Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DarknessLord/Le Comic

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 tagged for speedy deletion U1 per [1]. Note that the page was moved to User:DarknessLord/Random Stuff/Le Comic during the MfD proceedings, and as a result both it and the redirect (linked to in the header) were deleted, the latter as a R1. Daniel.Bryant 06:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:DarknessLord/Le Comic[edit]

This has no Wikipedia value. I am nominated all subpages from this as well See [2] (35 pages) and all images on these pages as well. --MECU≈talk 19:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The kinds of things people do to bug other people... feel free to... just waste another six hours of my time... -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (T C E) 20:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I snipped a shit load of arguing from this section. Bottom line is, it's one sub page. Bottom line is, we've all got far better things to concern ourselves with than continuing this shit storm. A lot of prolific users have slightly unencyclopaedic user page content, and this is still tolerated because of all the other good work they do.

The "rule" against cruft on user pages, like all our "policies", is subject to Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, which means we still have the right to use our goddamn common sense when invoking it. The spirit of the rule is to stop emo kids creating accounts, bitching about their lives, and using us as another kind of LiveJournal.

EMO KID? LIVE JOURNAL? BITCHING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?!?!?!?!?!?!!??!?!?!!?!??! -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (T C E) 14:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Sir James Paul"; policies are not set in stone, with five or six notable exceptions; the Five Pillars of Wikipedia constituting most of them. And I completely disagree with the assertion that, "when the law is broken, we must still enforce it" - that's just bull shit, and it has lead to some of the most horrendous atrocities in human history.

If a process, or a policy, is applied with common sense, then it works much better than a quick and messy implementation en masse.

It seems to me that Simply MP has contributed almost nothing of worth to the encyclopaedia proper, and is probably wasting his time and our resources; if this is the case, then he should be blocked - it's that simple. DarknessLord has made slightly more valuable contributions to the main namespace, and should probably allowed to continue doing so; his utility to us can be reviewed in a few months, and then we'll see.

Are we all done, here? I hear there's a free-content, web-based encyclopaedia project looking for people to help it out somewhere on this Internet. 81.156.126.223 14:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you IP. I am readding material that I included before as an addition to this nom which are moved pages of the material listed for deletion:

I would like to add all the user pages and images under User:DarknessLord/Random Stuff as well: (29 pages) [[3]] I also believe moving pages in your userspace to try and save them from deletion is not appropriate, as it appears you have moved at least The /Le Comic page to try and prevent deletion. --MECU≈talk 21:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not prevention. I was moving it because Random Stuff was left un-MfD'ed. And no, IP, that's not an argument. -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (T C E) 14:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DarknessLord, your fighting a battle that can not be won. If I were you I would just give up. This really is making you look bad. Again, give up. I think that everyone else will see that this is a clear violation of the user page guidlines and there that there is no reason for us to "bend the rules" in this case. You can gie up and get over this, or keep up the fight, either way it will get deleted. Peace. --James, La gloria è a dio 15:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that Simply MP has contributed almost nothing of worth to the encyclopaedia proper, and is probably wasting his time and our resources; if this is the case, then he should be blocked - it's that simple.

So you're going to block me. For what? What did I do against Wikipedia? How did I break the rules? The fact is, all Wikipedians should be treated equal. Just because one of them has made more edits than another does not mean they can get away with more. When will you understand that?

Oh, and if you think we can discriminate against users with lesser edits, IP, than the fact that you don't even have an account means that we don't have to listen to you. Simply MP 18:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can we please stay on subject and just decide whether to keep or delete this? DarknessLord, please desist your constant resistance of other's thoughts. Sir James Paul, please do not refer to this discussion as a "battle." This is an organized process of the deletion of User pages/sub pages. Not a battle. Also, why should one be blocked for not contributing encyclopedic content (unless it's vandalism only)? Simply MP, you are terribly wrong. Whether or not you're an IP, anyone's opinion is greatly noted. Nevertheless, delete as per little to no encyclopedic content. Thank you very much. --♥Tohru Honda13♥ 19:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if it sounded like I don't notice IP's. I was only saying that it was wrong that he considers users with more edits to be able to break the rules. Sorry if it came out wrong. Simply MP 19:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, it wasn't majorly uncivil. But the IP is wrong for what he said about you being blocked for low encyclopedic contributions. That's not right. Cheers! --♥Tohru Honda13♥ 19:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a final statement before I wring myself away from Wikipedia, I have to say that I have changed my mind about what I said before. I thought that it was wrong for DLord to be singled out to have his stuff deleted, but now that I think about it I see something that I didn't before - the overwhelming amount of this random "DLord cruft" he has stored in his subpages. True, a lot of people have a random subpage that doesn't fit into policy, but this is on an entirely different level. Personally, I think that he should be allowed to have one random subpage like everyone else, but this is unacceptable. While I'm all for turning the blind eye when a good user has a little fun, the line has to be drawn somewhere. DLord, I hope that you don't take this personally, but I have to vote Delete. Peace, -- The Hyb rid 20:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that we should just delete it now. There is no need to keep on talking about this bacause nobody is going to vote to keep it. --James, La gloria è a dio 21:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not only violating our user page guidlines but also WP:NOT. This is the section its violating:

Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site Wikipedia is not MySpace. You may not host your own website, blog, or wiki at Wikipedia. Wikipedia pages are not, Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration.

If you still believe it should stay please come up with a valid reason why it should. Thanks. --James, La gloria è a dio 00:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete rer Hybrid. -- Mikedk9109 (hit me up) ^SIGN 18:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per being owner. If I hadn't been banned because of sister meddlings, I would have said this yesterday. I understand now, but mainly the fight did not shift towards Le Comic, it shifted towards Wikipedia itself. And since I, the owner, say delete, I think the case is closed. -- ~D-Lord (Sign!) (T C E) 19:17, 22 January 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.