Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WP:MOBY

Add links
From 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 Keep. Incidentally, it appears the article has already been userfied, and so the outcome of this discussion could alternatively been interpreted as "Userfy and Keep". Anthøny 21:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:MOBY

[edit]

The original location of this page was at WP:MOBY. It has since been moved to take it out of article space. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new to MFD, so I don't know what makes a good or bad argument at MFD, but it seems to me that this is a useless and unnecessary essay. It was just added today. I know it's only an essay. However, it's similar to the (funny, but illogical) "User:Cyde/Don't be a fucking douchebag" also up for deletion. WP:KETTLE is a much more rational of a response. At the very least, it should be renamed into the wikipedia namespace (right now it's at "WP:" usually reserved for shortcuts).

~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Keep/Userfy Failing a Keep Consensus - Whether or not you feel the essay is illogical, its point is still quite clear and understandable. Even if it seems redundant to you, it may seem conversely enlightening to others. The "douchebag" MFD still has not drawn a consensus as to whether Cyde's userspace essay should be deleted, and thus, that should not be used as a precedent.--WaltCip 18:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I wasn't implying that it was a precedent. I was implying that it was similar in nature and purpose. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but I direct you to this block of text under WP:POLICY:
  • The term essay is used for many opinion pages that do not fall in the above categories.
  • Essays are neither policies or guidelines regardless of whether these represent a consensus.
  • Essays need not be proposed or advertised; you can simply write them, as long as you understand that you do not necessarily speak for the entire community. If you do not want other people to reword your essay, put it in your userspace.
Nowhere does it specify that an essay needs to be "rational", "useful", or even "necessary." If you will, it is the written opinion of the editor, that of which other editors can take into account. Some may prefer WP:KETTLE, others may prefer WP:MOBY. Still others will continue to hold onto WP:DICK or just WP:DGAF. You can't pass edicts on one essay, however, without passing edicts on all of them.
Furthermore, I would strongly advise that you notify the creator of the essay that you have put it up for MFD, otherwise if this does end up getting deleted, DRV can get particularly unpleasant.--WaltCip 18:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Sorry, I forgot to notify User:Dweller. It appears that User:John Carter just notified Dweller for me. "You can't pass edicts on one essay, however, without passing edicts on all of them." Why not? Can't you "pass edicts" on one essay based on the particulars of its message? For example, if an essay was spouting bigotry, racism, sexism, and hate, it would get deleted here, right? Note, I'm not saying that MOBY is a hate piece. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Based on the particulars of its message" - Of course you could, but I do not see anything inherently wrong with the message that this essay is trying to send. The argument that you are proposing is that it's redundant. Well, gee, so are half the mainspace essays.--WaltCip 20:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Creator of the page has been notified. I also agree that having some sort of response in place to WP:DICK would be appropriate, particularly if one doesn't think one's behavior is particularly objectionable. If WP:DICK could be changed a little, particularly the name, I might favor deletion, but that isn't the case right now. John Carter 18:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but rename. Perfectly good essay, which makes a sensible, valid and well-reasoned point. However, the name is inappropriate because the WP:X pseudo-namespace, although we use it for redirects to projectspace, is technically in mainspace (where essays do not belong), so, if kept, this needs to be renamed as Wikipedia:Moby or something like that (although WP:MOBY can stay as a redirect). WaltonOne 19:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As the originator of this essay, thanks for the notification and no sweat that it was a little late... it's not a speedy nomination, so I've had plenty of time to get here. I won't particularly try to sway this debate, but will note that if it's kept, I think Walton One's suggestion is useful, with WP:MOBY kept as a redirect. You may or may not find it interesting that I've long planned to create this essay (it took me months just to get round to creating it as a redirect page!) and that I'm unconvinced it's properly polished as yet... perhaps that accounts for any illogic in it currently. Perhaps understandably, I'm reluctant to work on it any further while this MfD is in progress. Oh, sorry, but can't resist responding to just one element of the nom - it's certainly not useless... so long as there's a WP:DICK, some sort of response to it is indeed useful; in fact, I'd argue, utterly essential. Finally, I placed it in Project, rather than User space because I had hoped that others who felt similarly would help work on the essay and subscribe to its values, elements that I felt a userspace essay would not prompt. It is my ultimate hope that buy-in to this essay gathers sufficient momentum as to make citing WP:DICK the epitome of the behaviour it itself seeks to condemn, rendering WP:MOBY an interesting anachronism to be memorialised, archived or deleted. But I'm an idealist. Cheers. --Dweller 18:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete article but keep shortcut. There's nothing here that isn't already elsewhere, such as on WP:CIVIL, WP:KETTLE, or m:Don't be a dick itself. The last thing we need is a canned response that actual dicks can throw up when they're called one. It's a cute shortcut, though, so I'd say point it to WP:CIVIL with an explanation of the shortcut. --UsaSatsui 19:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:I've moved this so it's no longer an essay in article space. The shortcut WP:MOBY resulting from this has not been changed. Comments above were added before the move. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Further comment: to avoid confusion, let me point out that I do not see any need to delete the page now that the namespace issue is moot. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Ironically, redundant with WP:DICK, which already notes the issues with citing it in debates. Phil Sandifer 13:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • No such redundancy should exist. If that appears to be the case, it's because the article was insufficiently developed before it was listed at MfD. The contention of MOBY is that WP:DICK is inherently uncivil. There is no polite or sensitive way to direct attention to WP:DICK. Argue the deletion of this essay by all means, but please do so on the basis of what it is saying, not a misunderstanding. So long as WP:DICK and the DICK meta article exist, this can be a lot of things, but never "redundant". --Dweller 14:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Essays are permitted to be redundant, and this one makes a valid point. Also, unlike User:Cyde/Don't be a fucking douchebag may be, this is not vulgar or offensive. --Alksub 20:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as long as it is understood that it doesn't necessarily speak for the entire community and as long as other people get to edit it. Both these conditions seem to be met. Personally, I see the potential usefulness of this essay: I've rarely experienced references to WP:DICK having a constructive effect in a conflict situation (whether I agreed with the assessment of dickishness or not), and I've sometimes wondered how I would react to having WP:DICK thrown in my face during a dispute. Thanks to this essay, I now have an acceptable response. Unlike the nominator I disagree that WP:KETTLE is a "much more rational" response, and unlike User:Phil Sandifer, I don't think it's redundant with WP:DICK either. I want to be able to respond without reciprocating. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy. It's good to be civil, but we have WP:CIVIL for that. It's a good idea, just not for a project space essay. J-ſtanTalkContribs 19:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm not sure ILIKEIT is relevant here, but I do. Contradicts no policies. No reason why not siotable for WP space.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
  • Keep, or if flawed & unfixable, Userfy by moving to User:Dweller/MOBY. Disputed essays that are essentially single-authored essays, if not fixed, should be userfied. No reason to delete. --SmokeyJoe 01:38, 29 October 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/WP:MOBY&oldid=1142591972"