Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Neutralhomer/TopDeely

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 Speedy delete. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Neutralhomer/TopDeely

This page, used as a template on the user's talk page, is wholly inappropriate and incivil. It was removed by User:El_C a week or so ago but Neutralhomer has restored it to his talk page. The user has been blocked for incivility in the past, so this is not something that should stay. Metros (talk) 21:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Keep - It is used to tell these four people that I wish to not have them post on my talk page. Could it be reworded, yes. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 22:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete As one of the "lucky" individuals included in this incivil template, I don't see the point in its existance. If I had been asked not to post to his talk page, I'd gladly not do so. I don't need a borderline insulting banner posted for the world to understand to stay away, which I have since the banner was put up. Of note, NH has posted 250+ times to my talk page at last count, a large portion of which while I was "banned" from his talk page. JPG-GR (talk) 22:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually JPG, I asked you a couple times not to post on my talk page and you continued. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 22:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete; offensive, inflammatory, divisive, violates WP:NPA, and contributes nothing to our encyclopedia project. If it were in the Template namespace it would be speedily deleted as WP:CSD#T1; as noted there, as a user page it could be deleted as WP:CSD#G10 (attack page). --MCB (talk) 22:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Wholly inappropriate. Horologium (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Is there an ANI thread or some other back-history to this, or is this something out of the blue? It would be nice for an outside party to be fully in the know before opining. Thanks.--12 Noon ^2¢ 23:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • There is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility_block_on_Neutralhomer this ANI discussion. There's also this edit by El_C to take it out of the user's talk page. Metros (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
    • It should have been noted previously (but wasn't) that Metros is the admin who placed a block on me about 50-some-odd hours ago...a block which expired today. The autoblock (which he added about 8 hours later) had to be cancelled. I technically have only been unblocked for under 5 hours. Again, just noting. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 23:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I have nothing to do with the technical issues that arise from blocks. I blocked you just as I would block any other user. What happened with the technical situation is not on my hands. Metros (talk) 23:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
        • Again, like I said, just noting. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 23:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete As the ANI thread details, this is just to make a point, bait some users and stir things up. The banner is not only implying certain editors, it NAMES them. However, I have seen over and over again users remove other users comments with an edit summary stating "I asked you not to post on my talk page so I am removing this without reading" or something of the like, which seems to be acceptable, especially if you have asked said editors not to leave you messages. If this banner were a mere statement that that may happen, without mentioning names NOR even implying anyone, it might be acceptable. Such as if it stated "I reserve the right to remove any comments from my talk page if I have asked you not to post here", or the like, I could see that being quite acceptable. Since NeutralHomer expressed willingness to alter the language, that might be an option.--12 Noon ^2¢ 23:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Given that Neutralhomer (né User:Orangemonster2k1) has a (recent) history of borderline stalking directed at at least a couple of the editors named in his comments-are-unwelcome template, he's on awfully thin ice here with respect to a number of Wikipedia policies. I also find it a tad...inconsistent...that Neutralhomer would post on User talk:JPG-GR ten minutes (and one edit) prior to restoring his banner 'banning' JPG-GR from User talk:Neutralhomer.

I'm going to speedy this. Template: namespace or not, it's an obvious candidate for CSD:T1. It's also a borderline G10, not to mention being incivil, and being the subject of previous warnings to Neutralhomer. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I personally would like to have seen this through, but oh well. - NeutralHomer ^T:C 23:49, 9 January 2008 (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.