Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Promethean/No


 * 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 keep per WP:SNOW.

No matter what you might think of the template, the issue in question or the way it is presented, the question here was solely whether this template can be seen as canvassing. The unanimous consensus here is that one can only canvass when they post messages to users who have not made up their mind already or !voted another way than you did. The template in question does not post messages, it shows only on the users' userpage, expressing their opinion like some userboxes (e.g. User wikipedia non commercial, UserMandatorySignin etc.) do. This discussion is not about whether the way chose to promote the use of this template is correct (which may or may not be canvassing) but only if the template in question is canvassing. As said, consensus is strongly against it and any other outcome is extremely unlikely. Regards  So Why  12:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Promethean/No
Adding: User:Neurolysis/No // roux   11:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Per WP:CANVASS; "Campaigning is an attempt to sway the person reading the message, through the use of non-neutral tone, wording, or intent. While this may be appropriate as part of an individual discussion, it is inappropriate to canvass with such messages." roux   11:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - Its my user space and ill have what I want on it. If people also use the template that is their decisions. It is no more of a canvass than the "bishzilla for arbcom" image advert that was also speedily kept.  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 11:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well umm no... there are actually rules about what can and can't be kept in userspace. Further, you are attempting to obtain a specific outcome in a specific discussion--that's campaigning. Third, you're explicitly not allowed to remove MFD notices, so consider yourself warned for that. Fourth, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a terribly useful argument. // roux   11:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Your problem is the image, not the page. So this is going to get closed :)  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 11:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (e/c)Well, arguably, you are canvassing using the page because you are spamming it to everyone who appears to support your position on the matter. Without the spamming/canvassing, this would indeed simply be a userspace issue, and I would be indifferent to this, but this now has more project-wide implications, so delete .  Fritzpoll (talk) 11:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes and reffering people with the same view point to the page is also not canvassing, as its not swaying the people i refereed. They were already "like minded". If I had posted this on talkpages of this on people supporting or those who had not voted, then it would be canvassing.  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 11:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Except that they are not the only ones who will see it. This has the potential to appear on around 150 user pages based on your contribs and so your opinion is having a wider airing than your comment would imply, since everyone on those pages will be directed to click through. WHilst all users use boxes to state their view, the vast majority do not use an imperative statement and link to direct people to vote in a particular way. That means that this is a tool for canvassing opinion beyond the editors it is supplied to and as such violates policy. If the picture linked to the general page rather than specifically to the Oppose section, I would have fewer concerns about it. Fritzpoll (talk) 11:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If the image merely said "Make your opinion known on FlaggedRevs" with a link to the entire discussion, there would be no issue. As it is, the image is very clearly trying to sway a biased opinion. // roux   11:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The image as it is links to the vote, but no section (oppose or support) specifically.  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 11:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: The nominator supported flagged revs which screams ill intentioned motives.  « l | Ψrometheăn ™ | l »   (talk) 11:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that I've also nominated Krimpet's obviously joke response to this. I nominated in good faith, would have done the same if you had been saying "Say Yes!". Consider this a warning for not assuming good faith. // roux   11:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, I see you've now edited it per in which case, I have struck the above !vote and move to keep (despite, I might add, my own personal opinion of FlaggedRevs) Fritzpoll (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per Promethean. Guy0307 (talk) 11:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Were this to be regarded as canvassing (and I assure you I have seen canvassing by others) that would be one thing, but as it is, it is not. And I would hope we trust editors to have their own opinions about proposed changes to WP and not be swayed just because a "friend" has an opinion. Collect (talk) 11:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Surely WP:CANVASS is about sending messages, not about expressing a personal opinion on one's own page? GrahamSmith (talk) 11:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's not canvassing. It is entirely appropriate for Wikipedians to be able to express opinions about how Wikipedia works, how they believe it should work, or about proposed changes, on their userpages. DuncanHill (talk) 11:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Express opinions, yes. Tell people explicitly how they should vote? No. Notifications of votes need to be neutral. // roux   11:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - this doesn't come close to meeting either the letter or spirit of WP:CANVASS. This is an expression of opinion on a user's own page. He's forcing no one to view it, and even if he was I wouldn't consider it canvassing. Roux, this is turning into an embarrassing WP:SNOWBALL and I suggest you withdraw your support. Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 11:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - No harm done in the creation and initial transclusion of the template, as per the above, but rallying users to start using it seems to meet WP:CANVAS - Might want to consider ceasing active promotion of the template. MrZaius  talk  11:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep As GrahamSmith noted its not canvassing when you post something only in your own user space. I don't see any difference between this and an irritatingly oversized and intrusively placed userbox, a polite note that it might be counterproductive would IMHO be more appropriate.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  12:04, 8 January 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.