Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GabrielF/AfDs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. —Doug Bell talk 20:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:GabrielF/AfDs

Replicating closed noticeboard. After MUCH contentious discussion and several MfD's, GabrielF agreed to close his Conspiracy Theory Notice Board User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard and use standard deletion sorting, and even set up a CT deletion sorting page. Gabe claims that this page is just for tracking HIS AfD's but it clearly says, This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it. If it's HIS, how can OTHERS expand it? Troubling. Lets nip this in the bud before it becomes even more problematic, and go back to standard deletion sorting like Gabe promised. Fairness & Accuracy For All 09:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep. That text is the result of {{incompletelist}}. Reasonable, given that the user states himself that the list is incomplete. I'm not privy to the details of the earlier situation, but unless this evolves into something other than what it appears to be now, I cannot see a problem with users listing their own AFDs, even if the templates they use to create the page aren't a perfect match. Serpent's Choice 11:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete Here we go again. Thanks Fair. Sigh. Wikipedia should be renamed wikidrama. Travb (talk) 12:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per nom.Tellyaddict 12:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Appears to be a user page tracking own AfD's. It doesn't resemble mentioned noticeboard. (There was never a consensus to delete it either per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard - snowball keep. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard (2nd mfd) - keep.) --Dual Freq 16:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep There is a comment under the incomplete list tag telling people not to add their own AfDs. I also reverted one user who mistakenly added his own AfD. I used the incompletelist tag because the list is incomplete. If there had been a template that simply said "this list is incomplete" without the "you can help" text I would have used that instead. GabrielF 18:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment : There was no such comment telling people not to add their own AfD's when I nominated it. history - Fairness & Accuracy For All 06:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
That's completely false. I added the comment on Feb 3, you nominated the article for deletion on Feb 4. [1]. GabrielF 00:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
And yet people keep adding them, and they only get removed after its noted in the target AfD that it was added. Guess that obsolves the board of everything right? there is a notice saying don't. --NuclearZer0 18:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
What? Do you guys actually look at the history or do you just make stuff up? One person added an AfD. I reverted it as soon as I was notified about it and I left a comment telling people not to do it in the future. Nobody added anything after that. I have absolutely no idea where you are getting your information from. GabrielF 05:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Dual Freq. --Aude (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The page is STRICTLY GABRIELFs AFDs now. Also, since GabrielF's deletion of the page was an informal agreement, I really don't see what we are even adjudicating here, seeing as the conspiracynoticeboard in fact SURVIVED both AFDs, and was removed as a sign of goodwill. This MFD is approaching harassment. AlexeiSeptimus 18:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Talk about Déjà vu. It is his personal page only. In fact – WP:SNOW this one. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 20:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment : Thanks for pointing out that "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it" was a template message. At one time the page did list a AfD added by another user - which has now been deleted - and as it was added by a notable denizen of the old board - it raised my suspicions. If GabeF would agree to wait until any AfD that he nominates closes before adding it to his list, I'll gladly withdraw this MfD. How 'bout it Gabe? - Fairness & Accuracy For List Makers 22:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • No, the AfD added by another user was deleted immediately after I was notified about it. There is no evidence that I have acted in anything other than good faith - and your consistent failure to assume otherwise strikes me as rancorous and unproductive. GabrielF 23:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry that your decision to add a template message encouraging others to add their own AfD's to a page that was intended for only YOU to edit was interpeted by this editor to actually MEAN what it said. It must have confused the editor who added his own AfD to the list as well. I'll ask first next time. - Fairness & Accuracy For All 00:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Tracking his own AFDs--Strothra 02:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per my comments below. Tuxide 04:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment to nominator If he wants to have his own sandbox for his personal use then that is fine by me. It was I who proposed that User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard be moved to the Wikipedia namespace (which I see nobody has modified since its creation, I wonder why?), and my only reason for proposing this was that it was edited primarily by two parties that plain just don't like getting along with each other. I see nothing wrong with having his own personal list of AFD nominations because it is for his personal use and he is not encouraging others to modify it. The {{incompletelist}} template is gone and I strongly encourage you to withdraw your nomination, least to demonstrate good faith if for any reason. Regards, Tuxide of WikiProject Retailing 04:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Response : I offered to withdraw it is he would simply agree to not add AfD's until they're closed. He declined. - Fairness & Accuracy For All 06:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
        • Why should I have to accept your conditions for the use of my user page? Maybe its more useful for me to track open AfDs when I nominate five or six at a time than closed ones. GabrielF 19:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
        • Comment to nominator So then what is your Nomination? If you still have one, it needs to be updated, else it will not survive MfD. Regards, Tuxide 07:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment to GabrielF You can subst that template and modify its wordage so that it doesn't encourage others to edit your page. Regards, Tuxide of WikiProject Retailing 04:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Used as a means of canvassing by proxy. If your collection of like-minded editors knows to watch your notice board, then you have to canvass them ONCE only and when nothing of note is happening, and can avoid the nasty negative consequences of canvassing them when there is actually something happening. And I think we have been here with this user and this topic once before. "Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent." --BenBurch 07:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Your hypothesis is cute, but completely lacking in evidence. Your attack on me is false, as others have pointed out, there was never a consensus to delete the conspiracy theory AfD watchlist and nobody has proven that I've ever canvassed anybody. GabrielF 19:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
      • So its coincidence that myself, TBeatty, Morton and Tom harrison all just happened to find on AfD the exact items posted on your noticeboard and only those items for over 2 months? And I believe Morton and Tom and yourself have always voted in Tandem, I will add Tbeatty I believe also. I guess you can say thats a coincidence, kind of like after I stated what the board was for Morton removed the "rl" tag next to my name on his "friends list", I am sure we arent buddies and "rl" doesnt mean anything and its all more coincidence. So anyone else want to stick their head in this sand I am selling? --NuclearZer0 18:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
        • You're confusing separate issues. I have never been accused of canvassing under any definition of the term that comes from wikipedia policy. Creating a noticeboard, or, as Ben puts it "canvassing by proxy" is something that a few editors have complained about vocally but which the community as a whole has repeatedly found acceptable. Did people watch my noticeboard and find out about AfDs through it? I'm sure they did. Did those people always vote the same way? Some of them frequently voted the same way, but others didn't. Was this something that the community deliberated on at least twice and decided to proscribe? Absolutely not. As for Morton, I fail to see what relevance the little notes he puts on his userpage have. For all I know they're designed to confound you. So what if he keeps a friends list? So what if he decides he doesn't agree with somebody and takes them off the list? Did Morton removing the "rl" next to your name have any effect whatsoever on your ability to find out what AfDs were on my noticeboard? Of course not! Regardless, this has nothing to do with the page that's actually being nominated for deletion here. GabrielF 06:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The notice board is provably enabling meatpuppet behavior in GabrielF's favor. The clearest example of meatpuppetry is User:Morton_devonshire. Morton has voted delete on the last 6 items added to the noticeboard (excluding the seventh item that Morton added himself to the notice board but was then reverted by GabrielF):
  1. Iran_Solidarity --> delete
  2. Action_Iran --> delete
  3. American_Idiot_%28film%29 --> delete
  4. List_of_killed%2C_threatened_or_kidnapped_Iraqi_academics --> delete
  5. Don%27t_Attack_Iran_Coalition --> delete
  6. Proposed_Israeli_Nuclear_First_Strike_on_Natanz_Facility --> delete
--70.48.70.252 17:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Of course Morton could just as easily have found those AfDs by looking at the AfD log for 1/20/07 since five of them were nominated on that day and the sixth the day before. Or he could have looked at my contributions. Should we require that all AfD nominations be made anonymously and that users not be able to look at each other's contributions? Further, there's no evidence that he voted to delete on those AfDs because I nominated them. After all, many users voted to delete each of these and all six were either deleted or merged. Don't you think its a little insulting to Morton to say that he's my meatpuppet? I have disagreed with him plenty of times. Finally, BellCanada, you yourself provide a perfect example of why this isn't as simple as you suggest. After all, you seem to show up to oppose me whenever I am involved in something controversial. Are you watching my contributions page? Should I suggest that users not be able to see others' contributions to prevent you from being a reverse-meatpuppet? Surely, you could use my AfD list to oppose all of my AfDs the same way you accuse Morton of using it to support all of them. GabrielF 19:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The page in question is linked directly to the top of Morton devonshire's user page, but I'm not going to care if he puts it on there because just by doing so he's not being uncivil. I am surprised to see he hasn't posted anything on this MfD yet, but if he's that big of a deal, then I hope the reaction he gets from all you people is entertaining civil both. Regards, Tuxide 17:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. I can't say I care what he agreed to do. If he wants to deactivate this too, it's fine, but why should we be saying to delete it? -Amark moo! 14:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per above arguments. Brimba 18:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. F.A.A.F.A., I like you, and you often make sound arguments, but today you fall flat -- your nom reads like this: "I don't like, so it must be deleted." You have not cited any policy, guideline, or rule in favor of your deletion, so it just looks like sour grapes. You have the burden here. Keep, because the subuser page does not violate our rules.  MortonDevonshire  Yo  · 19:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep I have a similar list that I use to keep track of my own activities, and I know that I'm not doing it for any pointed reason. The nominating editor seems to want the whole page deleted because he objects to a single sentence. Mole hill -> mountain. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete User agreed to close it after last AfD was going against it. Seems they reopened it on the sly in an attempt to circumvent that. Of the issue presented I will show again the bias notices that allowed for Meatpuppetry last time.
  • Bias Notices:
  1. Paul Thompson - Terms - "conspiracy crufter" & "Truther "researcher"" - [2]
  2. The CIA and September 11 (book) - Terms - "walled garden of conspiracy theory books" [3]
  3. The New Pearl Harbor - Terms - "walled garden of conspiracy theory books" & "yet another non-notable WP:BK" [4]
  4. Allegations of state terrorism by United States of America - Terms - "hot-bed of original research and conspiracy theories, with most sources failing WP:RS, and overall the article violating WP:NPOV" [5]
  5. Sofia Åkerberg - Terms - "non-notable Swedish academic" [6]
  6. Moshe Aryeh Friedman - Terms - "token Jews" & "91 google hits" [7]
  7. The Evolution of Intelligence - Terms - "non-notable academic book" "created to lend academic legitimacy" [8]
  8. Anthony J. Hilder - Terms - "non-notable conspiracy theorist filmmaker nobody" [9]
  9. Murder in Dealey Plaza - Terms - "non-notable conspiracy theory book" [10]
  10. The Great Zapruder Film Hoax - Terms - "same as above" (referring to Murder in Dealey Plaza) [11]
  11. Conspiracy of Silence - Terms - "Non-notable film failing the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (films)." [12]
  12. The Power of Israel in the United States - Terms - "non-notable book" & "I get the impression that its based on a lot of Jews-run-the-world crap." [13]
  13. Rumours and conspiracy theories about the July 2005 London bombings - Terms - "compilation of Original research and sources that fail WP:RS" [14]
  14. Hacking Democracy - Terms - "non-notable documentary" [15]
  15. Rosalee Grable - Terms - "Non-notable conspiracist, fails WP:BIO" [16]

I reccomend deleting this board as it has caused nothnig but drama and broke the rules regarding how to notify people. It was closed and reopened it seems to circumvent this very procedure as well. I reccomend GabrielF use the proper deletion sorting method as he began to do as opposed to this method. --NuclearZer0 18:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Never defeated, never deleted, often repeated.  MortonDevonshire  Yo  · 18:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Come on now. A lot of good came out of those MfD's. --Tbeatty 06:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Surprised you didnt post the "other link" you know which one ... =) --NuclearZer0 11:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Which other link? --Tbeatty 23:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
You're arguing against a page which has already been closed down. You might want to check what page this MfD is talking about. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually I am not, the page was simply moved. And since Morton has begun adding items, only to have them removed when it was noted in another AfD that GabrielsF's page had started again, it seems its the same page, with the same group. Had the item been deleted before it was brought to the attention of another AfD, it could be seen as a different story, but timing eludes to other reasons. And of course we have Mortons comments. He is not part of a board yet he takes it as being personally defeated if its deleted ... makes perfect sense. =) --NuclearZer0 19:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
What group? One person added one AfD! Further, I didn't delete it after it was brought up in an AfD, I deleted it after I saw travb's note about it on my talk page. Check the history. Travb left a note on my talk page at 19:13. I reverted Morton at 21:03[17] and replied to travb at 21:04[18]. I only posted on the AfD in question six minutes later, at 21:10 [19]. The timing alludes to this: I was notified of an error on my talk page by travb. I corrected it immediately, and replied to travb. Then, and only then, did I look at the AfD Morton had added. As for Morton being passionately involved in this MfD: as you well know, Morton's a good guy but he can be a bit of a pitbull. I don't think I've seen any AfD that he hasn't taken a bit personally. I think you are not only failing to assume good faith here, you are creating this vast conspiracy on the basis of a few shadows and some personal animosity GabrielF 06:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Are you really still arguing that everyone finds these AfD's through the AfD page? Are we to assume that none of them even followed your page anymore and found there way here, all 7 of the people on Mortons friends list with -rl tags? Give it a break. --NuclearZer0 12:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Check, The Nuke's citations. This is a long-running dispute, for which the people who oppose the concept are now 0-2, soon to be 0-3.  MortonDevonshire  Yo  · 19:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Not sure what concept this is? Since you do not use the board nor look at it according to GabrielF, he argued you happened to stumble on the AfD's, it seems you are making no sense at all. --NuclearZer0 19:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Again. THis is about fourth time it was nominated. I think the last time, the nominator was banned from commenting on it. Tbeatty 22:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I appreciate the support Tbeatty, but let me clarify. This is not, the "noticeboard" that users found controversial. It is simply a list of article's I've nominated for deletion. GabrielF 22:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, I know they are different. You know they are different, but they are not different to the nominator. --Tbeatty 06:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Just a list of pages GabrielF has nominated for deletion...and?--MONGO 06:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete There should be no meatpuppetry hubs. The targets rooted out follow a POV pattern. And I got harassed for my vote [20] by Morton Devonshire, so I must be on to something. The Behnam 05:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
    • What? You accuse people of meatpuppetry, they complain, and then you use that to prove that there's meatpuppetry? -Amarkov moo! 18:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
      • I am not a meatpuppet is a complaint. Accusing someone else is not a complaint. --NuclearZer0 18:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
I didn't accuse anyone; you misunderstood my statement. The page has potential for meatpuppetry, and I can't help but think it odd that I get harassed for my view. Morton Devonshire insinuated that I am a sockpuppet. If he had a fair disagreement he could have discussed civilly on this page instead of harassing me on my talk page. The Behnam 18:42, 10 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.