Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:CosmicEmperor/sandbox

 __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. JohnCD (talk) 12:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

User:CosmicEmperor/sandbox


This is a blatant attack page and one of the worse cases of WP:POLEMIC logging a laundry list of years old disputes claiming that the editors who happened to be on a supporting side of the dispute were tag teaming and the fact that no report has been filed in regard to this at a due venue makes it even more of an attack page. The editor is casting aspirations, assuming bad faith / accusing others of bad faith and has been doing so since quite some time. The creator has been repeatedly flirting the boundaries of WP:CIVIL while casting baseless accusations but not filing a report to avoid WP:BOOMERANG for his behaviour. I chose to ignore this behaviour until I saw this sandbox. I would also note that the user has been recently indef blocked for a very similar behaviour of trolling, harrasment and abusive editing. I don't see how this list would help build an encyclopedia at all by keeping such conjecture based on the assumption that editors who endorse similar facts in a topic area are a WP:CABAL. The page is currently blanked as a courtesy by who preferred MFD over CSD for this case. lTopGunl (talk) 12:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Well, this one's quite a shocker. I cannot see any other reason for the existence of this page other than WP:BATTLEGROUND, as I don't recall having any conflicts with the said user, neither has there been any major instances of noticeboard/content disputes. By making it an us vs. them sort of thing, it also appears to display WP:TAGTEAMING mentality (ironically, that is what the user has accused others of). This is indeed an unfounded "laundry list" created with heaps of bad faith and mala fide intent. Its purpose is nothing other than disparaging and throwing dirt on others, and leveling unfounded accusations. It goes against the very collaborative atmosphere which Wikipedia fosters. At most, this sub-optimal userpage demonstrates the petty state of mind of the user who created it. I have just become aware that the said user is currently indeff blocked, and although I am still not sure what for, after going through this laundry list, I don't find the block very surprising. With an attitude like that, such users don't belong on this site.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 13:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete While I turned down the speedy deletion as this does not meet the criteria, I do support deletion of the page for the reasons given by then nominator. Chillum 14:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per UPNOT. A flagrant attack page created with WP:BATTLE mentality. Faizan (talk) 14:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Irony is that same "team" is collaborating here again to comment "Delete". Anyway, Cosmic has been blocked permanently and this sandbox can be preserved as his "legacy", I don't think that this sandbox is doing some "harm" to anyone, this is not in main article space or this is not a redirect or template or else. No one will view this "exposing" sandbox. Still I don't care if this sandbox remains or gets deleted. Sandbox do have mention of mine so I commented. But I do hope that editors on Wikipedia will become more sensible and neutral someday. -- Human 3015  Call me maybe!!  • 21:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Users A and B are attacked on a page and called out for tag teaming. A nominates the page for deletion, B agrees in consensus. Regardless of what the truth is about the original accusation, the support in nomination is just obvious due course to which all involved users have right to participate in as they are being accused. You can not first accuse a group of users of tag teaming and when they all defend (obviously supporting the defence) accuse them of tag teaming again. This WP:ADHOM and a fallacious argument. Also, per WP:DENY we don't need to preserve a defacto banned editor's 'legacy'. -- lTopGunl (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete preserved as his "legacy" ? Nope. - NQ (talk)  21:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Attack page.112.79.39.195 (talk) 17:15, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLEMIC, unused attack page BMK (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per my nomination rationale. -- lTopGunl (talk) 16:30, 29 June 2015 (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.