User talk:UBX/Userboxes/Beliefs

This miscellaneous page was nominated for deletion on 14 July 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by .

What happened to the profanity userboxes?

They were here yesterday, now they're gone--and they were never listed on Wikipedia:Templates for Deletion! What happened? And above all, who did this? And why? Lockesdonkey 15:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering too. o_O EvilTacox4

Maybe they were deleted. --Tony Sidaway 19:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Accused" Zionist

Note: this discussion is about this userbox – User:Peter G Werner/Userboxes/Template:User AccusedZionist

I find your userbox offensive and ~~racist~~, I believe it does not fit Wikipedia, and it violets Wiki policy. Before I go ahead with speedy deletion I wanted to let you know before hand how this type of userbox makes some people in this community feel, and that it is offensive. I am not asking you to remove it from your own user page but I do demand that you immidiately remove it from Wikipedia:Userboxes/Beliefs, before someone else forces it out. Tal :) 19:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Offensive and racist? Please explain. I'm sorry, I do not find it "offensive and racist", rather, it is a satire of offensive and racist rhetoric directed at me. Why its somehow "racist" to make light of such cheap shots is beyond me. Furthermore, how is it anymore "offensive" than the communist userbox or the "by any means necessary" userbox? I'm willing to discuss this, but I'll tell you right now that I have no intention of complying with your "demand" that I take the userbox down. BTW, I generally don't comply with "demands", and its less than civil to make "demands" on other editors. Peter G Werner 19:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to get into the racist argument and I'll strike that.However, it is very offensive as I shall explain. Firstly, it imply's that Zionism is negative, because one cannot be accused of something positive. Further more, "accused of being a Zionist" sounds like "accused of being an antisemite," "accused of being a racist," "acused of being a Nazi," etc, and as such portrays Zionism in a very offfensive manner. How would you imagine the community will react if I'll make a userbox stating "this user is accused of being an American"? or "This user is accused of being a Jew"? (the latter one clearly fits the argument of racism), would THAT be treated as mere "satire"?.

In addition, the image used for the userbox is offensive, it alludes to Israeli/Jewish control of the Unitesd States or of an attempt for such control and as such may hint at clear antisemitic conotations ("Jewish rule over the world" etc.). Also, it resmbels the flag of colinial America where the Union Jack of Great Britain stood in the exact same place that Isreal's flag stands at the current image , further streangthening the above point.

Thirdly, the existence of alleged other Userboxes that are offensive and worthy of deletion does not change anything in the case of this one, and you are welcome to mark them up for deletion if you see it fitting (in other words one injustice doesn't justify another injustice).

Lastly, this template has already been deleted (today!) from the userbox category for violation of T1, and so the removal of this same template (from another location) already has a precedent.

Oh, and regarding "being civil", I think I was more than civil by notifying you in advance about this and not just marking the userbox for speedy deletion right away, as I could have, which would have saved me a lot of time on writnig all this, and by attempting (unsuccessfully it seems) to allow you to "save face" and remove this yourself instead of your creation being forcibly removed and possibly deleted. Tal :) 19:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So many issues here. First, I have to say that I guess satire is simply lost on some people. Actually, I'm not pro- or anti-Zionist, but I've been the recipient of some pretty negative accusations of Zionism. And now I stand accused of being divisive and racist for acknowledging that? Please! Your censure is misdirected.

I would actually have no problem with somebody making a userbox "accused of being an American" (since the latter is a favorite insult among left-leaning Europeans), "accused of being an Islamofascist", "accused of being a moonbat/wingnut", etc. It simply acknowledges the heated rhetoric that gets tossed around Wikipedia and serves to take some of the power out of such cheap-shots. (I'll confess to having referred to somebody as a "moonbat" once myself after an anti-Zionist tirade against me, but I'd probably try and avoid such rhetoric in the future.).

As for the Israeli flag on the American one, I happen to know exactly what it means, and I too think the symbol itself is offensive. But context is everything here, I'm not saying I beleive that Isreal or Jews control America, but I am saying that that seems to be the belief of people who are quick to label me a Zionist.

I know about the userbox debates, and I also know that they're not settled. If it becomes Wikipedia policy to get rid of all userboxes that make a political statement, then, fine, away with the "accused Zionist" userbox along with the others. But until then, I think it has a valid place as a political userbox, and I don't think that it should be singled out any more than many other of the political userboxes.

I don't have any intention of "saving face", since it happens that I have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. If this userbox raises some discussion, then that's a good thing. If there's anything I find "offensive", its the use of speedy deletion as an end-run around discussing something. Peter G Werner 20:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Peter G Werner. ANY userbox can be found offensive by SOMEONE, and this userbox is neither particularly offensive nor is it racist. As for User:Tal642's assertion that "one cannot be accused of something positive", this is blatantly untrue, and is simply related to POV. I can be 'accused' of being a "captialist", or "conservative" or even a "WASP" (which would be untrue... I'm catholic)... but none of those things are neccessarily negative, they are only viewed as such by some people. I'm sure many others would agree with me. A personal problem with someone's userbox does not mean that it is generally "offensive". Easter rising 13:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note: [[[User:Tal642]], you claim in your userboxes to be a "wikipedian against censorship"... I find it offensive that you would make such a hypocratic claim after reading what you write here. Easter rising 13:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think your personal attack here is irrelevant to the discussion. However, I'm bound to respond to it. Basically, I am against censorship and I have engaged in some discussions (/votes) that clearly reflect that. I am not against userboxes and to the contrary I am for them and I myself use many beleifs and other such userboxes and find nothing wrong with them. However, I respect Wikipedia's speedy deletion T'1 policy, according to which this Specific userbox has already been removed twice (and NOT per the German solution as Peter hinted). I think this userbox is fundumentally different from the others currently appearing in this category (none of which are against any group but rather are for a certain group) and that saying that "accused of" isn't negative is hypocracy. I do not care if people state their opinions so long that they aren't offensive and anti a certain group. I would mark for deletion any such userbox. I do not consider deleting a userbox such as "this user is a Nazi" or "this user is accused of being a Catholic/Jew/Arab/whatever lover" as censorship. I highly doubt that a userbox such as "This user accused of being an American" or "This user is accused of being a Catholic" will survive five seconds on this page and THAT is hypocracy as I see it. Tal :) 14:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, as for the above accusation of a "personal problem " the discussed userbox has been deleted by two different admins for this same reason. Both admins are unaffiliated with me and deleted this userbox idependently of each other before I have even noticed it for the first time...Tal :) 14:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that something was already deleted by someone else doesn't prove your point in any way... admins are not infallable, nor are they without their own agendas or POVs... that being said, I will concede that the userbox will never be able to stay on Wikipedia:Userboxes/Beliefs, there will undoubtedly always be people willing to delete it regardless of what anyone else says. I still agree with User:Peter G Werner that the spirit of the userbox is NOT offensive, and that an interpretation of it as such is simply going out of your way to be offended by any preceived slight. As for your accusation of me launching a personal attack, try reading your own words, like "racist" and "demand", or the assertion that you would allow User:Peter G Werner to "save face", implying he was made a greivous error. Easter rising 16:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emptied out

This userboxes subpage needs to be emptied out into userspace. It's going to be deleted soon. Per The German Solution, userboxes like this cannot remain in template or project space because they are not sanctioned by the project. Note that all of the userboxes having to deal with sexuality were already entirely moved out of project space; the same needs to happen to these, as well as the politics ones, the religion ones, etc. --Cyde↔Weys 20:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, WP:GUS has helped (to varying degrees) the userbox/template space issue. Just remember, the proper way to delete this page is to bring it to WP:MFD, not just delete it (as I just reversed). — xaosflux ^Talk 05:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I commend Xaosflux for this and related actions concerning userbox pages. However, this out-of-process maneuver had nothing to do with a memory problem. The true process problem is no meaningful sanctions ever are imposed against the perpetrators. The most likely conclusion one can draw is that such behavior is condoned and enabled by the power structure of this web site. Rfrisbie^talk 07:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of this page

That's fine with me. To help facilitate the migration of wayward userboxes to userspace for this and any other group of userboxes, I volunteer the directories at User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes, such as User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Beliefs, as a means for keeping track of them. I also volunteer User:Rfrisbie/Userbox as an archive location for userbox subpages. My basic stipulation is that you follow my request posted on each directory page.

You are welcome to edit this User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes directory page, as long as you honor all applicable policies and guidelines. It is recommended this directory be updated in one of three basic ways:

If you move a userbox linked here to userspace, and then bypass redirects with a tool such as AWB, this page will be updated as part of that process.
If you copy-and-paste a userbox linked here to userspace, please update the links here to reflect the userspace location.
If you create a new userbox, feel free to add it to a directory.

Rfrisbie^talk 03:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Veg--what?

Now wait a sec. How can you be both a flexitarian and a vegan? Hahaha. Wolfdog 18:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, all of your templates are contradictory. Haha, I guess I'm a little slow today. Wolfdog 18:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a directory for users, not a personal declaration. ;-) Rfrisbie^talk 18:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Hmm. Haha.Wolfdog 22:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]