Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User hate CCP

 __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:  reword and rename. There is a consensus that this userbox is not appropriate as it is. There is, however, no consensus to delete it. Voters split exactly halfway between wanting to delete it and wanting to keep it in some form. Personally, I find arguments that this userbox violates WP:SOAPBOX and WP:UPNOT compelling, but cannot find a consensus to delete solely on this basis when the global consensus is that political userboxes are okay when not incendiary.

Obviously, there is a consensus that this one is incendiary; more than three quarters of participants expressed this opinion. A majority took exception specifically to the word "hate" rather than the general practice of expressing dislike toward something political. Because there was no consensus to delete and those who supported deletion will probably support it as a second choice, I find a consensus to reword this userbox. I have chosen the word "opposes," although if anybody wants to replace it with something else, that is fine, as long as it is similarly inoffensive. I will leave a note on each transcluder's talk page informing them of this change so that they may further modify the template and/or their user page as they desire. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Template:User hate CCP

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

WP:UBCR and WP:POLEMIC. Divisive userbox. Broc (talk) 08:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. The word 'hate' should not appear in userboxes.—Alalch E. 09:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I lean to supporting this, but not without limit. A userbox might mention hate without expressing or advocating hate.
 * There are several transcluders. The transcluders should be advised of this discussion. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping to the transcluders of this userbox:           -- Broc (talk) 07:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ,, specifically pinging people who are likely to !vote in a certain way is WP:VOTESTACKING. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 21:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No, it is not. The proposal is to alter these people’s userpages, altering their self-introductions, with an allegation that they are doing something wrong. There are therefore key stakeholders. Their contribution here is not to vote, but to explain, or defend. If the userbox is deleted, they may be accused of disruption if they put a similar back. This outcome is an obvious failing of natural justice. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I’ve not found the input of any of the transcluders to be persuasive. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If like to ask them, what is it about the CCP that they hate. Then, I’m sure it can be improved by an edit. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - Hate of a political class of tyrants should not be equated with a group of individuals. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * How is a party which counts 98 million members not "a group of individuals"? Broc (talk) 07:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Dislike towards an organization (that has done "things") is different than hating millions of Chinese. I didn't think the word "hate" should immediately be construed as divisive. I didn't think "hating" the Nazi Party or ISIS is violating WP:UBCR. &maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   11:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, now read the userbox as "This user hates the US Republican Party". Do you still consider it non-divisive? If the template said "oppose" I would have no problem with it, but hate is a different thing. Broc (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: My usage of the anti-CCP infobox isn't of any malice towards Chinese culture or society at all, but as a protest against the party's omnipresent dominance and human rights violations that led to a moral decline within the country's political state, if not with China altogether. This includes but is not limited to Mao Zedong's cult of personality (similar with Joseph Stalin's), several massacres (Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Red August, the Tiananmen massacre and suppression of its discussion and the related), declining human and Internet rights, and other forms of crimes against humanity. That's what I hate about the party and its impact; I believe other users with the infobox aren't drastically different in motive. The party's slogan is "Serve the People", but it only serves itself, of a code not revealed to anyone with any sympathy. I wouldn't be anti-communist in the first place if all of this never happened. My use of this infobox is not light, and it speaks out for the preservation of common sense and human dignity. Carlinal (talk) 13:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Wording Change: I am a Hong Konger, and this template sums up a large part about my childhood in the city, so I'm definitely against deleting the template entirely (please see Hong Kong-Mainland China conflict). I personally have no problem using the word "hate" towards a political organization that has no respect for human rights whatsoever, but I can understand why some would feel problematic about this. So, I would be fine if the template is re-worded to take out the word "hate" but keep much of the meaning, something along the lines of: "This user strongly condemns the CCP (for its gross violations of human rights)". TeddyRoosevelt1912 (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose for being more divisive than the current wording. NasssaNser 00:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * How is "strongly condemns" more divisive than "hates"? Broc (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete. It is disruptive to use userspace or projectspace as a WP:SOAPBOX. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 21:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Not to move away from focus on this infobox, but with several more examples and an entire category's worth of similarly politically charged infoboxes, how exactly does this one cross the line? Carlinal (talk) 00:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This userbox being nominated doesn't mean it's special, it was just the one that happened to be nominated. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 01:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the place for this; WP:SOAPBOX per above. Uhai (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a venue for expressing hate. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Pppery. No opposition to articulated nuanced criticisms, but clumsy hate is not ok. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Wikipedia is not the venue for this divisiveness, and there is nothing positive that can come from this crude criticism. —Matrix(!) { user - talk? - uselesscontributions } 17:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Hate is a strong word, so in the state it was nominated in, i'd have to agree! But this userbox is not unfixable! We are wikipedians! We can edit!. I think it would be a good choice to change the wording on this userbox, and change the name of the template. Possibly to something along the lines of "This user is opposed to the policies of the Chinese Communist Party" and the template name to "User oppose CCP"? Samoht27 (talk) 18:55, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Reword. Most just have a problem with the word "hate". Change it into "strongly condemns" or even "dislikes" would fix it. If you genuinely think all political userboxes violate WP:SOAPBOX, it would be more prudent to start a discussion on the talk page of the policy first. Northern Moonlight 00:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Reword: Easy to fix with "rejects", "dislikes", "condemns" or whatever. Cambalachero (talk) 04:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment CCP-related discussions tend to make highly heated Chinese language debates, more so when it's between a Mainlander and a non-Mainlander. NasssaNser 11:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment to those suggesting a rewording: is it fair to reword userboxes? The user who added it to their user page might not have meant it with the new wording. Broc (talk) 14:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It's usually fair unless the changes are sweeping, most suggested rewording would change it in a way where the meaning is retained. I think this scenario rewording would be a viable option. Samoht27 (talk) 16:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Changing "User hates X" to "User dislikes X" is not the same as "User hates X" to "User loves X". Cambalachero (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:SOAPBOX. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 02:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Reword "Hate" to "Opposes" per User:Winhunter/Userboxes/CCP. If you have those that support then there are going to be those who oppose. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom.  thetechie@enwiki  :  ~/talk/  $  02:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - I was going to support rewording however Broc's point regarding the user may not wanting this is spot on, Someone can easily recreate this with "opposes" instead of "hate". – Davey 2010 Talk 12:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Nobody "owns" the content of Wikipedia, and that includes userboxes. If a larger community discussion decides that a userbox should be phrased some other way and the original maker does not like it, too bad for him. Deleting a userbox to create a similar userbox elsewhere would require to replace all uses of that userbox, and why go with all that trouble when it can be simply rewritten? Cambalachero (talk) 01:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Reword per above. It's unnecessary to recreate. It would also be more disruptive for this box to suddenly disappear from multiple user's pages into an error message than for its wording to just change. Meanwhile, we should just notify all users of this userbox through their talk pages. Air on White (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2024 (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.