Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Born2cycle/blackkite

 __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 Already Speedy Deleted in accordance with CSD U1: user request to delete page in own userspace.  Super Mario  Man  18:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Born2cycle/blackkite


Violation of this section of our userpage policy. Not being used in any sort of ongoing discussion or dispute resolution, just a "shit list" that the creator is using as justification for creating another shit list, now also listed at MFD. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Seeing as this list acts as a defense against Blackkite's expressed intention to take administrative action against Born2cycle, it seems odd that he would be forced to delete it. If Blackkite's self-imposed exile continues, or if he specifically retracts his threats, then the list would no longer be necessary.LedRush (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to have completley ignored the actual reason I have nominated it. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to have completely ignored the actual reason I have defended it. And been rude in the process.  I understand that you believe this is just a "shit list", but seeing as Blackkite has a history of attacking others and than blocking them, even well after the alleged first infraction (he often comments about people's long history of problems, and has made that remark several times against B2C, I don't see how we can say that this is not part of an ongoing discussion or dispute resolution until Blackkite retracts his threats or until some time has passed.LedRush (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what was rude about my comment, it was just an observation. If you found it to be rude then repeating it back to me would be an act of deliberate rudeness on your part. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Generally, being overly argumentative is also considered rude.LedRush (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - it's not being used, it doesn't help the encyclopedia, and it doesn't meet with policy. Jonathunder (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Contentious, bullying, and entirely against collegiality and good order on the Project. N oetica Tea? 00:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, because bullying is frowned upon, shouldn't he have the means to defend himself from an active threat?LedRush (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Didn't you just criticize me for being "overly argumentative" because I responded to your comments? Beeblebrox (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC) l
 * Nope.LedRush (talk) 01:31, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - if this page were to be used as part of a dispute resolution process, it would not have gone unedited for so long. Laundry lists of complaints and perceived wrongs, if not urgently required for the purpose of providing evidence, have no place at Wikipedia.  Super Mario  Man  00:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete we don't normally allow such pages unless being actively used in dispute resolution. The material can be kept off site should it ever have a use. Hobit (talk) 00:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Jonathunder, which is nice and succinct. Greg L (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The nomination contains language "that is usually considered vulgar and profane".  Unscintillating (talk) 01:34, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh do grow up. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:37, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I remember how my friend in second grade was fond of calling me a “shit ass”. Quite novel back then (1962). Not so much now. Wikipedia is part of the real world. Greg L (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. per WP:UP. Actually, I'm slightly tempted to keep this as a record of B2C's modus operandi, but on balance think this content is offensive; this MfD should suffice as part of B2C's own dirt file. I'm less than impressed by his bragging about it as if the ends justify the means. [comment to B2C: if you really do have a dispute you want to resolve amicably, go to WP:DR or WP:RFC/U ]. -- Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 02:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, obviously Repeat of my post at the similar case. There have been many cases like this, and they have been resolved in accord with POLEMIC: while it's ok to work in a sandbox to prepare evidence for an appropriate noticeboard in the immediate future, pages which simply list "points about editor X that I don't like" are very unhelpful for the community (no BATTLEs please). Johnuniq (talk) 02:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I saw the kerfuffle with Black Kite and regarded it as undignified on B2C's part. That a hate page should result is unacceptable and a clear breach of policy. PM Anderson has a hate page on me (actually, it's a large section of a page), but I can't be bothered to apply for it to be deleted; and parts of it are amusing. That's my choice, though. B2C's habit of flinging mud at people with whom he disagrees needs to stop. Tony   (talk)  02:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and ban Born2cycle from creating these types of pages "sin bins" don't help the project in any way --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  21:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment since the problematic behavior stopped soon after I started compiling the incidents on this page (coincidence?), I added a db-user tag to the abandoned page and it has been deleted accordingly. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:07, 9 January 2012 (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.