Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tygew


 * 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 debate was  No Consensus to delete. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Tygew
Reads as excessively preachy. Userpages are not for personal essays or soapboxing. I've posted a friendly request to the user informing him that his userpage is against policy and asking him to remove it, to which he has not responded. Ironholds 20:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Which policy in particular is the page breaking? Avruch  T 22:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * And the answer to my own question is WP:SOAP, which applies to user pages. Avruch  T 22:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I'm not seeing the problem here. This guy is interested in bible articles, and has a small, non-offensive write up on his userpage on how he feels about that topic. I've seen this happen for many other topics, and I'm not sure we should treat this differently just because it's religion. -- Ned Scott 05:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Needs a good SOAP scrubbing.   Ase ' nine ' '' 08:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * And now, I shall read from Jimbo 2:24 - And lo, the he sayeth unto the community, "How doth thou feel about using thy personal pages as a pulpit?" And the people answerth, "Verily, we shalt not allow it.  And we shalt scribe upon the Wiki this great commandment, so that the editors, far and wide, shalt know the truth".  And therefore such pages were, and shall for all time, until the great event known as the Consensus Change, be deleted.  And it was good.  --UsaSatsui (talk), the Great Prophet of Wiki, 08:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ah, the book of jimbo, good reading. 4:20 is an interesting one, he wrote it while stoned ;p. Ir</b><b style="color:#A9A9A9">on</b><b style="color:#808080">ho</b><b style="color:#696969">ld</b><b style="color:#000">s</b> 11:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to let you in on a little secret: there's a lot of people out there who are very religious, and they often talk the way this guy is, but they don't realize how they come off. The real point of his rant is about being speculative about terms used in the bible, such as.. how long is a "day" in the bible when it says God created the world in seven days. This is not a soapbox issue. -- Ned Scott 07:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a secret in return: When people in real life talk like that, they're doing what we would call "soapboxing" on Wikipedia.  Unfortunately, it -is- allowed in real life.  This is not a user who is stating his religious preference in a concise, non-persuasive manner.  He's preaching.  For St. Pete's sake, this page even cites the bible verses he uses to back up his sermon!  A bit of leeway might be in order if this were a user in good standing editing in good faith, but there's no evidence of that at all.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 12:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You're wrong, this is not a soapbox issue. -- Ned Scott 06:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Before I comment, I'm curious. Why don't you think that this is a "SOAP" issue? And further, would you also not consider this a MYSPACE issue? - jc37 01:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I interpret the WP:USER guideline to forbid extensive discourse unrelated to the Wiki project. As Tygew is an active contributor, and his statements are less than one page, I see no reason to delete his userpage. Lazulilasher (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * His only contributions have been massive postings on the Antichrist talk page about why the version of the bible HE likes is the correct one, and how we should rewrite the page to conform to that, and removing information from the page "bloody mary" that attempts to explain a phenomenon in a rational way. Active is not the same as useful. <b style="color:#D3D3D3">Ir</b><b style="color:#A9A9A9">on</b><b style="color:#808080">ho</b><b style="color:#696969">ld</b><b style="color:#000">s</b> 20:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, see WP:SOAP which applies to user pages. <b style="color:#D3D3D3">Ir</b><b style="color:#A9A9A9">on</b><b style="color:#808080">ho</b><b style="color:#696969">ld</b><b style="color:#000">s</b> 20:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I just checked to see if he were active--I didn't evaluate his contributions. As far as his userpage is concerned, it is merely a few paragraphs long and I don't consider it particularly disruptive. This wouldn't be my personal style, but I don't find it to cross the line into propaganda. Lazulilasher (talk) 00:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Yes, WP:SOAP does apply to userpages and yes, this page is borderline for paragraph one of WP:SOAP as it appears to be some sort of religious advocacy or propaganda, though I'm not sure what the point is so it's not very effective. In any case, userpages should be given fairly wide latitude in this regard as in others and we normally only proscribe the most extreme MySpace/Webhost-like pages, absent advertising.  What concerns me most though is the nominator's: Reads as excessively preachy. That is pretty darned subjective and not the sort of standard for WP:SOAP that I would support.  No one else has given any reasons that the current material violates WP:SOAP, merely stating that it does.  Bare statements that a page violates a particular policy are hardly more helpful than statements that don't reference policy at all in determining what our policies require or proscribe.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 01:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but fix excesses. User contributes, but seems to be fixated on one topic, and he doesn't seem to understand or accept core policies starting with WP:NPOV.  If the user is disruptive and doesn't respond to attempts at dialogue, then he should be blocked.  However, I don't see evidence of sufficient disruption.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, harmless. I'd also say nudge the guy to be productive in more areas, but I'd say that about most contributors. Cheers! bd2412  T 01:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - the entry is soap-y, and had it existed with other things on his user page, I would not have as much problem. My problem is, I see it being used (tho no way to confirm it) as a linkable essay not as a user page.  Almost like webhosting space.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 19:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep with occassional watch: People should be able to express religious beliefs; however, the person may want to shorten the page if it becomes too long. DarkFireYoshi (talk) 01:30, 22 August 2008 (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.