Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Micoolio101/Supporters in the death of OrphanBot


 * 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 speedy deleted, attack page, WP:CSD. — Jul. 3, '06  [15:15] < [ freak]&#124;[ talk] >

User:Micoolio101/Supporters in the death of OrphanBot
This user page is a nexus for incivility targeted at Carnildo. The language chosen is inflammatory and offensive. Note also that Micoolio101 has imagery elsewhere that attempts to associate OrphanBot with Nazis, which is an inherently offensive and incivil act. This page should be deleted as grossly offensive, incivil, and contrary to encyclopedic purpose. Kelly Martin (talk) 05:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as ludicrous and against Wikipedia principles. If you want to violate copyright, please do it elsewhere. (ESkog)(Talk) 06:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per ESkog. -- ADNghiem501 06:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reasonable criticism is of course permitted, but this is an attack on our anti-copyright infringement tools. Finally, "Deleting this page is an act of vandalism, and will be reverted" does not lend much confidence. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete with extreme predijuce.--SB | T 06:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete please. Perhaps this user would be happier elsewiki, or host his own wiki? or maybe myspace.com... ~Kylu ( u | t )  06:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Kimchi.sg 06:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete it's unhelpfull and uncivil. This is not the way to adress whatever legitemate concerns there might be with the bot, wich IMHO are few and minor compared to the benefits. Before the bot the number 1 complaint was that images where deleted without warning and left as redlinks in articles. Now the complaint is that the bot removes images prior to deletion and that people are drowning in warnings. You just can't please everyone I guess. --Sherool (talk) 07:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep violate copyright? WHERE? There is one sentace on the page and the user that created the page probably wrote it. Saying it's copyright vio is just silly and any vote against it under "copyrightvio" should not be counted as it is NOT a copyright vio. If another page is in violation delete that, but this page is ok. Also this page is hate for a bot not a person and there is a HUGE difference. --DragonWR12LB 11:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Er, no, this page essentially supports copyright infringement -- the purpose of OrphanBot is to find (non-free) images that have been improperly tagged, uploaded without a source, etc. and remove them from articles so they can be deleted (or, ideally, the problems solved.) in accordance with our "fair use" policy. There isn't much difference in attacking a bot or a person, because this page denigrates and attacks Carnildo's (who is most certainly a person) hard work and plentiful contributions to Wikipedia. As such, it is innapropriate.--SB | T 13:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per Sherool and all above. It is not civil, plus it is not useful: we do not decide things here by petition. ×Meegs 12:27, 3 July 2006 (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.