Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ohconfucius/Incivility hall of fame


 * 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 speedy deleted, user request. –Juliancolton Talk  ·  Review  13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Ohconfucius/Incivility hall of fame
This page serves no useful purpose and will cause needless Wiki-drama, especially given the past incivility of the owner of this page. Tennis expert (talk) 21:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Only serves to feed the flames. –Juliancolton Talk  ·  Review  22:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, of course - how come I'm not surprised this has been put up for deletion ? As I tagged the article, it is under construction and is far from complete. The purpose of this page is to provide amusement for wikipedia editors, who will be free to nominate examples of Incivilities with few limitations. We can have a page on WP:LAME and WP:BJAODN, there is every reason not to delete this. Ohconfucius (talk) 01:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Addendum: As I am only really interested in the quotes themselves, and also to comply with WP:V, names have been removed to protect the innocent. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * False. Take a look at the footnotes. Tennis expert (talk) 02:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep – I would have no problem if I appeared on these pages, because – for once – they allow us to take negativity out of context and make us see it in a humorous light. There's not enough of this on WP, and rather than causing "needless drama", I think it's more likely to be a good thing for community harmony. Let people smile and sit back and go on with their lives. Tony   (talk)  02:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Oh for God’s sake, lighten up. It’s in someone’s userspace. No one gives a holy dump except a few editors who feign needing their nitroglycerin pills for their weak hearts. If you don’t like it, don’t go to his subpage. Or, since the proper response to bad speech is better speech, start your own subpage dedicated to whining about how Ohconfucius “is very bad and and things like that.”’ If you do, I’ll be sure not to visit it either. Greg L (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:UP. Tennis expert (talk) 03:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, with reservations - I appreciate the humorous aspects of Wikipedia and would like to see this page stay, IF the anonymity of posters is kept. Any identifiers should be removed, as these are much more capable of being attacks and personal in nature. Alonsornunez  Comments  03:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep the diff in the footnote (required for verification, anyway), but don't display the user's name up next to the quote. If people want to find the source, they easily do so via a number of other search facilities. Tony  (talk)  03:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So Tony, you propose that each user keep a permanent record of linked instances where they have perceived incivility to themself or others? Wouldn't that require a few more servers? Next year I'll try to throw in more than $20... Franamax (talk) 07:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Whether or not the intentions are good, there is no good that can come from this. This page does nothing to ease tensions, and is in fact guaranteed to perpetuate bad feelings. --Ckatz chat spy  04:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete – Are some of the quotes on this page humorous? Yes. Are people capable of reacting well to a friendly, tongue-in-cheek induction into the Incivility Hall of Fame? Yes. Will some people react badly to it? Hell, yes! Ckatz is correct that, regardless of intent, this page has the potential to perpetuate tensions and inflame already-irritated editors. Is it worth poking a possible wasp nest just because it can be fun? No. A word of warning: stay away from friends who throw objects at wasp nests while you are standing directly under one and are aware neither of its presence nor of said friend's sado-masochistic tendencies and/or total lack of a self-preservation instinct... –Black Falcon (Talk) 06:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Although incivil comments are a problem, preserving them as some sort of "most infamous" is problematic. We want to eliminate the instances, not glorify them. As a userpage, it constitutes a record of perceived grievances (which we generally frown upon). As a WPspace page, it would be unmanageably large since there are insufficient selection criteria - I would nominate around 20% of all talk page comments and 19.5% of my own (kidding, but you get my drift). And civility is too nebulous of a concept. Yes, some statements are obviously beyond the pale (which is why I con't oppose this so strongly as singling out "divas"), but some of the most insidious incivility is done quite subtly over multiple posts on multiple pages and on multiple sites - so single instances have no special claim to an "incivility hall of fame". On balance, like the others objecting here, I see no benefit to this page. Franamax (talk) 07:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Note This page has been speedy deleted per user request. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2009 (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.