Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Krzyzowiec/Userboxes/ThirdPositionist

 __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: no consensus to delete. BD2412 T 02:31, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Krzyzowiec/Userboxes/ThirdPositionist

 * – (View MfD)

Same reasoning as in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gr8opinionater/Userboxes/Italian Fascist and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Fascist. We shouldn't be giving Nazis a platform. – Frood (talk) 02:51, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Neutral - The term is sufficiently obscure that it has little polemical value. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * the Celtic cross on the userbox is a white supremacy symbol. I'm not sure how that's obscure? The sixth word in the article linked in the userbox is "neo-fascist". Also not exactly obscure if you ask me. – Frood (talk) 00:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I get your admirable intentions, but Robert McClenon did say, "little polemical value." That, to me, implies he's aware of the symbol, but that, on balance, it is "sufficiently obscure." As to the term "neo-fascist," that doesn't just refer to white supremacists. This could refer to various fascist political ideologies. In terms of policing infoboxes, do we also delete userboxes of those supporting Antifa or similar radical socialist groups? I think we're bordering on censorship here, and I can't support that. Perhaps we should have a discussion about including a disclaimer on userpages displaying certain infoboxes, but that's about as far as I'd want to go. --Doug Mehus T · C  00:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There's a precedent set for deleting userboxes that endorse fascism in the two MfDs I linked. WP:POLEMIC says that "statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors, persons, or other entities" are prohibited on userpages. How the hell does something described as including "ultranationalism, racial supremacy, populism, authoritarianism, nativism, xenophobia and opposition to immigration" NOT fall under vilifying other people? – Frood (talk) 20:18, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that deletion discussions are not, necessarily, precedent-setting. In order to be binding, I'd suggest a policy proposal at the Village Pump that would refine the wording to permit deletions of such userboxes in all cases. --Doug Mehus T · C  20:34, 25 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per . I do not endorse the political ideology, but at the same time, I see no reason to mess with an editor's userboxes for the sake of maintaining good editor relations and good faith. --Doug Mehus T · C  23:25, 18 January 2020 (UTC)