Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:IP vandalism

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. I'm closing this now per WP:SNOW. —C.Fred (talk) 19:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:IP vandalism

I WP:USERFIED this because it's essentially a personal essay, but it has been restored by the author. ––FormalDude (talk) 04:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is not a personal essay. SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 04:41, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Contrary to what the creator claims, this is a personal essay. There is no need for this essay in the Wikipedia namespace, as it really serves no value (just link to WP:VAND). ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 04:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that this is a proposed guideline and not a personal essay SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 05:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We do not need a page telling readers that IP users could vandalize Wikipedia but please don't. WP:BEANS and WP:DENY have better advice. Johnuniq (talk) 05:25, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy: Disputed single-author essays, unworthy for projectspace. Encourage new users to write their thoughts in userspace essays, but reserve projectspace for new essays that are somehow better. This essay is perfectly fine in userspace as the reflections of its author. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:41, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a new user. SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 07:16, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
8 months 11 days is not new? That’s very new. Or do you have prior history? SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:19, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's new compared to YOU. SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 11:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Observation: SpyridisioAnnis has ~350 edits in a little over eight months of editing, which certainly counts as a relatively new user. SmokeyJoe has over 40,000 edits in over 16 years of editing. —C.Fred (talk) 14:28, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But I am apporaching ECP rights. SpyridisioAnnis Discussion 14:31, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Which is very respectable. New users must always be welcomed and encouraged. Your essay writing should be encouraged. It is admirable that you are thinking on globally applicable principles. The “delete” !voters are being very harsh in not agreeing that you should be encouraged to write these things, except in your userspace as opposed to in projectspace. SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This editor was provided the opportunity to develop their essay in userspace initially but immediately restored the page and called the move "disruptive". I don't think anyone's being overly harsh. ––FormalDude (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should offer him the choice of “userfy” or “delete”. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anybody here would object to userfying this page if SpyridisioAnnis were to request for it to be userfied. —C.Fred (talk) 04:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The user is now indef blocked. So it would now seem pointless to userfy it. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This does appear to be a (unnecessary) personal essay. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 08:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if this editor would like to contribute constructively to discussions or additions to our main vandalism policies, this is not the way to go about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizium23 (talk • contribs)
Delete. As far as policy, this seems to be stating that IP editors shouldn't vandalise. That's already covered by existing policy. --Yamla (talk) 10:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This isn't even worth userifying, since there's nothing worthwhile even as a userspace essay; the entire thing could be condensed into "Anyone editing Wikipedia should follow Wikipedia's rules unless they can demonstrate that there's a good reason to deviate from them on a specific occasion", which is already our most core of core policies. ‑ Iridescent 15:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Badly written "proposed policy" that just regurgitates bits of other policies in an unclear and confused way. The various topics that this page covers are already covered in other pages (e.g. WP:VAND, WP:SOCK, WP:PROTECTION etc). The standard of English used here is poor, and many of the sentences in this page don't actually make sense, what is stuff like At all costs, IP vandalism destroys an IP user's editing privileges and blocks the IP from editing if the IP continues to vandalize Wikipedia, even if it seems normal to readers. even supposed to mean? We don't need multiple policies covering the same issue in trivially different ways, that just adds confusion and is pointless WP:Rule creep. 192.76.8.64 (talk) 16:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I have zero idea how this could be a guideline, considering vandalism is bad regardless. First sentence is patently untrue (Logging out cannot let you vandalize Wikipedia.). I don't see the want to move this to userspace - there's nothing here that is actionable and doesn't give any information that isn't handled better elsewhere. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:35, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is a poorly written and completely unnecessary page that just repeats information in better-written pages elsewhere. There's no need for a page that basically says you shouldn't vandalize if you're editing as an IP, just as there's no need for a page that says you shouldn't vandalize if you're logged in, or a page that says you shouldn't vandalize on Tuesdays. And unhelpful nonsense like "readers might not understand what terms like "Vandal", "Page protection", "Huggle" or "IP user" mean in Wikipedia. They are terms related to vandalism and IP vandalism." doesn't belong on any page. CodeTalker (talk) 19:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Drivel from an incompetent editor. Burn it. — Trey Maturin has spoken 21:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I sincerely hope the message is getting across here, for their own sake.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 00:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—the creator was given the offer to develop this essay is his user space but declined it. Any further attempt to put it in his user space where it belongs would likely be rebuffed. Per the many opinions above, this "proposed guideline" is not ready. Imzadi 1979 → 02:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to userspace: Technically a user can write an essay about anything they want as long as it is related to the encyclopedia and it is in userspace according to WP:USERESSAY and WP:ESSAYS. The essay in question is technically related to Wikipedia. We should allow the user to develop the essay in their userspace no matter how many grammar mistakes there are. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 13:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As per the discussion above, they have been offered userfication of this screed and have declined it – they want it in mainspace and not userspace. — Trey Maturin has spoken 13:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SpyridisioAnnis Do you want this moved to your userspace? Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 14:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since the creator is now blocked I change my vote to Delete. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 16:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the author's refusal to accept userfying. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Captain obvious “guideline” (“vandalism is bad”) with misinformation in it. Dronebogus (talk) 14:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-Wiki junk, and the user doesn't want it in their userspace (otherwise they would have stopped moving it out of there). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unnecessary, and the work of a blocked user. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Dronebogus. Would have also agreed with userfying if the essay creator accepted it. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 19:30, 28 November 2022 (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.