Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Libertyville/USCongress (2nd nomination)

 __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. No strong agreement one way or the other, and the content of the userbox was changed in the middle of this discussion. My hunch is that the new content seems more acceptable, and there likely won't be any future disagreements if the new content remains in place. If the userbox is reverted back to the original content however, then I'd have no prejudice against a speedy renomination at MfD to understand if there is clear consensus to delete that version of the userbox.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 21:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

User:Libertyville/USCongress

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

WP:UBCR does not allow propaganda, advocacy, or opinion pieces on politics. WP:POLEMIC does not allow inflammatory content in userspace. WP:BLP does not allow derogatory content on living persons in any namespace. The previous deletion did not receive sufficient attention 11 years ago and closed as no consensus, but this still exists in violation of rules on inflammatory content and content about living persons. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete yet another political attack box. Dronebogus (talk) 22:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. —  Sundostund  mppria  (talk / contribs) 22:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Unnecessarily divisive. Curbon7 (talk) 02:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - We allow latitude for some political opinions on Wikipedia and I don't see this as being any different from self-identifying as a conservative.--🌈WaltCip - (talk)  12:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Because it’s targeting a specific couple of individuals in an insulting manner rather than stating disagreement or expressing general ideas. Dronebogus (talk) 05:27, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There are private people, where WP:BLP says to delete, and there are public people, who people need to remember are real people, and then there extraordinarily public figures, leaders, whether Presidents or House Speakers, who represent political positions or whole organisations. However, I fall on the side of Dronebogus.  Nancy is a living human.  However again, it can be fixed by editing, people should stop going straight to deletion ahead of fixing. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as fixed by depersonalising. It is important to value BLP even for top politicians, but the underlying sentiment is an allowable declaration. If the users really which to combine the two people and together being particular poor in joint leadership, something more articulated would be needed. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree that the content was ever “inflammatory”. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:42, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree that the userbox was ever an “attack” userbox, because it did not even allude to an active response of violence. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. We do not need political attack boxes. --Bduke (talk) 10:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Nom comment. My main concern of the BLP issue has now been addressed. I still believe that it's in violation of Wikipedia policies and guidelines and would vote to delete, but I probably would not have gone to the trouble of nominating it for deletion if I had found it in its current state. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep by restoring to original version. Oppose editing userpage userboxes of other users without their consent unless something is breaking down due to it. It is a perfectly valid political opinion to believe that Ried & Pelosi lead the worst Congress. &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 15:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: FWIW, the userbox different at the time of nomination from what it looks like now, see Special:Permalink/1119874756, which isn't poorly written. &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 15:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ping @Knowledgekid87 in relation to my above comment. &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 15:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a poorly written userbox about something that already happened. I would also disagree from a historical perspective as the 34th United States Congress saw the caning of Charles Sumner, and the 37th United States Congress featured states withdrawing from the Union. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep as a questionable historical comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:46, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't have a strong opinion on whether this userbox should be deleted, but I've made some adjustments in its wording, in response to complaints above. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. This is an opinion, but if the wording can be changed to provide an objective measure of something, then that would certainly be allowable Doc H e u h (talk) 14:54, 11 November 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.