Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Louis88/Mormonism


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Delete. Xoloz 16:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Louis88/Mormonism
Inflammatory and divisive. Proabivouac 09:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. According to the lead section of Mormonism it's also inaccurate. - Mgm|(talk) 09:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, needlessly insulting to Mormons. Also self-contradictory, as he only underlined the word Mormonism, not the supposedly emphasized phrase. --tjstrf talk 09:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete as a violation of "no polemical statements" per WP:USER. Tarc 14:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no need for offensive userboxes here.  hmwith  talk   14:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC) Keep with Nardman's new wording of it.   hmwith  talk   15:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Bear in mind, however, that the editor considers this to be objectively true. I'm not sure how to explain to him otherwise. San Diablo 14:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I've updated the wording to make it a little less inflammatory and linked it to the Criticism of Mormonism article. -N 15:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Still too much of a soapbox issue. Having this sorta stuff on user pages just causes far more problems than they're worth. Tarc 21:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete As has been pointed out in similar discussions, you can just write your opinion in identical words as text on your userpage, and nobody will care. There's something about userboxes that bothers people.  I think the religious status of the Latter-Day Saints may be too controversial for a template. Yechiel Man  22:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Inflammatory and unacceptable; eligible for a speedy if someone doesn't want to let it sit there for 5 days. Newyorkbrad 00:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I insulted anyone, that wasn't my purpose - Louis88 10:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Pst, you might want to sneak a "keep" in there, Louis. -N 10:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The userbox has been changed. It appears to state something that is supported by the Mormonism article itself now. -wizzard2k  ( C &#x2022;  T  &#x2022;  D ) 15:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If the Mormonism article states that Mormonism is incompatible with the Bible, then we've got a serious POV problem there. Mormons do not believe that their faith contradicts the Bible. It's pretty sad that we are even debating whether it might not be beneficial to the project (unless there is some other reason it should stay?) if editors are allowed to denounce one another's religious beliefs from their userspace: of course it's not. Blocks are not the solution; removal of problematic material is.Proabivouac 21:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I took the last sentence in the section Mormonism to mean that. If it doesnt, then we still may have some polemical issue. -wizzard2k  ( C &#x2022;  T  &#x2022;  D ) 22:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete: Inflammatory and unacceptable, like Newyorkbrad said. We're not here to prove ourselves by disproving all others. We're here to prove that humankind in collaboration can make worlds most extensive encyclopedia ever. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 12:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Jimbo Wales said:"libelling people on userpages is a bad idea, and in fact, using userpages to attack people or campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea." For that reason we should delete this article.--James, La gloria è a dio 01:41, 4 June 2007 (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.