Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Miller17CU94//An open letter to Nancy Pelosi


 * 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 debate was Delete. There is consensus that WP:NOT applies here, whether the issue poses a possible threat to Wikipedia or not. Tikiwont (talk) 09:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Miller17CU94//An open letter to Nancy Pelosi
We don't do political advocacy here like this, even in user space. Delete, please. rootology ( C )( T ) 22:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is an essay and lists and opinion of something that could have an effect on Wikipedia - the Fairness Doctrine which could also be applied to the Internet, including Wikipedia. Chris (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * (ec)I strongly agree with the nomination, per WP:NOT & WP:SOAP. In particular, posting a political statement and specifically linking it on wikipedia will reflect on the project, which it will not benefit from, no matter the cause. Delete. -- Amalthea Talk 22:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I realize we are trying to do an encyclopedia, but do we realize the impending threats that could be coming to Wikipedia especially if they try to pass the Fairness Doctrine to the Internet? I understand the policy of WP:NOT and WP:SOAP, but sometimes you have to ignore all rules and this is one of them, especially if you believe in free speech and free press. Chris (talk) 22:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that I do, the opinion of one FCC Commissioner doesn't concern me that much, but then I'm also not living in the US (yes, I know where the WMF servers are currently residing) . But this is not the place to discuss politics. I commend you for standing up for freedom of speech, but in my eyes the neutrality of this worldwide project is too important, as I said no matter the cause. --  Amalthea Talk 22:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I probably shouldn't stick my nose in here, but I happened to see this from Jimbo's talk page, and was pretty amazed at the levels of being "played". Sigh - FYI - 1) We are very, very, far from ever getting back a Fairness Doctrine for TV and radio. 2) Even if by some strange chance that did happen, having it apply to the Internet would be an even bigger stretch 3) And even if both those happened, having it apply to Wikipedia is another level of improbability on top of that. In sum, you have been lied to . You have been told untruths by political lobbyists in order to manipulate you, to rile you up against a bogeyman. There is no threat. There only liars and demagogues :-( -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 23:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and comment WP:SOAP. Also, I agree with Seth above.  No way, no how, would the fairness doctrine, or anything resembling it, be applied by any level of government in the united states on Wikipedia. Protonk (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a webhost.  There's a lot of latitude in what editors can use their user pages for, but hosting political campaigning material is clearly out of bounds.  This isn't even remotely contributing to the encyclopedia, and is likely to invite a political discussion on the talk page.  --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 11:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Let us take into account that this is an effort by some to shut down free speech, especially if you look at what is going on in the country right now regarding the President election in this country. Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama is asking the Justice Department to investigate an organization trying to release a commercial about William Ayres of the Weather Underground. Obama is also having his people harass WGN AM in Chicago on the radio station interviewing Stanley Kurtz of National Review on Obama's connection with Frank Marshall Davis. Internet blogger Michelle Malkin was verbally assaulted at last week's national convention in Denver over some of the protest rallies going on. Finally, an ABC News producer in the United States was arreste on a public sidewalk over spying over a hotel entrance trying to see donors to Democratic bloogers. May I remind every one of Wikipedia is not censored, even on the user pages. May I also remind everyone that there are userboxes that are just as poltical if not more than what I have written. Let us also not forget that in January 2006, there was a userbox purge which several users have joked about. Do we wanto to see that happen here again? Chris (talk) 18:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Chris is right! Don't let The Man get you down! Fight the power! ...Seriously, delete as a foil helmet rant. JuJube (talk) 20:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - I was kinda torn, because I can see the perceived relationship between the editor's general concerns, and how those concerns could potentially become Wikipedia concerns. However, this really seems like it would be better as something posted at a website designed for web-hosting. And then you could link to that from your user-page. And if you're concerned about the wiki-links, note that there are innumerable Media-Wiki wikis out there. I would guess that one would allow you to post those concerns. (See also: m:Help:Interwiki linking and Interwiki map.) - jc37 23:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, soapboxing. Outside political advocacy, even if it has some relation to issues concerning Wikipedia, does not belong on a WP page. Nsk92 (talk)
 * Delete - Once again it is soapboxing, but once again I propose the author moves it to a blog of some sort. -- Lord   ₪   Sunday   14:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - directly violates WP:SOAP and WP:USER. This is precisely the kind of advocacy those guidelines are supposed to prevent. Terraxos (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2008 (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.