Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Grue/howto

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 delete. The relevant guideline states that "[m]aterial that can be construed as attacking other editors" is not appropriate to user space. The case that this page is by design intended to disparage is made in the arguments in favour of deletion and by the creator's comments. The arguments for retention do not address this issue. This page is an attack on other editors and thus an inappropriate use of user space. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Grue/howto

This is unusual in being a request to consider deleting a user's subpage. The grounds for deletion are that it is an unacceptable use of userspace.

The page purports to give instructions on "How to delete a template you don't like", and was created on 21 November, shortly after the closing of the deletion review of the now-deleted Template:Spoiler, and it was then linked by the owner, User:Grue, on Template talk:Spoiler, so clearly drawing a link between a list of very serious alleged policy breaches and an actual deletion of a template.

I don't want to address whether the allegations are true here, because although I think they're obviously false this shouldn't be a discussion about whether or not they are true. I want to address the question of whether this page and ones like it that are used to poison the well of debates can legitimately be used on Wikipedia.

Worthy of consideration is the fact that allegations similar to this have been persistent during the debate on Wikipedia talk:Spoiler over the past five months or so, and persisted beyond the deletion debate that saw the spoiler template eventually deleted. A case for arbitration was prepared by User:Kizor but rejected by the arbitration committee. Mediation was also attempted but failed. No further dispute resolution steps have been attempted. In the wake of the deletion debate and the deletion review further allegations (which are listed in Grue's template) were made.

So this page seems to me to be an attempt to exacerbate a dispute without

seeking dispute resolution. I suggest that this kind of page is thus not a legitimate use of userspace, which is reserved for improving the encyclopedia (and not making it worse by attacking fellow Wikipedians). --Tony Sidaway 06:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Replacing comment removed by accident.
This deletiong request seems ill-considered. While in it's current form it's not much use, a thread has been started at
CygnetSaIad 06:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Grue could engage in dispute resolution simply by approaching those people whom he believes to have made illegitimate blocks, meat puppeting, lies and deception and the like, and tackling them about it on their talk pages, then escalating if necessary through dispute resolution until the dispute is resolved. Writing a page in his userspace and posting links to it can only exacerbate the dispute. Editing the existing page to catalog the problems without showing actual evidence of his attempts to resolve the dispute won't get anywhere. --Tony Sidaway 06:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not currently in dispute with any user, so I don't see what's to resolve here. Nor is the page related to any particular dispute. The fact that it is relevant to Template:Spoiler deletion discussions is not actually my fault. I wrote a general "guide" how to delete any template. The fact that User:Tony Sidaway sees this as a personal attack on himself is only Tony Sidaway's problem and nobody else's. I think this page may have triggered guilt in him and he may now need to resolve disputes with himself.  Grue  22:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The page attacks no one. I don't know why Tony Sidaway thinks it's about him. Guilty conscience perhaps? --Pixelface 20:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Not an attack on me (though Grue has made a comment ("truth hurts") that suggests that he thought only a person who though it was aimed at him would complain about it) but certainly about identifiable individuals. You have repeated the essence of Grue's comment. I remind you and Grue of the Assume good faith and No personal attacks policies. --Tony Sidaway 20:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry for assuming you thought it was an attack on you. Do you think it's an attack on someone in particular? --Pixelface 21:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, for instance it attacks the various people who have closed deletion debates, and also makes accusations against those who have blocked people for edit-warring. It also accuses those who have argued for deletion of the template of using lies and deception. Although Grue is trying to distance himself from the implications, he made the connection by posting the link to the deleted template. He clearly intends the reader to understand that he is talking about those who were involved in the deletion of that template. --Tony Sidaway 17:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought it was a how-go guide for future reference. Are you suggesting these steps were actually followed by specific editors? --Pixelface (talk) 22:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm saying that by deliberately posting a link to the talk page of a deleted template, very shortly after its deletion, Grue is accusing fellow Wikipedians of systematic lies and deception. This is unacceptable. If he had evidence that those editors (especially the admins) have acted deceptively, he should take it to dispute resolution, and not poison debate by casting innuendoes against them. --Tony Sidaway 23:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I really cannot tell which fellow Wikipedians, if any, he is accusing. Would you please tell me who, specifically, you think Grue's page is referring to, instead of casting innuendoes against Grue? --Pixelface (talk) 19:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See above. Black Falcon (Talk) 19:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment However, if the instructions in the how-to guide are effective, administrators could follow the steps in order to get around the
    Wikipedia is not a guidebook, although the page is in userspace. Informing administrators how to disrupt Wikipedia is probably a bad idea. But I certainly don't think it's an attack on any particular user. --Pixelface 21:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete. In its current form at least, the page is accusatory of and offensive to at least a few editors (no one is actually named, but "close the discussion early, ignoring everyone who argued for overturning" doesn't call for much guesswork). Besides, The Prince is a more informative how-to guide. – Black Falcon (Talk) 00:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the page does not name any editors and the steps in the how-to guide have never actually been followed, how could the page be offensive to any editors? --Pixelface (talk) 01:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Editors do not own their userspace. It is his userpace, but that doesn't mean he's free to do whatever he wants there. In particular, he is not free to host content that harms the encyclopedia, such as content that attacks or accuses other editors. From
    WP:UP: "As a tradition, Wikipedia offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. However, pages in user space still do belong to the community." – Black Falcon (Talk) 04:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • How so? It's either a guide for lying and cheating one's way to deletion of a template or it's intended to disparage particular editors. Either way, it's not something that is conducive to collegiality and collaborative writing. – Black Falcon (Talk) 06:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Grue/howto&oldid=1082505474"