Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ikiroid/User Jimbo v. Willy 2

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 keep and schedule bout for 15 rounds. —Doug Bell ^talk 16:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Ikiroid/User Jimbo v. Willy

I'm not going to say "per WP:DENY", but userboxes such as these glorifying notorious, long term vandals with possibly thousands of impersonators are probably not a good idea. It's only feeding the trolls and giving them attention, and practically naming WoW as the antagonist (or Jimbo's evil counterpart) in the story of Wikipedia's history is, well, the ultimate recognition. It seems like this userbox is indirectly encouraging vandalism, and hence it should go. There's also the point that some other notorious vandal may see this userbox and want their own bout with Jimbo too-K@ngie^meep! 06:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Previous nomination on TfD Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 May 12#Template:User_Jimbo_v._Willy. CharonX/talk 17:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep- let it fade into obscrity, to quote someone on the last MfD. Jorcoga ^(Hi!/Review)06:56, Thursday, 15 February '07
• Keep - Even Wikipedia needs humour! Not only that, Willy on Wheels has actually sparked a meme on Wikipedia, at least that's what I think. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 07:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete This is not relevan at-all and would just create avoidable arguments and/or discussions between good editors and Vandals/trolls etc. Yes the newcomers should be taught about the infamous vandals and sockpuppets but this is by far the wrong way to go around it.Tellyaddict^{Editor review!} 16:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete- per nom.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 16:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I am slightly torn on this one. Well, it does give WoW a (minor) bit of publicity (counter question: is nominating a userbox, which in itself attracts wikdrama like bees to honey, with the reason to deny WoW and vandals in general publicity not rather counter productive?) But this userbox is little used, and is actually tounge-in-cheek humourful. Only a very small number people probably did even know about it, until it was nominated here. Trolls and vandals live from publicity. Being mentioned in a box almost nobody ever uses won't satisfy him or her. So my verdict is keep. CharonX/talk 17:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. It's not harmful and a bit funny. Willy on Wheels is the antagonist in the story of Wikipedia's history :) --- RockMFR 18:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - I do not believe that it is really causing a problem. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 21:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It makes me laugh, but it's contrary to what Wikipedia is all about. Others are right to say that if kept, it will probably fade into oblivion anyhow. YechielMan 11:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: a debate from mid-to-late last year took place at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ikiroid/User Jimbo v. Willy. Daniel.Bryant 12:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. WP:DNFT is not a policy. I also don't see much troll feeding in this template but rather an attempt to parody two major aspects of the Wikipedia community. As noted in the previous discussion, Jimbo himself doesn't care while it remains in userspace. Michaelas10 (Talk) 18:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep every time I see it this template nearly makes me groan (not my sense of humor, I guess), but that's irrelevant. A vandal may think "Hey, if I gain publicity enough, I might one day be the subject of a visually painful and not widespread userbox!"... or then again, perhaps not. Let this userbox continue to fade into obscurity. Willy on Wheels is not an active part of Wikipedian culture, just a meme-like reference, and deleting this userbox does nothing to change that. Gracenotes^T § 06:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Look, Romans tried that, heck, Egyptians tried that before them - and in 20 years from now, people will probably wonder who the heck this "Wheels" guy was, apparently a very loathed character among the Wikipedia community. "Deny recognition" doesn't mean "erase every damn mention of the person in question, no matter how minor". I don't like the guy either, but I do recognise this as a case where we're taking a well-intentioned guideline and stretching it so far that it's no longer even recognisable. WP:DENY is meant to stop trolls from getting an Official Score Chart and bragging rights. It's not meant to stop other people from having fun at the troll's expense. I know there's a thin line between the two, but still - arguing about this box is a little bit ridiculous. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, it's stupid – Qxz 11:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep for the same reason we have WP:), despiteWP:FEED. Abeg92contribs 14:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)!

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.