Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Porchcrop/Antiquette

 __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 delete. Courcelles 06:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Porchcrop/Antiquette
A proposal for privately-kept list of "offenders", circumventing public processes like WP:WQA. The broader context of Antiquette is now discussed at Village_pump_(proposals).

East of Borschov 09:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please remove me/Template
 * User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please_remove_me


 * Delete Wow. Judge and jury, all under one user page. Consensus?, we've heard of it. 8-( Andy Dingley (talk) 11:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete shit list. Mark Wikipedia:Antiquette as failed per snow as well. Gigs (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. We've been here before, and consensus says you may not use your userspace for this. — Gavia immer (talk) 17:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Seriously, a blacklist? Netalarm talk 18:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete-Personal blacklists are hardly helpful to a collaborative environment. Also, establishing hoops for users to jump through if they wish to be removed from the list does NOT make it okay. On that note, if this page is deleted, the subpages User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please remove me, User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please remove me/Template, User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Preload, and User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Reports should also be deleted.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Per everybody above.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 21:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. This page does neet seem to be leading towards dispute resolution, but more as a blacklist.  No. Karanacs (talk) 13:29, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I wholeheartedly concur with Fyre2387: highly inappropriate use of userspace. Salvio  Let's talk 'bout it! 16:44, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please note that the user list in User:Porchcrop/Antiquette is to identify any user that has has violated either of these guidelines. I've found that these people keep telling others not to violate any policy or guideline when they themselves have been violating the guidelines WP:Etiquette and WP:AGF, this means they have a history of violating guidelines. Here are some examples of how they have (shown in Etiquette):


 * 1) Be polite, please and Be civil - When they send out rude comments and not using manners such as "Please", "Thanks", "Cheers", "Sorry", etc. Like for example, when a newbie aor inexperienced editor that is mature and well-behaved that makes a mistake (but doesn't show any bad behaviour), they scold or criticize the editor when the editor didn't even know it was inappropriate. They are just degrading and biting the newcomer.
 * 2) Give praises when due - When I have been constructive abundantly to the project, I haven't gotten any praises for those good edits, and I would like to know why.
 * 3) Do not ignore questions - When I see that there are questions (sensible and appropriate questions) that are unanswered.

The Etiquette guideline is not the only guideline people violate. Assume good faith is the other guideline people violate, (fewer times this guideline gets violated than Etiquette) when all these people keep giving offensive myths and other inaccurate scoldings, criticisms, and degrades to good editors.

Remember: If you want to give ANY negative information about another user, also give positive information about that user.

Perhaps, all these users that have been identified as "antiquette" Wikipedians could give explanation why they violated the Etiquette guideline:


 * 1) (Counterproductive list of users redacted) — Gavia immer (talk) 01:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hoping all of you can understand all of this. Thanks. -Porchcrop (talk 00:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete this and all related subpages. Maintainance of private shit-lists is expressly verboten under WP:UP.  -- Jayron  32  02:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * In general, I wouldn't agree to delete this as someone's idea, much as per my comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Antiquette, but the listing of alleged offenders (properly blanked by Roux) crosses an established line at WP:UP ("Users should generally not maintain in public view negative information related to others without very good reason"). --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is in direct contradiction to community standards and could cause harm. Townlake (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as all the above - such a list is in bad faith and not in keeping with the collegiate atmosphere that we should be trying to adopt here at Wikipedia. Also, some people on the list are amongst the most civil and constructive people we have, so there isn't even an attempt to be objective - it's just a personal grudge list -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, not compatible with the nature of the project. Amusingly, should such a system ever be implemented, it would no doubt result in lots of bad faith assumptions. --- Taelus  ( Talk ) 10:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Please delete User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please remove me/Template and User:Porchcrop/Antiquette/Please_remove_me as well, both fit into this MFD. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 16:07, 27 September 2010 (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.