Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Don't be a whiny bitch

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 keep.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Don't be a whiny bitch[edit]

Completing nomination on behalf Of Wilkos who considers it "Unnecessary, harsh language, vandalism".[1]--Tikiwont (talk) 09:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Essay tag at the top clearly states it's a user's opinion, and WP isn't censored, so the language is a non-issue. At worst, userfication would be acceptable. GlassCobra 10:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy sems to be in order. Single line essays are not really WP material. Collect (talk) 13:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per GlassGobra. The essay tag at the top of the page really couldn't be more clear. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy or Delete This is just a snippet of WP:TEA or WP:HORSEMEAT in my opinion. Yanksox (talk) 21:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy copy of WP:TEA indeed. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GlassCobra and MZMcBride. Mr.Z-man 22:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Makes sense, and it's an essay. —Ree dy 22:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:IAR is a fundamental one line policy, so this argument on length is not convincing. It has all the elements of an essay, and what is says is good sense. I agree we do not censor. Thanks! --Cerejota (talk) 01:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - Essay by single user that is already duplicated by others already in project space with more WP:CIVIL language.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 01:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GlassCobra.--Ashbey ₮ 03:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on the basis of its offensive language. Lightmouse (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And when did WP become censored? Plus, while I recognize that other crap exists is not a valid argument, we do have other essays with worse language WP:FUCK---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 14:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that essay is actually funny.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it's fun to use the word FUCK in the edit summary, I wonder how many WP:NPP'ers came rushing to this page thinking that it had been vandalized!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 15:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! Yeah, WP:FUCK is way funnier. Still, I think anyone who argues against this essay solely on language should be ignored. We do not censor, period. And this is still a bit funny, and could be useful when people keep on keepin' on. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for comedy. This "essay" isn't informative or unique. As Aervanath states, there are duplicates of the message which are already being used in project space, without profane, insulting language. And in response to Balloonman, it uses unnecessary profanity (see WP:PROFA). Userfy wouldn't bother me but IMO, the article is wasting valuable space which could be used for a constructive, informative purpose, which is why I requested it be deleted. Once again, I have no problem with profanity in wikipedia as long as it's used to inform and educate. WP: Don't be a whiny bitch does neither, it just states one's opinion in an insulting manner.-Wilkos (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the "wasting valuable space" argument isn't likely to go over well, because of the widely-agreed essay entitled "Wikipedia:Don't worry about performance", and the fact that this page is really small. (I'd be interested to know how much storage space en.wikipedia actually has access to. Something mind-blowing, I imagine.)--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't think WP:Profanity applies to project space, only to article space. It's a style guideline. My main concern is WP:Civility, which is policy, and applies everywhere.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 18:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It matters most how such an essay is used. So I find it ironic, that Wilkos himself has chosen to link this as direct response to an RfD [2] and fail to see how this cannot be meant as stating his opinion in an insulting manner.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was me, showing you, how it can be used in an insulting or disrespectful manner. Also asking for your input on the subject. Thank you for your input. Please do not use my talk page unless it is necessary. Thank you. --- Wilkos (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Userfy~~ this is not something that should go in the wikispace, but I have no problem with it as a user essay.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 14:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)While, I don't generally believe in pointy edits, I think the point was made above---there is no way that this essay can be cited without it sounding like a personal attack. Delete---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 20:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm thinking of the purpose of the essay, not its current content. Yes, the current content should be expanded to explain more about why whining is a problem. But suggesting it be deleted because it's not as funny as WP:FUCK doesn't make a lot of sense. We need to have an essay that explains why whining is troublesome to Wikipedia's outcomes. Icemotoboy (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - We have enough essays that drum this message home already. — Realist² 19:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The page makes a good point, and uses language that could be considered vulgar by some to communicate its message effectively; cf. shock tactics. In that the page is useful and in that the community does largely not object to cussing in essays, I would keep, and suggest not userfying. AGK 20:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And why shouldn't it be userfied? According the various guidelines surrounding essays include the language, Essays in Wikipedia namespace that are mostly written by a single person, and not frequently referenced, are generally moved to the userspace of their author. This essay first that description. It is written by a single person and not frequently referenced. This is a prime example of an article that should be moved to the userspace.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 21:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Userfy - it's redundant, pointless, and needlessly inflammatory (Calling someone a whiny bitch isn't going to smooth arguments.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Pretty funny. Jonathan321 (talk) 05:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Because that's where it apears to belong in its current state. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 07:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Don't be a whining idiot; else Delete for pejorative language. Xavexgoem (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy (or otherwise Delete) - possibly acceptable in userspace, but doesn't really belong as a WP-essay. We already have plenty of essays that say the same thing, with a slightly higher level of civility. Terraxos (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Three sentences does not qualify as an essay! The statement is far too general and poorly articulated. Reguiieee (talk) 16:39, 15 December 2008 (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.