Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 speedy delete by ++Lar: t/c 17:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Tobias_Conradi

 * This is a deletion discussion. For issues of user conduct, see Requests for comment/Tobias Conradi.

The page is a clear violation of Civility, Assume good faith and User page. It’s a torrid collection of accusations against admins and editors, some of which are more than a year old. Tobias should stop smearing other people’s reputations and raise any issues he has through appropriate channels. This is a replay of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi/admin right abuse. ShivaIdol 06:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well, any user is entitled of a Userpage. Parts of the page (e.g. Babel Userboxes are obviously helpfull in producing encyclopedia. If there are problems with other parts of the Userpage then we should improve it not delete the whole page. I might be mistaken but the personal attacks here are mild lack sufficient venom and mostly oriented on some specific administrative actions rather than the persons. Alex Bakharev 07:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixing up the page may be an appropriate remedy for a normal user, but this user persistently moves the offensive content from one page to another. User page states If the community lets you know that they would rather you delete some content from your user space, you should consider doing so — such content is only permitted with the consent of the community.. Furthermore, In excessive cases, your user subpage may be deleted, following a listing on Miscellany for deletion, subject to deletion policy. If this isn't a case requiring deletion I don't know what is. ShivaIdol 08:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reasons per User:ShivaIdol and per User page. In fact, User:Gnangarra in Tobias' talk page has politely asked the user to delete it per previous WP:MFD closure. Gnangarra did it, but Tobias reverted back and added new smear campaign to Gnangarra in the page by writing: "2007-04-11 admin User:Gnangarra deletes parts of my user page, with unverifiable claim that the content had been recreated.". It isn't hard to see that the page is really a smear campaign, not only to admins but to other editors. I give you some examples:
 * to User:Caniago: "2007-04-10 personal attack" only because of this edit that looks to me a normal comment.
 * to User:Merbabu: "" only because Merbabu put deletion as a minor by accident. The deletion itself has a self-explanatory edit summary.
 * It's hard for me to assume good faith to this person based on his user page. Q.E.D. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 08:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete I couldn't really care less that I'm on the list, but this is just a misuse of user page. jimfbleak 10:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per User page (and this comment on WP:BLP), stating that polemical statements shouldn't be there. -- lucasbfr talk 10:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete soapboxing. In addition to the above, airing grievances in this manner is unproductive and unfair (the targets have no place editing the page to refute the accusations). Take genuine complaints to an appropriate forum. --Dweller 10:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: The ranting was originally brought up for deletion in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi/2006 summer admin incidents (deleted) and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi/admin right abuse (deleted). He moved the material to his userpage, and here we are. --Golbez 10:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Seeing as subpages of Tobias Conradi have been deleted because of soapboxing issues before, I've decided to speedy delete this page. If anyone wants to help him restore non-controversial material feel free to do so. - Mgm|(talk) 12:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sometimes keeping the evidence around saves some steps... Tobias is a user with a long contribution history. Much of it is positive... but in my view he is indeed periodically disruptive and it may or may not be the case that his positive contributions are outweighed by his net negative impact. That is for the community to decide should the issue arise again. But having stuff like this around, or at least recorded somewhere, might be helpful to better understand the context and issues. So I perhaps would have left it. But I have no arguments with the case presented, or with the speedy delete by MGM. I should mention bias, I have some mentions on some versions of that page and I have blocked Tobias more than once. One of the times almost led to an outright community ban. My views on user pages can be found at the top of my own user page, where I quote Mindspillage: User:Mindspillage/userpages... they ultimately belong to the community and if the community finds them unfit, then they can be changed or removed, with some very limited exceptions. That does not mean that people should edit other people's user pages without invitation, willy nilly. But it does mean that egregious things ought to be handled. This user has been warned and counseled and encouraged to use dispute resolution (and given many other good pieces of advice), many many times. ++Lar: t/c 13:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So, since the user page was speedy deleted, is there any reason to keep this MfD open? --Iamunknown 16:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Not in my view... therefore, closing this. ++Lar: t/c 17:13, 17 April 2007 (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.