Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Yeanold Viskersenn


 * 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 Keep it off the page. Yes, legally you are probably entitled to use the image, but if the Wikipedia editor depicted in this image requests that you remove it from there, it's common courtesy to do so. If it comes down to enforcing this (i.e. the spirit of the law over its letter), which it really shouldn't, well I'm prepared to do this. El_C 23:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Yeanold Viskersenn
Incorrect use of image of another editor, per WP:UP, paras. 6, 8 & 11. It's clear this user is not going to take the initiative himself, so I bring this here.  Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 21:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, and indef-block user if he acts up again. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Remove image and lock page, but I think indef blocking is extremely harsh - this is an established editor, after all. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 22:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Deletion is not the only tool in the toolbox. The only thing needed to address the problem, whatever the outcome, is the edit button.  Try discussion.  Talk to the editor whose userpage it is.  I see that none of editors who brought this up at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents nor the nominator here have made any attempts whatsoever to talk to the editor on xyr talk page.  In contrast, Stan Shebs has, and appears, according to User talk:Yeanold Viskersenn, to be satisfied as long as the picture is not misrepresented as being of someone else.  The two editors concerned have talked about this in a civil fashion, per their respective talk pages.  This should not have been brought to MFD.  Uncle G (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You call this civil discussion? I call it obnoxious, malicious taunting. It is certainly to Stan's credit if he hasn't escalated this further, but Y.V.'s behaviour is, in my eyes, absolutely unjustifiable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The edit you refer to was a direct response to an editor threatening me with "trouble". My response was far more civil than the initial message I received on my talk page - I think I dealt with the situation amicably, especially considering the personal stress I was under at the time.Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, as a matter of fact. It appears quite civil to me, as do the further edits by both editors as they discussed this between themselves.  this is not civil, in contrast. Uncle G (talk) 23:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I would gladly withdraw the nom if I could be convinced that the use of this image was in complete good faith; however, it was precisely the exchange cited immediately above that tipped the balance. If it matters, this is not the first time this user has brushed with policy. -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 22:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And yet you still fail to see that an MFD nomination was not an appropriate response, whereas talking to the editor is. If you are assuming things about Yeanold Viskersenn, what are other editors to assume about you when your first reaction to an editor's conduct is to head straight to MFD, without even stopping off at the editor's talk page (which I see that you have never edited apart from the MFD notification)?  The correct course of action is to talk to the editor, and to proceed to RFC if you want wider input after that.  Uncle G (talk) 23:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Yeanold is creating needless drama. Addhoc (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't see that I am doing anything other than explaining why I am in my rights to use the image on my page. Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment (from user in question) - 1. I have now been an editor of Wikipedia for four years. I have thousands of edits to my name, and have attended two WP meets in the United Kingdom. The image on my page is free to use, and as such I am using it (I have been very careful to check with the GNU License text). I have no interest in the person in the photograph - I am using the image because I like the image, and the image only.


 * 2. The subject of the image, Stan Shebs, contacted me in a threatening manner insisting that I remove the image or there would be "trouble". I then explained to him that I was free to use the image. He agreed - but requested that I clarify that the image is of him by using a quote from the message he sent me. I complied with his wishes.


 * 3. My page has been vandalised twice since then (with quotes written in the first person to look as if they were written by myself. Shortly after I reverted said vandalism, my user page was nominated for deletion.


 * 4. I strongly contest the allegation that I am in breach of WP:UP#NOT. A) Like countless other users, including administrators in this discussion, the sole image on my user page may or may not be construed as "non-encyclopedic". B) Using an image from the commons that happens to be of a Wikipedia editor cannot be construed as an attack on another editor (whereas said editor's threatening me with "trouble" most certainly can). C) Nothing on my page pertains to "entertainment" rather than "writing an encyclopedia" any more than, for instance, a selection of userboxes.


 * For these reasons I strongly contest this deletion nomination, and request that - considering I have already discussed and explained the situation to the editor involved, and that he has accepted my use of the image - my userpage be left alone. I'm sorry that this situation has come to such a head that I appear to be Wikilawyering - but I feel like my good faith edit in customising my userpage has been dealt with an iron fist.


 * Thanks for taking the time to read my views. Yeanold Viskersenn (talk) 22:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll be blunt: Stove your hypocrisy up where the sun don't shine. I'm now going to remove that image from your page. (And then we can close this MfD, as far as I'm concerned.) Restore it or do anything else that can be construed as taunting or making fun of other editors, and you'll be blocked for a long time, and then you can use your rhetorical flourishes in crying 'admin abuse' all you want. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I brought this here for community consensus. That's all I brought it here for. -- Rodhullandemu  (Talk) 23:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's what Requests for comment is for. Uncle G (talk) 23:29, 7 January 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.