Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Gangs Portal

 __NOINDEX__
 * 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:  delete. I have subst'd it on the user's page. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Template:User Gangs Portal


Redundant. Portal:Gangs was deleted 3 months ago at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Gangs. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Procedural Keep - Wrong forum. Take to TFD.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:22, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Userbox templates come to MfD, not TfD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * @Robert McClenon: I used WP:Twinkle, which chose this venue. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 07:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Twinkle appears to know whether the template is a userbox. How does it do that?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak keep . A historic userbox on two inactive userpages.  If they return, the redlink will lead them to the relevant deletion discussion.  Consider substituting before deleting?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * @SmokeyJoe, this template is based on the premise that an editor can somehow be a "member" of a portal, which is an odd concept. A portal is a page not a club.
 * The two editors on whose user pages this template appears last edited in 2010 and 2011.
 * So why memorialise is a misconceived badge of affiliation to a deleted page, for editors who moved on a decade ago?
 * Sometimes Wikiedia's tendency to sweat the small and inconsequential stuff can be depressing. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 07:34, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The premise that the userpages of long inactive Wikipedian's is dangerous, if it means they are not valued then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy that they won't return. The nature of the wiki, of any wiki, is that old stuff gets preserved.  The advantage of that is that even mistakes get preserved, and the advantage of that is that mistakes can be forever learned from.  Preserving, without glorifying, is a good thing.  Reckless or careless deletion of things in other's userspace is a bad thing.
 * I agree that this userbox should never be used again, yes delete it. I've subst-ed the two transclusions.  Even if you want to edit out the subst-ed userbox, it will properly remain in the userpage history.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:01, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * subst and delete. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: no longer relevant. — Bilorv ( talk ) 08:16, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete No longer relevant or ever serving any productive purpose on Wikipedia. I also think the idea that altering Wikipedia is going to drive away people who left long ago is an incredibly childish belief. Those editors chose to leave Wikipedia many years ago and if they ever come back, an actual adult would understand that Wikipedia having changed even a little bit since they were gone isn't a personal attack on them. Newshunter12 (talk) 03:21, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * An incredibly childish belief? Had you wanted to be more insulting, how would you word that?
 * The notion is not that deleting useless userboxes drives anyone away. The notion  WP:Editors matter. It is that all editors past and present should be respected for their attempted contributions, to the limits of WP:AGF, and that a lack of respect for past efforts is damaging to them on their return, checking back in.
 * These two editors, authors of the deleted portal, thought they were contributing to Wikipedia. Hiding their edits from them, and disappearing the records from their userpages  is needlessly disrespectful.  Subst & delete means that you don't leave broken template tranclusions.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't a memorial to make any and every editor feel good about anything they touched, and an adult would realize that. The applicable portal MfD basically says their creation was crud and they dumped it soon after creating it and now you want us to powder their behinds with we love you anyway and want to honor you both forever? This is an encyclopedia, not a children's book group where every potential feeling is weighed and considered. Hence, WP:SPADE in regards to childishness. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:23, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't want to say another word that could be read as a defense of this Gangs portal stuff, my !vote already includes "delete", but...
 * Editors matters, and respect for editors is almost as important as the product itself, and is an essential part of Wikipedia. Calling me incredible childish I read as an intended plain insult on your part.  It is not civil, which is a part of WP:SPADE.
 * Also, userspace is not an encyclopedia. Cleaning userspace does not improve mainspace.
 * Funny that you are unusually aggressively insulting following your engagement in several Portal MfDs. Like with BHG, I think this is evidence that dealing with Portal junk is aggravating, understandably aggravating.  Thanks for engaging with them, it has been too disturbing for me, but please don't call me incredibly childish.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced on substituting but I do find the above comments by very disrespectful and needlessly rude. I want to thank the authors of the portal for their contributions to the site, which are greatly appreciated whether or not they ever do return to the site. — Bilorv ( talk ) 08:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I’m not superconvinced either. What I dislike is looking at old versions and finding broken templates.  So maybe subst, cut the subst-ed userboxes, deleted the userbox templates.  I’d say that but I fear the next ridiculing comment. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Neutral - Tempest, meet the teapot that you're in. Teapot, meet the tempest that you are housing.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2019 (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.