Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Confederatemarine95/confederateflag
- 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: delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Inflammatory and divisive pro-Confederate piece, an obvious breach of WP:NOCONFED and WP:NOTWEBHOST. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 02:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. WP:NOCONFED is the opinion of a user, but either way, this is a violation of WP:NOTWEBHOST as well as WP:SOAPBOX and WP:UPNOT. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete usual pro-confed soapbox Dronebogus (talk) 04:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Delete per Thebiguglyalien. Oxi (Contact me) 10:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - WP:NOCONFED is not a policy. It's not a guideline. It's an essay that does not enjoy the widespread support of other commonly cited essays such as WP:CIR or WP:NONAZIS. I would hope a more valid rationale is presented for deletion. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly – WP:NOCONFED is not a policy, and it's not a guideline. It's an essay that is about a month old, and already endorsed by several users; currently, more users support it than WP:NORACISTS. I hope that it will enjoy far greater support over time, and that it will be implemented with the same strictness as related essays, like WP:NONAZIS and WP:NORACISTS. I would say that WP:NOTWEBHOST is quite a valid rationale for deletion; I am sorry that I forgot to mention WP:SOAPBOX and WP:UPNOT, cited by Thebiguglyalien, that certainly apply in this case. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 14:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Agree, but also think noconfed shouldn’t be used as an argument until it’s grown in popularity and age. Dronebogus (talk) 21:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly – WP:NOCONFED is not a policy, and it's not a guideline. It's an essay that is about a month old, and already endorsed by several users; currently, more users support it than WP:NORACISTS. I hope that it will enjoy far greater support over time, and that it will be implemented with the same strictness as related essays, like WP:NONAZIS and WP:NORACISTS. I would say that WP:NOTWEBHOST is quite a valid rationale for deletion; I am sorry that I forgot to mention WP:SOAPBOX and WP:UPNOT, cited by Thebiguglyalien, that certainly apply in this case. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 14:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Wikipedia is not a webhost for your screeds about history. Curbon7 (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This singles out a specific group of editors. However some may feel about the confederacy it stood for slavery, and hosting it here is supporting that racism. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 22:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I mean come on... if you are going to make a case like this at least provide scholarly references rather than your own personal take. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as one of the authors of no confererates. Confederates are like Nazis. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:56, 12 November 2022 (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.