Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gp75motorsports/ChampionMart

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 debate was Delete - user has requested the page be deleted and the request has been granted. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Gp75motorsports/ChampionMart

I am nominating this and the related subpages of this mart. This serves little purpose on Wikipedia as an encyclopedia and barely assists the community in terms of morale and community development. It encourages nothing more than turning Wikipedia into a social network and its only purpose is (to quote the page's creator) to give newcomers "a unique userpage." This provides nothing to us to helping newcomers actively build articles or anything. Delete this and all related subpages. Metros (talk) 02:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• DeleteThough i like the idea of a nice easy place to have this done, its nothing more then what is stated above. Id really wanted they could open a website to do this. BonesBrigade 02:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep in case you haven't scrolled all the way down the page, we do other stuff. Besides, we aren't even set up yet. This is like killing the baby before it's even born. All we need is someone to redesign the userpage and we'll be smooth. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 02:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment This is not the only store on Wikipedia's servers. —BoL @ 02:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep "Shops" are opened for helping users (mostly newcomers) that need something special (like signatures). I have a shop myself. Please leave some time for this one, because it will help more newcomers.-- Vintei  Talk  02:54, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • But how does this help help them contribute to the encyclopedia? Many of the people you are "helping" have a very, very limited number of mainspace edits especially in comparison to their user spaces edits. It only encourages them to work on socializing and their user pages. Metros (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Developing a sense of moral and community spirit is always useful in a collaborative environment. Does this help in that regard? I'm not really sure... but I don't see how it causes harm - so long as it's not taken too far (like esperansa, etc) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 03:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • I don't really see this as creating community morale that much though. This creates more of a walled garden effect where it's only a set of users within it rather than a "global" community of Wikipedia in full. Metros (talk) 03:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
        • How so? "People who have asked for a custom template" vs "people who haven't"? It kinda just seems like these people are orgonising to offer assitance in creating sigs, templates, images and a few other things. Maybe I'm just not getting it.---J.S (T/C/WRE) 03:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
          • Sort of, but on a different level. The "target audience" for this are, more or less, those who are looking at this like a social network. So they go towards anyone on this shop to be their "Wikifriends" (like this). So the "walled garden" aspect comes from that, in my opinion. Metros (talk) 03:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
            • You want to know how this helps them contribute. it helps them learn HTML, before i started contributing to wikipedia about 3 months ago i had no idea what HTML was let alone how to use it. I learned by asking someone to make me a barnstar, or a signature and seeing what changes alter what. It is an excellent way to get a jumpstart for newcomers in learning how wikipedia works. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
              • Also, i dont see where you get off saying we are doing this as a "social network" if someone is looking for that they would never come to wikipedia they would go to myspace or facebook i never even knew about anything except the articles on wikipedia until i made an account. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Week keep, for my reasons stated above. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 03:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep for now. If they start criticizing each other's "shops", do not delete. Instead, have the shops fully protected. —BoL @ 03:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • On what merits do you think this should be kept? Metros (talk) 04:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Vintei's shop is excellent, I'll tell you that. As for this shop, this shop is actually (I believe) spamming Wikipedia (yes, check the reference desks), and is trying to create a fake of it. So, by all means, delete when they get flaming on each other, not fully protect, but delete. —BoL @ 05:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Once again, on what merits do you think this should be kept? Metros (talk) 05:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete with fire - More silly unencyclopedic nonsense, bureaucracy where it's not needed, reminiscent of Esperanza. Want to help someone design their user page? Fine. But don't start running around asking for "employees" and calling them "shops", then making subpages for "job requests". Wikipedia is not an online game - The Transhumanist has an excellent user page design guide here, and I'd be willing to bet that there's already a page for requesting help with one. Blow for Light's suggestion above needlessly complicates things as well, we don't need admins wasting time keeping the kids from calling each other's shops teh suck when there's an encyclopedia to clean up and backlogs everywhere. If there is not another page with a simple list devoted to letting people add their name if they are available to design userpages or requesting a design, replace this page with that (no "shop") nonsense. Otherwise, delete it or redirect to that. EDIT: Also, Metros is completely right about it being a rationale to add "WikiFriends" and other junk. This is not MySpace - if it helps you improve the encyclopedia, fine, but all I see is a bunch of users attempting to build their own little project for them to be at the top of. -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 04:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Then what should someone call it if not that? I guess we can just say, a page where you can post things that you need help with and list these people will help you with it. It is simply a place for people to get help in areas that they have less experience in, nothing more. we are not trying to create a "social network" if that were the case i would be adding people to my "friends list" and starting a blog. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • And another thing, how are we were just "a bunch of users attempting to build their own little project for us to be at the top of" if all we are trying to do is help newcomers... and if i did want to "find something to be at the top of" id just go play WoW. Sirkad_talk^sign 06:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
    • All it would require is a header: these people request user page design help, another header: these people are available to help create user pages. That's it. No unnecessary "shop" language, no grandeur of being a "founder" or a "clerk", no "competing", just a simple page with two headers and a description. -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 06:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • If that is what it takes then why cant we make a separate page so that all the requests dont clutter our talk pages. No matter what you call it the closest thing it could relate to is a shop, you go there, ask for something to be made, we make it and then give it to you. sounds like a shop to me... Sirkad_talk^sign 17:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per WP not a bureaucracy. This faux commercial enterprise is a terrible idea. You can provide all of these services, for free, without the "shop"/"employee" language. This editor has had difficulty understanding WP's purpose previously, and should be gently advised to cool his ambition, and channel his contributions into articles for a while. Xoloz (talk) 05:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep A shop is a greatway to help new comers become more interested in Wikipedia as well as a way to teach them how to properly use HTML in order to help contribute to an article. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:45, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • How does 4 lines of a signature like you have in your signature teach someone how to format an article on the encyclopedia? We don't use font colors and HTML within articles, do we? Metros (talk) 05:51, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Because it shows them some of the code and the effects it has upon the text. not to mention that signatures arnt the only things that can be created. User page templates or barnstars. anything. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Again, do we ever use those kinds of effects in a Wikipedia article? Aside from the occasion color-coded tables, I can't think of an article that does use these effects. Metros (talk) 05:54, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
        • In a template as for a user page you use tables, images and hyper links, which is also used in main articles. i am not just talking about using colors, in fact...i never even mentioned colors. Sirkad_talk^sign 05:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
          • Images are not HTML nor are hyperlinks. These are all wiki-specific things that users can play around with in the sandbox on Wikipedia. Also, how are these users learning anything? They're requesting what they want, you develop it, they copy and paste the code into their respective user areas. Where do they learn through that? Metros (talk) 06:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
            • They look at the code like i did, they take what they got and change what they want to see what changes and ultimately see how it works, simple observations. It is exactly what i did, using shops like vintei's to get the coding. Newcomers are an essential part of wikipedia (see here newcomers) and shops like this help them. Sirkad_talk^sign 06:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC) (hah, i rhymed)

Newbies need useful and practical instructions for contributing constructively to the encyclopedia. I don't see this anywhere on the nominated pages. It's constructive contributions first then a fancy userpage, not the other way around. MER-C 08:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Most users contribute through their I.P. Addresses before they even make an account, then they decide to make an account so that they can be recognized for their contributions, thus they would want a cool userpage and would need help. THAT is what we do and THAT is why newbies need the help! Sirkad_talk^sign 17:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete the lot. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an MMORPG or a social networking site. The user concerned has a track record of creating myspace-like pages. Why don't you spend some time fixing up some articles instead? There's tens of thousands of such pages here, so there's no excuse for being unable to find them. MER-C 08:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete all, not again. Wikipedia isn't MySpace or a MMORPG or a social networking site, nor is it a bureaucracy (Daniel refactored a hierarchical system within this "project" yesterday). I don't know how many MFDs it's going to take to get this across to the people working on these "projects", but this is an encyclopedia. This serves absolutely no purpose that isn't served by something else. Learning how to make a colorful signature bloated with three and a half lines of code is not going to help a user contribute to the project at all. --Coredesat 10:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete this page would serve little (if any) encyclopedic purpose, and in persuading users to get fancy signatures/userpages/barnstars it is more reminiscent of Myspace than an encyclopedia. Combining this with a bureaucratic and hierarchical structure creates something that is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Hut 8.5 11:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete contributes nothing to the encyclopedia, this is what we have sandboxes for. BLACKKITE 11:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Strong delete per above, and furthermore my warning at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Gp75motorsports/WikiProject AccInsure ("The users involved are strongly counselled to stop creating userspace groups such as this (and other previous deleted versions therein), and edit the encyclopedia"). Daniel 11:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The shop is disigned for helping people and like Gp75motorsports said we are waiting for someone to redisign the userpage.  Sunderland06  12:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note Sunderland06 just made completely contradictory comments about this shop on another MfD. So is it "a waste of space" or something that's a "strong keep" like he suggests here? Metros (talk) 14:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Actually it's not contradictory, just confusing grammar; he wrote "it is not a waste of space just like User:Gp75motorsports/ChampionMart which is also up for MfD" which I presume needed a comma after 'space'. He still doesn't give any good reason for either to be kept though. BLACKKITE 14:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • That makes sense now, but the way it reads in the state I found it can easily be seen as contradictory. Metros (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and this whole idea is inviting extra bureaucracy. I don't know about other admins, but I'd prefer to kill CSD backlogs or close old AFDs than keep protecting and unprotecting "shops". If you want to make signatures for people, fine, if they ask, make them one; it's a good thing to do. However, Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia, a serious encyclopedia, not MySpace or one of those social networking sites. Keilana 15:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. And NOT just because Sunderland06 told me so. It's because this page gives an oppurtunity for new useers to learn the basics about stuff on wikipedia. Keeping it doesn't do any harm;In fact, its best if we do keep it, while deleting it just removes helpful information that users can use.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete this and all other 'shops' and admonish these users to do something useful. Avruchtalk 15:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral, but maybe transwiki -- this and the other shops nominated are at worst harmless. However, getting groups together to experiment with wikicode and page layouts would be perfectly appropriate on Wikiversity, and most wikicode that works there will work here as well (some of Wikiversity's extensions are not enabled here, but not a huge issue), so if people want to use them on their pages they can just grab a copy and leave a link to the source. It doesn't remind me of Esparanza by the way: Esparanza was a pseudo-political organization, these shops are more akin to hobbyist groups. --SB_Johnny | ^talk 15:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete – encyclopedia arguments aside, I have few objections to a majority of the shops themselves, but am opposed to having them duplicate the functions of other wikipages: commons:Commons:Picture requests, commons:Commons:Graphic Lab, Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Requests, Wikipedia:Requested templates, etc. Add to this the fact that there are a select group of helpers, and anyone who wants to pitch in must first run through a bureaucratic process. As a result, things will get done less efficiently, and more poorly, by bastardizing collaboration. Individual "shops" for users that have a penchant for signature design, making barnstars, etc., are usually fine, but a "multi-use shop" such as this one is a misuse of the wiki. Gracenotes^T § 16:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Would it be better if we merged all of the existing shops to form one big wiki shop.  Sunderland06  16:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Increasing the size of a bureaucratic orgy doesn't make it more enjoyable, you know. It's the nature of a "shop", rather than the output, that's my main concern. I strongly agree with ArielGold's comments below: you might find her solution a good one. Gracenotes^T § 16:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete The Transhumanist already has a rather large selection of userpage design elements, and we also have a whole project already for this, at Wikipedia:WikiProject User Page Help. For non-specific requests, there are a multitude of resources already in place, Wikipedia:Reward board, Wikipedia:Bounty board, Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance), and the various Wikipedia:Requests pages that editors can request things like barnstars, or other items. I feel this "shop" is redundant, unnecessary, and the bits about "Managers" is tending towards a hierarchical organization system that is not something inline with WikiProjects. As mentioned by Daniel, this editor was previously cautioned against creating such pages, with a warning that recreation of like pages, or even similar "userspace groups" such as this, would result in speedy deletion and/or blocking. While I don't deny that many users like custom userpages, there are already excellent resources available to them, as well as many editors who, with a simple request, are more than happy to create someone elements for userpages, create custom banners or barnstars, or do a complete design overhaul. Ariel♥Gold 16:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per my reasoning in the essay Wikipedia:Editors matter. I am leaving aside the question of whether userpage design "shops" have a place on Wikipedia; that's a matter for a more general policy discussion, and if there is a community consensus that such shops should not be created, then we need to insert such a provision into WP:USER and make it clear that they are not allowed. The question is whether to delete this individual set of pages, and I believe that deletion would be counterproductive. Let's apply the most important test: will deletion of these pages be good for the encyclopedia? Per WP:PERFORMANCE, webspace is not our most important resource (and deleting pages doesn't free up server space anyway) - our most important resource is, in fact, Wikipedia's contributors. Deleting this page may dishearten its creator and drive him away, which would, unquestionably, be bad for the encyclopedia. In contrast, no actual, tangible benefit to the encyclopedia will be produced by deleting this page. Furthermore, as I already stated, I feel it is unfair to delete such pages when they are currently permitted (or at least not prohibited) by the policies and guidelines. If the community feels that such pages should not exist, then let's amend WP:USER to that effect, rather than picking on individual users. Walton^One 17:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

To some extent, your argument is moot. The user has been blocked for a month, and whether he returns or not is probably not going to depend on the outcome of this MfD. Avruchtalk 17:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

True (although I've reduced the block length). Thanks for notifying me. Walton^One 18:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment some of you are saying that these "shops" and or "hierarchies" do not contribute to the building of an encyclopedia. So if that is the case, can someone please explain to me what Userboxes do to contribute to the building of an encyclopedia? Sirkad_talk^sign 17:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per CSD U1, as the creator has requested its deletion. [1] Walton^One 18:10, 22 December 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.