Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Captain scarlet/Trollbox


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 Delete ^ demon [omg plz] 19:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Captain scarlet/Trollbox
This showed up on WP:ANI a few days ago and as a result, I requested change the name of this subpage. As it is still here at this namespace I assume he has declined to do so. This is pretty clearly against WP:USER. While it would be perfectly acceptable to have a user subpage of disputes appropriately titled, calling it a "trollbox... dedicated to trolling messages" the editor has received is simply disparaging those he has come in conflict with, particularly when you consider that the "trolling" is really nothing of the sort. It includes an exchange where he and another party toss WP:NPA, WP:AGF, and WP:CIVIL at each other; a sockpuppet investigation (which ended in being blocked); and several content disputes. This subpage in no way furthers the encyclopedia. Delete. --Isotope23 13:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per concerns relating to not assuming good faith. Addhoc 13:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment (oh and guess: keep) No request for name change have been filed upon my talkpage and if it were I probably would leave it as is. That page is what I consider trolling and for me alone. you guys not believing it is trolling doesn't mean I don't believe it is, these were comments left to my attention which I consider trolling as none of these comments were welcome or appreciated. whatever my history, any comment I consider trolling goes there. I find it patronising and inappropriate for anyone else than myself find it appropriate to judge what I consider trolling. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Nothing in your userspace, or anywhere else here on Wikipedia is for you alone... please see WP:OWN. You may find it patronizing and inappropriate, but the fact stands, this page exists to disparage those who you've come in conflict with an this is in no way helpful to the project.--Isotope23 14:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Who said anything about owning anything? The page isn't there to help or not to help anyone, it's a categorisation of comments I consider trolling.
 * (edit conflict) Bonus Actions inconsistent with good faith include repeated vandalism, confirmed malicious sockpuppetry, and lying. Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be criticized, but instead that criticism should not be attributed to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice. Editors should not accuse the other side in a conflict of not assuming good faith in the absence of reasonable supporting evidence. Well I consider all those comments as trolling. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * ...and what you are doing by characterizing those comment as "trolling" is covered by the text you've quoted above; specifically: Editors should not accuse the other side in a conflict of not assuming good faith in the absence of reasonable supporting evidence. Calling these comments trolling assumes bad faith on the part of the other editor.--Isotope23 15:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * You've forgotten the last part of the sentence. Firstly you ommited to mention this in the first palce, then ommitted part of it. You can't turn things your way. Not assuming bad faith is valid before meeting someone. After weeks, months of collaboration I'm entitled to think what I wish about both a contributor or his/hers contributions. I've specifically asked, in many occurances, that certain editors do not contact me on my talk page. I'm not vandalising, personally attacking any user here, I'm saying their comments are unwelcome; trolling. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 15:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The way things are going, I guess I ought to make a backup of all this... Regardless of your guys' right to do any this I'll have to store it someone under an appropiate name. I don't know why I waste my time with you... Comments after comments it's inuendos, double entende and vaguely insulting à propos. God I think it's trolling, it should be enough for any of you, off course it isn't, someone needs to voice their PoV.


 * "No request for name change have been filed upon my talkpage" Oh yes there has. Andy Mabbett 16:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Andy Mabbett 16:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename as suggested. Captain scarlet is perfectly entitled to keep an archive of disputes, and probably the easiest way to deal with its unfortunate name is to ignore it, but it is completely against policy. This user has been advised that a trollbox is not a good idea on several occasions, going back to June. Labelling messages "trolling" is not helpful even when they are trolling. In this case, where it is hard to see how many of the comments could be considered trolling, it is unacceptable. JPD (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete and re-merge stuff such as the sockpuppetry case to the main talk page. Note I am NOT advocating a simple delete. I am asking the closing admin to do a little extra work on this one. Nardman1 23:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is necessary to remerge anything... the sockpuppetry case for example was on Captain scarlet's main talkpage before he deleted it and moved it here. He is under no obligation to keep it listed on the talkpage.  If he wants it deleted that is his call.--Isotope23 01:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete: Per nom. Jhamez84 12:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. This page serves no useful purpose other than to attempt to disparage other users. Captain scarlet has asked that I do not leave messages on his talk page but I feel it is perfectly acceptable to ignore this request where I feel it is necessary to communicate with him. The recent case of sockpuppetry was one such occasion but this is being described by Captain scarlet as trolling despite the instruction to "Notify the suspected puppetmaster" in the "Reporting suspected sock puppets" section of WP:SSP. If Captain scarlet wishes to retain the messages they should be archived like other messages. In summary, I cannot understand in what way this page furthers the aims of the Wikipedia project and so do not believe it should remain. Adambro 13:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: User is still adding to the page. Andy Mabbett 17:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - Keeping a trophy cabinet of all the people who have annoyed you is not assuming good faith & quite frankly, is something that the Predator would do... Spawn Man 11:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * LMAO, good faith is assumed upon meeting someone. After a while there's a pattern of annoyance, and trolling! Anyway, you've fantastically described the page, a trophy of the worst comments I've received. I've archived the trash that these messages are anyway. Feel free to apply Comunism if you wish, the messages are safe to show to people what contributors get away with and get others punished for. One day too I'll insult someone and have my target banned. Captain Scarlet <i style="color:#FF0000;">and the Mysterons</i> 11:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Why thank you - I always knew I was masterful with the word. ;) Well my friend, it sounds like you have a case of the tough bikkies - We all meet pains in the vases here & there (me being one included!), but we have to deal with it. We all make mistakes & I'm sure your page's subject's wouldn't want theirs plastered on an article somewhere to remind them. Have some compassion for your fellow man & let go. Hope you have a great day! :) Spawn Man 11:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: User is still adding to the page. Andy Mabbett 15:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Well credits to you for at least being aggreable to read. It's like this, I've said above the people who've made it to the trollbox (it's a bit like a collection of the worst) are clearly not held in my heart, I don't feel like being compassionate about them, more still, I'd like them to see it as a sign that they've gone over the top. Just like Pigsonthewing who'se just made it. <b style="color:#000000;">Captain Scarlet</b> <i style="color:#FF0000;">and the Mysterons</i> 15:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Time to close? Andy Mabbett 17:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Careful of the slippery slope Pigsonthewing. You can wait the two more days there is to conclude this farce Pigsonthewing. It's the 15th today, not the 17th. Anyway, all your blabber's been archived, it's all safe don't worry. <b style="color:#000000;">Captain Scarlet</b> <i style="color:#FF0000;">and the Mysterons</i> 22:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You think WP:Consensus is a farce, eh? I wonder what the consensus here will be. Nardman1 22:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry Nardman1 but it seems your contribution could be assimilated to a threat. <b style="color:#000000;">Captain Scarlet</b> <i style="color:#FF0000;">and the Mysterons</i> 23:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete and Comment User:lewisskinner also has a sub-page named "Trollbox" as well, and has been active on many similar pages to User:Captain Scarlet. After scanning his trollbox, on which I see, surprisingly, my own name appear, given that I was merely disagreeing with him, I feel this page should also be deleted.  DDStretch    (talk)  23:32, 15 April 2007 (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.