. In any case, "Hate is disruptive" is a pretty anodyne sentiment to want to argue against. It's right in line with civility, the
fourth pillar. If the nom really disagrees with the idea, they are free to write up a response essay in line with their own attitudes. I would personally be very interested in seeing what the title is. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)20:41, 20 October 2022 (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.