Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Поль Крол Злой Диктатор/Userboxes/Andropov

 __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:  speedy delete.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 21:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

User:Поль Крол Злой Диктатор/Userboxes/Andropov

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Created by a user known for pushing Soviet/Russian propaganda, the sole purpose of this minimally used, rather bizarre userbox is to glorify Yuri Andropov as the only "normal" (hardcore Stalinist) Soviet leader since the death of Stalin in 1953. —Sundostund (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete pro-authoritarian tankiebox, but more importantly who actually cares enough about this guy to use this thing? No-one, as it turns out. Dronebogus (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't be so rough; obviously, the tankie who created this userbox cares very much about Andropov ;) —Sundostund (talk) 22:07, 12 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete unless someone here can define the word "normal" which has no agreed upon definition. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment IMHO, in this context the word "normal" is an anti-revisionist POV. Its intention is to present Soviet leaders from Stalin to Andropov as being "not normal", for not adhering to the principles of hardcore Stalinism, and being revisionists instead. —Sundostund (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Bizarre, useless, unused, and likely intended to be an endorsement of Andropov's Stalin-esque policies.  Vanilla  Wizard  💙 19:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Misuse of Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 00:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - some users here seem to be unaware that Wikipedia has these things called "policies". Most of the reasons outlined above fit neatly within an arbitrary "do-not-like-it"ness and not within any serious reasons as to why this userbox should be deleted. If you are apparently so upset by a userbox promoting a national leader of a country that no longer exists, I implore you to get to work on some articles - Supreme Soviet of the National Economy is in quite a sorry state for a such key agency in the USSR. But until then, "pro-authoritarian", "not-defined", "bizzare" - these are not reasons to delete anything and there are indeed quite a few userboxes that tick any of these categories, yet curiously receive no attention from the anti-"tankiebox" crusaders. Perhaps channel your apparent recentism into something productive, rather than destructive? EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 14:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Wow, that’s condescending. Have you heard of WP:UBX and WP:IAR? Dronebogus (talk) 19:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Glad you noticed. Now if you only employed IAR in a proper manner instead of weaponizing it to remove content you personally seem to disagree with (and seem to be, by all indication, especially concerning the language used, on a crusade against), and also noticed that WP:UBX is not policy, we could maybe get somewhere. All the best. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Guideline, whatever. Stop Wikilawyering. And how exactly am I supposed to use IAR “in a proper manner”? Your comments here seem to be intended to WP:ABF, make WP:personal attacks, and make a WP:POINT against users you think aren’t engaging in the “right” areas of the wiki. Why don’t you “get to work on some articles” and “channel your apparent recentism into something productive” instead of making passive aggressive comments on subjects you supposedly don’t care about? Especially considering you’ve made a grand total of 285 edits since 2020. Dronebogus (talk) 20:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I can see you might consider basic competence in Wikipedia regulations to be "wikilawyering". Good faith has its limits, just like any policy, and when your primary stated reason for a deletion is "pro-authoritarian tankiebox", well, that's well beyond said good faith. I'd like to see where exactly I have made personal attacks against you - pointing out your misconduct and suggesting better avenues for your collective interests are not by any measure personal attacks. I can see you have not actually thoroughly read WP:POINT, so I invite you to do so, as to not misuse it again. If you're quite done with your gish gallop of pointlessly bringing up policy in invalid contexts (I believe there's a term for that - "wikilaw... something", anyway...), then we can either move onto discussing why this completely harmless infobox deserves to be purged, other than that you do not personally agree with its sentiment and you don't think it's quite that useful. If we can't do that, I suggest you take a breather, relax a bit, put things in perspective. It'll do you some good. PS. Bringing up someone's edit count to prove a point is frankly pathetic and I would rethink that tactic if I were you. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * How is it “pathetic” when you’re admonishing everyone else to do more mainspace editing when you have barely done any yourself?! 44% of your 280something edits are classified as “small” which doesn’t exactly scream “great article writer”. Dronebogus (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not "admonishing" you for not doing enough mainspace editing, I'm simply suggesting productive rather than destructive avenues for your interest in Soviet history - I'm sure there is no other reason for why you would be deleting this userbox, no? PS. Doubling down on it doesn't help, friend. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I’m not particularly interested in this, I’m just going through boxes created by a disruptive user. Dronebogus (talk) 20:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * We delete content based on the content, not on the user who created said content. I thought this went without saying? EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:40, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Their content is disruptive. And it’s their only real editing, so WP:NOTHERE Dronebogus (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If the content is disruptive, why don't you go ahead and tell us how? All you've offered is an ideological argument and that "nobody cares" - that is  what I would classify as being disruptive, not making an infobox praising a long-gone leader of a now-nonexistent state. WP:NOTHERE is not a content guideline - it is a user conduct guideline and does not permit you to unilaterally declare all of that user's content disruptive by-association. I thought we were done with misusing policy? EuanHolewicz432 (talk) EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Previous deletion discussions have established that supporting Stalinism is unacceptable content for a userbox Dronebogus (talk) 20:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * "Stalinism" is not a concrete concept that one could "support". Deletion consensus is established per-case and what is indeed unacceptable is deriving a broader consensus than has been obtained. Deletion discussions establish consensus for deleting content - not for what is acceptable or unacceptable content - that is derived from Wikipedia policy. To say otherwise would be untenable and frankly illogical. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 20:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

The incivility and condescension is not appreciated. No offense is intended by this, but a very new user such as yourself shouldn't be making attacks along the lines of some users here seem to be unaware that Wikipedia has these things called "policies". Our !votes here are consistent with the relevant guidelines for deleting userboxes, specifically WP:UBCR and WP:UP. See Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for: Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind (commercial, political, religious, or otherwise) and In addition, there is broad agreement that you may not include in your user space material that is likely to bring the project into disrepute, or which is likely to give widespread offense. There is precedent for deleting userboxes that are considered sufficiently useless, too. Your other comments, such as If you are apparently so upset by a userbox promoting a national leader of a country that no longer exists, I implore you to get to work on some articles - Supreme Soviet of the National Economy is in quite a sorry state for a such key agency in the USSR reek of WP:Other stuff exists and WP:NOTCOMPULSORY. Familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies before patronizing others over their perceived lack of familiarity with them.  Vanilla  Wizard  💙 02:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)


 * They’re not new, they’ve been here about as long as me. They’re inactive. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, of course, but you can’t do practically nothing to build an encyclopedia then chastise others for not building an encyclopedia. Dronebogus (talk) 05:29, 18 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Not offensive or disruptive. Userboxes are given wide leeway. AusLondonder (talk) 13:20, 22 April 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.