Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Andrew Davidson/Glossary

 __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:  keep. Withdrawn by nom, clear consensus to Keep (non-admin closure) Britishfinance (talk) 16:40, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Andrew Davidson/Glossary

 * – (View MfD)

This is a list of negative personality traits, several of them originating in clinical psychology, with "deletionist" thrown in to smear a group of Wikipedia editors that the author doesn't like as being in the same list as "fanatics", "sadists" and "psychopaths". The fact that Huns is linked somewhat carelessly (that article is about the ancient ethnic group, not the slang term for a belligerent person or the ethnic slur) indicates he just took whatever negative-sounding words relating to people's supposed "personality types" without a care for whether they actually are used by psychologists. This is essentially an attack page since "deletionist" really stands out, but the reason it stands out to me might be because I'm one of the editors Andrew most frequently smears with that label, so bringing it here rather than requesting speedy deletion. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 02:16, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn. Some of the keep !votes are reasonable and made in good faith, and even though they are in the minority on the keep side they currently outnumber the delete !votes. And I don't need the revenge harassment that Andrew, Thirteen, and Lightburst have been subject me to in response to this nomination. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:37, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not engaged in "revenge harassment." I deny the accusation.  It is just another example of User:Hijiri88's continued WP:Hounding of me and other editors.  That being said, I agree that this nomination has been withdrawn.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:45, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, given the fact that Hijiri88 has been called disruptive, paranoid, a troll, a liar, slimy, a stalker, and vain by participants in this MfD I can't really blame him for feeling harassed. I hope the closing administrator takes note, but I strongly suspect it'll be another case of inclusionists being allowed to say what they like about people while everyone else has to walk on eggshells. Reyk YO! 14:55, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Jesus Christ ... I didn't even notice WW's hideous remark about me below -- I don't know what this editor's problem is with me, given that we've disagreed with the past but I don't even recall as much and it was infrequent; also, needless to say they've never edited an MFD before. No idea how they found this but I wouldn't be surprised if there were canvassing involved. Or perhaps it's slow-motion hounding of me -- they made some pretty inappropriate remarks about me on ANI over a year ago, and all of those interactions were on pages I had edited first. I hope whoever closes this discussion takes note of this. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 16:32, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I too reject the unfounded personal attacks of Hijiri88. Please accept your WP:TROUT for your disruption and follow it up with humble pie. I also accept your withdrawal of this frivolous MfD. Lightburst (talk) 02:04, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I would very much appreciate it if whoever closes this discussion would address the harassment that the above editor has been subjecting me to both here and at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hijiri88, where he is supporting the maintenance of an attack page that contains no useful information except an IP I used (in violation of our privacy policy). I would also request that they do it quickly -- I withdrew my nomination to protect myself from more attacks almost two days ago. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 02:47, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You withdrew because this is a snow keep. And the other opinions on your other MfD is not in your favor either. FYI: nobody has attacked you. A !vote is not an attack. I find interacting with you very unpleasant so I will leave these two MfDs. Please take the advise of Worldywise. It would benefit everyone concerned. Mostly yourself. Lightburst (talk) 02:55, 5 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reasons appear to be verging on paranoia.  Hijiri 88, how did you find this page?  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:58, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * How is that relevant? (FWIW, I occasionally keep an eye on Andrew's edits, since I've noticed a number of disruptive patterns in his AFD !votes, include attacks on other editors and copy-pasting lists of books he Googled up without actually reading. Not really germane to this discussion, mind you.) Also, questioning the mental state of people who disagree with you is not appropriate. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 05:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, would you mind changing your !vote here now that an SPI clerk has endorsed deletion? If you did that, it wouldn't bother me so much that you're undermining me elsewhere on the project and calling me "paranoid" for requesting deletion of a user page that essentially claims "deletionism" is a mental disorder. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 05:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit and so we naturally attract a variety of types; good, bad and indifferent.  The page in question was prompted by some recent discussions at a conference for another hobby of mine, about problematic people who had caused trouble for their local circle.  We need to cope with such in order to survive and that must start with some understanding.  The page is currently just a list of links to relevant articles.  By reading these, we may develop such understanding, but it's just an early draft and so is a work-in-progress.  The nominator seems much further forward in such work as they have several sections on their user page where they discuss other types of editor.  These include:
 * Response to off-wiki criticism by disturbingly racist editors
 * Random observations such as "New accounts ...should never be allowed close discussions"; "Admins who show severe misunderstanding of our policies, and of the limits of their own admin tools, should be desysopped immediately."; "Editors who want to pass their GA reviews so badly that they make vicious personal attacks..."
 * Pet peeves including "Admins who attack non-admins for..."; "Editors showing up to RMs..."; "Admins who choose to treat editors they don't like as..."
 * List of editors who have hounded me
 * Per WP:SAUCE, the nominator should explain why their extensive and specific commentary on other editors is acceptable while the page in question is not. Andrew D. (talk) 10:38, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Nowhere on my user page or in any of my subpages to I insinuate that certain "types" of editors suffer from a mental illness, and in fact much of the commentary on my user page is how I dislike these "labels". If you think finding disturbingly racist editors harassing you off-wiki ... disturbing is on par with questioning the sanity of people who disagree with you in a few AFDs, then I seriously question your competence to continue editing Wikipedia. (Do you think it's cool for racist editors to open a forum discussion speculating about my ethnicity? What exactly is wrong with describing my ethnic background on my user page to discredit them?) Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 11:15, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Additionally, the claim that "deletionists" (not an identifiable group of people but just people Andrew happens to disagree with at one time or another) are problematic people who had caused trouble for their local circle is highly offensive. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 11:23, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete- I 100% guarantee that I'd be facing a pitchfork mob at ANI if I started a page consisting of the following:
 * Compulsive hoarding
 * Crapflood
 * Falsification of evidence
 * Inclusionist
 * Lying
 * Sockpuppet (internet)
 * Stalker
 * Troll
 * It's clearly in violation of WP:POLEMIC in that it deliberately and explicitly equates so-called "deletionists" with book-burning nazis and internet trolls. Reyk YO! 13:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Reyk has just posted his list of supposedly dangerous words here and I'm not seeing a pitchfork mob. Is he suggesting that this MfD page should now be deleted too?  Me, I see words like this all the time at AfD and elsewhere and so it goes. Andrew D. (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Are you being deliberately obtuse, or can't you help yourself? Reyk YO!</b> 14:56, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pitchfork mobs are everywhere. But seriously, mob rule should not govern freedom of thought or expression, unless we have a clear policy and a clear and valid reason.  Nothing like that exists here.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 17:09, 2 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep the nominating editor is WP:FOLLOWING and it is not collegial. The nominator often !votes at AfDs like this. Note: not even a !vote just a WP:PA. FYI: whatever Andrew D has on his user page is not WP:POLEMIC in any way, and never mentions the paranoid editor. Not everything is about the nominator; as Carley Simon has said "You're so Vain." Lightburst (talk) 14:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that the above editor has been repeatedly called out for hounding me; the irony of him somehow managing to show up here to accuse me of "following" (his first ever MFD edit, followed closely by this) would be hilarious if it weren't so wrong. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 15:43, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: the fiction being peddled by the nominator. I have twice taken the nominator to WP:ANI for the same type of WP:HOUNDING behaviors that the editor is employing against Andrew D. The WP:NOTTHERE behavior of the nominator is maddening. At the risk of having this disruptive nominator start WP:FOLLOWING me again, I am speaking up. Lightburst (talk) 15:50, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * WP:Snowball Keep. by and large, WP:User page is a thing apart from regular encyclopedia pages.  Those who are complaining seem to think the page is about them.  It's not about you, and no one has mentioned you.  Other than you, that is.  The Thought Police ought not to be successful here.  WP:Not censored.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 14:29, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment It would be hard to say this nominator created item is not about Andrew D as well. It was created at roughly the same time as this MfD and is a tacit admission of the non-collegial WP:FOLLOWING of Andrew D. Lightburst (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Look at the following edit summary. But again, what does that have to do with whether User:Andrew Davidson/Glossary should be kept or deleted? Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 16:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep for now, because apparently I don't understand what User:Hijiri88 finds personally offensive about this oddball list. Maybe User:Andrew Davidson put this out there to see if anyone was looking and was provoked by it.  Maybe Andrew was doing a harmless breaching experiment to see if anyone was looking for stupid stuff to take offense at.  If so, Andrew D. has won, and Hijiri88 has lost, and I suggest that Andrew D. be gracious and rename this to something more arcane while leaving it in place.  Maybe I don't understand.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:44, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep – This is a completely harmless glossary, and an admin should just close this discussion as "keep" now without wasting any more of the community's time. I noticed a while ago while contributing to article deletion discussions that Hijiri88 has been stalking and harassing Andrew Davidson across Wikipedia, often making patently false personal attacks against him. No attempt through diffs was made to prove any of the slimy aspersions and personal attacks stuffed into the opening statement. It's just a glossary, not an attack page, and as Andrew Davidson pointed out, if real attack pages were deleted, most of Hijiri88's userspace would be deleted right now. Anyway, there is no conceivable reason for deletion here, and Hijiri88's trolling and blatant intimidation tactics shouldn't be rewarded.Worldlywise (talk) 03:52, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: Andrew and I rarely agree. I tend to be less inclusionist than him.  I tend to oppose fewer RFAs than him.  That's fine.  I've not seen him trying to use this page to cast aspersions against users who lean more towards stricter interpretations of things like GNG, so I really don't see the problem here.    SITH   (talk)   12:34, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as a harmless user page. If you don't like it, don't read it. North America1000 17:37, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.