Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:StevenCrum

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 Delete. Notwithstanding its ridiculousness, moving an active user's userpage to BJAODN would seem a bit incivil, so I'll decline to make the move. Xoloz 19:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:StevenCrum

Campaigning page against established (and proven) scientific theories in favor of his own "scientific theories", which have been proven false already Errabee 16:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete. Regardless of whether it's true or not, the user is using his userpage in order to campaign against relativity, which seems to be his primary focus on the Wikipedia. The Wikipedia is not a personal webhost or soapbox. The userpage and the user's contributions as a whole violate this policy. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message. Delete per nom. - 16:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, StevenCrum's response is here: [1]. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, typical crackpot stuff. Vpoko 17:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Consumed Crustacean. BTW - Steve as also responded on his user page with this edit. --EMS | Talk 20:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    • New vote: Delete and move to BJAODN. At the least it qualifies as "other deleted nonsense". BTW - Versions which are candidates for BJAODN include [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], and [9]. --EMS | Talk 03:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Although I always advocate for free speech & all the stuff, this user is most certainly being disruptive to express a point. He is showing civilty issues, such as calling people pea-brains, & has said he looks forward to his page being deleted anyway. I say we happily oblige him in his request. Spawn Man 06:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Hang on a minute here. This user is pushing a ridiculous theory; if he doesn't stop, that will get him permanently blocked. Deleting his user page? We should just edit it mercilessly. If he gets banned - which is quite likely at present - then we can remove it. But what purpose will deleting the history serve here? Guy 11:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    • The user has made edits mostly only to his user page, thus violating WP:NOT (eg, not a myspace zone). He is also violating the harmony (or disharmony) of Wikipedia by only making controversial edits to articles. Sure he may have his opinions, but in my book, that is vandalism. For example, we block the editors to the Dinosaur articles who refuse to accept evolution. This guy is exactly the same... And I don't feel like just editing the page either... I have no opinion on his theory though; I haven't even read it! Spawn Man 23:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - I think that you have a valid point about the edit history (in case we need it to make a case against Steven). However, I must express my disaproval of our "editing [the page] mercilessly". Either we keep the page or we don't. At the least, we should keep our hands off of that page during this process so that others can see what the fuss is about.
      My own feeling is that StevenCrum's work is so out of line that the loss of the history is nothing to worry about (and we can have it undeleted if we need it anyway). The real question is whether Steve will continue his campaign here in the face of increasingly stiff opposition. The answer to that may wait until his current week-long block expires. --EMS | Talk 18:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep! - By all means, let everyone on Wikipedia see this guy's whackjob theory. I suggest if you must delete it, keep at copy at BJAODN. For math people, it's hilarious. More seriously, the user is in violation of all kinds of policy, but userpages should not be attacks on mainstream science, or personal soapboxes. --Shrieking Harpy Talk|Count 19:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • What you see now is not the version nominated; that was very much longer and clearly violated policy. Guy 07:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, no, Guy , I went and looked it up in the history. Hilarious. Definately keep that, I read it again this morning and laughed myself right out of my chair. Yes, I agree, it violates all KINDS of policies...but you can't get entertainment like that without breaking a few eggs. --Shrieking Harpy Talk|Count 14:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Then feel free to transfer Steve's stuff (or maybe just the highlights) to BJAODN while you can. --EMS | Talk 15:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete it faster than the speed of light. That ought to shake up relativity somewhat. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 21:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and move to BJAODN per ems57fcva. --Arnzy (talk ·  contribs) 00:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Move to BJAODN asap After that, delete the page and possibly ban the user. Spinach Dip 05:58, 10 November 2006 (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.