Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Winkelvi

 __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: speedy keep. Its snowing. Spartaz Humbug! 19:05, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Winkelvi


The page is ripe with WP:POLEMIC violations. The editor in question has also been blocked indefinitely   Calidum   17:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - indef block is not a site ban. That user may decide to appeal his indef. after a year. What do you consider "polemic" on that page? Atsme Talk 📧 17:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC) Add-on 18:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep there's only a few quotes that could even come within the remit of POLEMIC—and even they don't, they're really just mildly sarcastic opinions. The rest is all stuff explicitly allowed (ndedd encouraged at WP:UPYES. And as Atsme (almost) rightly points out, it rather smacks of something like WP:GRAVEDANCING to delete a fella's user page when they're blocked. ——  SerialNumber  54129  17:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , no offence, but you could've had the—nous?—to have at least edited the template (as it subsequently appeared on their page) so it didn't tell an indefinitely-blocked user that their opinions on the matter are welcome and that they may participate in the discussion by adding [their] comments. Talk about rubbing salt into the wound... ——  SerialNumber  54129  17:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - Is there really nothing more productive for us to be doing at the moment?  G M G  talk  17:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Until we go after everyone else on Wikipedia for Polemic we shouldn't start with blocked editors. I point you to JzG/Politics, which was closed as keep, I point you to EENG, which is Polemic, I point you to Nishidani, and half a dozen other editors who have polemic on their pages. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep As much as I'm glad that we're not discussing portals for once, this userpage is hardly worth deleting per all above. CoolSkittle  (talk) 17:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as this junk helps an Admin assess his participation an attitude if he ever appeals again. Legacypac (talk) 18:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Snow keep This is not the only user page to express the editors stance on things. Blocks - indef or otherwise - are not a reason for deletion. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 18:27, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep all. No evidence of "polemic" has been presented. I'd rather support unblocking, but that's a matter for WP:SO. w umbolo   ^^^  18:29, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep Was a partisan move to block this editor to begin with. I wish admins would do more page protections, fewer blocks and grow up.--MONGO (talk) 18:50, 16 April 2019 (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.