Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:68.39.174.238/dontcare


 * 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 Speedy close. Nomination withdrawn. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:68.39.174.238/dontcare
As with the other userboxes. Not offensive, but could be seen as canvassing by some. If an IP doesn't want to register, they're within their rights not to. Solumeiras talk 14:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, looks like a perfectly legitimate userbox to me. Could be reworded to "...doesn't care if IP users get their own account" to make it more general. (Why does it have a photo of the Eccles Building though? —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 14:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Check out the contribs for that IP address. Notice the continuous streams of article corrections and anti-vandalism work? That's one guy. Yes, year after year. Constantly. That's why he's "special". ~Kylu ( u | t )  20:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Move as it is on a User space for an unregistered account and an orphaned talk page. That said, there's nothing wrong with it, so it can be moved to a legitimate userpage. - Koweja (talk) 15:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note same thing with the other three. Would you object to merging the discussions into one? - Koweja (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and Move to the main namespace. Perfectly legit - if not strange. Note however use should (if possible) be checked, as they could potentially be used wrongly.  Bluegoblin  7   16:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This goes for all the pages in the batch upload btw!  Bluegoblin  7   16:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Why do people keep MfDing things in my Userpage hierarchy and never tell me? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 20:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep all items in this IP userspace. Unlike many anons, '238 is the same person every time. He's been with us for years, is a proven known good contributor, and we (being the antivandalism community) know him better than we know most registered users, and possibly a good number of admins. Unlike many IP talkpages, this isn't "orphaned": '238 is known to read this daily. Don't we have better things to do than delete innocuous userboxes by valued contributors? ~Kylu ( u | t )  20:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep The IP user himself endorsed the creation of these boxes, making the nomination rationale irrevelant.-- Phoenix -  wiki  21:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I "endorsed" their creation (Or my memory doesn't remember it), but I do not object to them and do not mind if people use them. Given their content, their current location seems to be the most appropriate location for them. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep all per Kylu's highly articulate reasoning. 'fraid I don't get the deletion rationale. Great latitude is given in userspace, and if 68.39.174.238 wants to be rid of them, can tag for speedy deletion. Dloh  cierekim  21:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep All. This is not even close to a violation of WP:CANVASS.  No valid reason for deletion provided. --JayHenry (talk) 22:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep. Some users actually use the userboxes, plus who ever tagged them, s/he forgot to add the "noinclude" tag -- Antonio Lopez (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - There's nothing wrong with this usrebox. It expresses a valid opinion.  Lara  ❤  Love  00:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep WP:CANVASS does not apply to user registration. Furthermore, the userbox shows a disinterest in the subject, which could not be construed as canvassing. I suggest withdrawing your nom. the_undertow talk  00:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Please close this debate as I was not thinking straight when I nominated it - I was vandal-fighting and doing a fair bit of vandal-reversion yesterday. Apologies to 68.39.174.238 and Kylu for this nomination, it wasn't a bad-faith nomination, I just wasn't thinking straight. Sorry. --Solumeiras talk 10:19, 18 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.