Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The C of E




 * 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  Speedyish keep - User:The C of E has voluntarily removed the userboxes from his page ; there is a continuing discussion on the homophobia userbox at AN/I. Xavexgoem (talk) 23:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

User:The C of E
This page seems to exist for the sole purpose of promoting hatred. The user declares that he doesn't "like homosexuality" as it is "morally wrong" - he also has a homophobia userbox. His paragraph at the bottom is a fairly nasty Troubles-related diatribe. He doesn't own the page, and Wikipedia isn't a lecturn for his tirades. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  directorate  ─╢ 17:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:UPNOT and WP:SOAP. Unduly polemic and divisive. Rodhull  andemu  17:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm not really sure. The user says he wants to be an admin someday. I rather like the idea of keeping the userpage intact, in the interest of ensuring that never happens. But I can see that being a poor argument for keeping a userpage, so in that case, delete. Equazcion (talk) 17:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair point, actually, but this page will always be visible, anyway. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  First Secretary of State  ─╢ 17:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, this sort of content doesn't have a place here! Jeni  ( talk ) 17:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Saying that a userbox that says that this user is homophobic is "promoting hatred" is a lie. It is that users personal opinion, you dont have to aggree with it. and further more if this userbox is deleted then shouldnt the ones that say "this user is gay" ect. be deleted as well since it "promotes homosexuality"? you are attacking the freedom of speech here and that is "morally wrong"-- Coldplay   Expert  17:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, there's being homosexual and being heterosexual, and then there's being tolerant and being intolerant. You're confusing the two spectra that we're dealing with here. The example I'm complaining about, and the hypothetical example you're comparing come from different bases. As in, I believe that people have a right to be gay, but I'm not gay myself; whereas most people who are gay don't believe that everyone should be gay. Or something. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  duumvirate  ─╢ 17:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) They're not the same. The difference is that one is a positive statement and the other is negative. Positive promotion of a lifestyle is okay. Making negative comments about a lifestyle isn't. We want to have a general air of positivity and acceptance here. Equazcion (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Then why dont you just remove the userbox and tell C of E that you removed it, instead of deleting the whole page?-- Coldplay   Expert  18:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would do, but then he'd put it back, cause an argument, lots of disruption, possibly incivility and edit-warring, and accusations of breaking policy, ANI threads, and we'd be no further forward. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  co-prince  ─╢ 18:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That userbox isn't really the only problem with the page as others have noted. (I'd prefer asking the user to take it down first, and only deleting as a last recourse, but that's me. -- B figura (talk) 18:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We had a case of this just the other day. If the user reverts, then he gets blocked.  Simple. Tarc (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Its worth a try, remember WP:AGF. And Im sure that you could tell him that he could put something else up instead of that userbox.-- Coldplay   Expert  18:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * AGF isn't really necessary given that the content itself is evidence of an attitude inappropriate for a collaborative environment. I politely asked anyway, but realistically, the user should have known better in the first place (especially given admin aspirations). -- B figura (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Regardles, you should still attempt to ask him to direct his dislike of homosexuals in a positive manner, like making a ubx that says that "this user is not a homosexual" ect. he is not trying to attack any person, justvoicing his personal opinion. (Just like the ubx that say "this user is strait but not narrow")-- Coldplay   Expert  18:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Could this conversation be taken to the talkpage, please, so as not to clutter up this space? Thanks. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster  ─╢ 18:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The talk page on the MFD?-- Coldplay   Expert  18:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, here: Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion/User:The C of E. Equazcion (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

*Delete per nom, least likely way to cause more drama. BigDunc
 * Keep userpage, but delete offending userbox and image. If editor starts a drama-fest over it then they're obviously not here for the right reasons and they will be dealt with accordingly. And a statement of his choice of what to call some town in England is really quite insignificant IMO. -- &oelig; &trade; 18:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep You want to delete my user page!? Whatever is wrong with it? I though Wikipedia had freedom of expression The C of E (talk) 18:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, it doesn't. Equazcion (talk) 18:50, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Divisive and offensive userpage, although no prejudice to it being recreated sans offensive userboxes and content, or at the very least rewording said sentiments to drastically tone them down. Skinny87 (talk) 18:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - User has removed all the offensive content (as far as I can see). Equazcion (talk) 18:52, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I have now deleted the offending things on it and I cannot apologize enough if it has caused any offence to anyone The C of E (talk) 18:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Non-issue now that the user has deleted the offensive stuff. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 19:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In Future wouldn't it be better to just MFD the offensive bits rather than the whole userpage unless the userpage is hopelessly unrecoverable (which this one was not)? Arakunem Talk 20:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep user page, but endorse removal of hateful userbox. The image at Commons should probably be deleted there, as well.  Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 20:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep the userpage but I would seggest that The C of E remove the userbox...-- Coldplay   Expert  22:56, 11 October 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.