- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The outcome of this request for deletion was to 
Delete. Along with removal of the hardcoded userbox from the author's user page. Chenzw Talk 13:06, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
User:RazorTheDJ/ALGBT
[change source]Auntof6 has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: This userbox contains hate speech and should be deleted. People are entitled to their beliefs, but they are not entitled to have messages of hate on their user pages. Including the text "However they are to be respected" does not diminish the hate aspect. In addition, the hardcoded version of this userbox should be deleted from User:RazorTheDJ. I considered deleting this page immediately, but decided to bring it here in case the creator wants to argue for a different wording. Auntof6 (talk) 04:02, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.
Discussion
[change source]- Delete per nom --DannyS712 (talk) 04:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
- Being that they're in Kenya, if I'm correct it's taught that LGBT is a choice and is against ethics, something obviously false. Of course, such biases are not acceptable to be displayed in their editing, but why should they be prohibited from advertising their bigotry on their userpage? Vermont (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Delete. Not encyclopedic, unsourced POV spiel. Using WP for propaganda, no attempt to write a proper article. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:52, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
- I understand the POV bit, but why would a userbox need to be encyclopedic, sourced, or a proper article? Vermont (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
- The content is improper, and cannot be used as the basis for any page which we could accept. Therefore it should be removed. Having at least a potentially proper function on the encyclopedia underlies everything. We are not a free hosting site for whatever users may want to say. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I think we need to differentiate how this userbox is different than the other presently-accepted userboxes, and why such a difference merits deletion. I'm not sure if I'm reading your comments correctly, but it seems to me like that argument could be applied to any userbox. Vermont (talk) 10:09, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- Because this one as opposed to others could/would make for a toxic environment for editors and end up causing them to leave the wiki. A userbox saying someone supports X sports team is not going to do that. -DJSasso (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I think we need to differentiate how this userbox is different than the other presently-accepted userboxes, and why such a difference merits deletion. I'm not sure if I'm reading your comments correctly, but it seems to me like that argument could be applied to any userbox. Vermont (talk) 10:09, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- The content is improper, and cannot be used as the basis for any page which we could accept. Therefore it should be removed. Having at least a potentially proper function on the encyclopedia underlies everything. We are not a free hosting site for whatever users may want to say. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:27, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I understand the POV bit, but why would a userbox need to be encyclopedic, sourced, or a proper article? Vermont (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
- Comment. I have very mixed feelings about this. I will say the following: (1) Sourcing has nothing to do with this. Userbox starts with "This user believes..." (2) For Mac: The possible legitimate function here is that if this user ever tries to edit on a page concerning LGBT, people know where the user is coming from. In my view, understanding a person's background as informing his/her edits is just about the only reason that any userbox about a person's background, faith, what have you, can legitimately live here. (3) The line between censorship and preventing bigoted speech is a very tricky one. I'd be much happier with a rewording than an outright deletion, I think. (4) I'm more OK with deleting the template subpage than in deleting the hard-coded version on the userpage (provided there is some rewording). If someone wants to copy the hard code to their user page, then (sigh) it's probably OK. We don't have to allow it to be easy. (5) I STRONGLY suggest that Auntof6 send this user an email. This user is on a wikibreak, apparently, and may not see this discussion. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I would require the categorization "Anti-LGBT Wikipedians" to be removed". StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- The category is no different than the userbox itself. It is saying essentially the same thing. Both are inappropriate. Delete. -DJSasso (talk) 16:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I would require the categorization "Anti-LGBT Wikipedians" to be removed". StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- Comment- the user box doesn't worry me, and having someone with strong views on this subject "self identify" makes it easier to check on any future POV editing.--Peterdownunder (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per vermont and peter, does not harm anything and is perfectly fine if its kept out of articles. Computer Fizz (talk) 21:23, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Noting I'm in favor of deletion, just not in agreement with Macdonald-ross as to why. I echo DJSasso's comments on this. Vermont (talk) 22:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- Clear-case Delete. I think this is pretty self-explanatory. Openly hateful views like this aren't appropriate. Hiàn (talk) 23:16, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
- So I guess wikipedia is censored now. Computer Fizz (talk) 05:55, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Computer Fizz: Wikipedia is not Censored but I think it's not along the Resolution:Nondiscrimination. So please, delete.--BRP ever 06:16, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
- It is also not a soapbox. -DJSasso (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
- I think I went over the top on this one! User boxes were originally a way to say something witty, or to tell others something about yourself. The issue with this one is that it says what the person thinks negatively about others or at any rate about other people's opinions. That's a route we should not go down. We are certainly able to delete any content intended for userpages (etc) if we feel they are deleterious for the wiki and its readers. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:43, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete That box really has no place on wikipedia I agree with DJSasso. Examknowtalk 22:03, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- This RfD has been open for more than double the time it was supposed to be. I understand it may be hard to draw a consensus and may propose a reword. Computer Fizz (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- The consensus is a pretty clear delete. Just need a non-involved admin to close it. -DJSasso (talk) 12:47, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- This RfD has been open for more than double the time it was supposed to be. I understand it may be hard to draw a consensus and may propose a reword. Computer Fizz (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
This request is due to close on 04:02, 29 September 2019 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.