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.
Expresses support for a leader known for his authoritarian behavior and poor human rights record, and used by primarily a handful of inactive and/or possibly WP:NOTHERE users. Unnecessarily inflammatory and unlikely to find use by the general userbase. Dronebogus (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Beside the obscurity issue, there is no reason for the project to have an userbox like this, which expresses support for a leader who almost certainly committed genocide against his own people, in a decade-long civil war, and basically function as a Russian-controlled puppet for years now. —Sundostund (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment→Keep my opinion on this is obviously the same as with the other Assad userbox you concurrently nominated. You've demonstrated nothing disruptive resulting from it's use and listed no policies or guidelines to support this MfD. Assad is the current President of Syria. Are you saying that people who support him can't be a part of the WP community? And why nomintate this userbox and not all userboxes for all politicians? Also, بحرآني does not appear to be an "inactive" or "wp:nothere" user, so that's just a strawman argument. - wolf16:17, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lolz... so if someone takes a little time off they're no longer entitled to the same privileges and protections as any other editor whose account is still in good standing? That doesn't seem like justification to delete their userspace content. That leaves UBCR and while you've now cited it, you still haven't clarified how it applies. As for the rest of it... that I will ignore, including your opening remarks. (Striking them doesn't make them less rude.) - wolf03:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is it somehow impolite, because I certainly didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Also, many politicians can be considered "substantially divisive", so is this the beginning of some kind of mass-deletion drive? Actually, nevermind... let's just go with 'agree to disagree'. - wolf04:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record – not making a single edit since 2012 (for exactly ten years) can't be interpreted as "taking a little time off", but as the withdrawal from the project. Undoubtedly, that is the right of every editor. At the same time, the return to the project at any time is undoubtedly a right as well, so – nobody is preventing the creator of this userbox to leave their remarks here, but themselves and their decisions. It is very unfair to blame the nominator about the willing inactivity of the creator, and to use that inactivity as any kind of argument. The nominator certainly can't be held responsible for these things, nor the userbox start to magically appear as acceptable and not inflammatory because the creator didn't make a single edit for a decade now. —Sundostund (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa... slow down there a sec. Just to be clear about the sequence of events, the nominator brought up the inactivity of the user first, and repeatedly. I did not (unfairly) blame the nominator about the willing inactivity of the creator" (not sure how you got that). When I mentioned it, that was to counter, as I don't believe the inactivity is a basis for deletion (whether whole or in part). I'm not sure it should even be a part of this MfD. - wolf07:43, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your countering is precisely what sounded to me as an attempt to excuse the creator of making an userbox like this, on the basis of inactivity, presenting them as some kind of victim, and blaming the nominator for even starting this MfD because of that. Nothing more. Once again, the creator is willingly absent since 2012 (without any kind of block), and they can return at any time to leave their remarks here, providing this MfD is still open at that time. —Sundostund (talk) 08:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, as Assad is currently a living ruler of a country. If you lived in Syria then people have every right to support him there. Are we going to delete the userbox that says "This user supports Vladimir Putin" next? I can see there being an exception for North Korea because its largely isolated and their editors wouldn't be on Wikipedia anyways. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn’t not support deleting Putin boxes at this point, he kind of crossed a line of basic international diplomacy with the whole unprovoked invasion thing… Dronebogus (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but its still WP:BIAS, as just because an editor may support these people doesn't automatically make them evil or something. I think we should focus more on their behavior here towards editing and other editors. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep It is unreasonable to think that every syrian hates their leader. We shouldn't bar people from showing support for their country's leader. There are also going to be some left wing people who don't like the US and like anyone who opposes the US, so assad would be part of that. The other userbox's wording of 'foreign jihadists' might be inflammatory and a WP:UBCR violation but this one just voices support for Assad. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above rationales. I think we need a WP:OTHERPEOPLEEXIST to remind us to get out of our echo chambers.--WaltCip-(talk)12:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is utterly absurd. I see you nominated another userbox about President Assad and had it deleted. This war has been going on for eleven years and the Syrian Arab Army has been scoring victory after victory. You lost the fight on the ground, why do you want to come to Wikipedia? Should we entertain you? Should Wikipedia silence any views that you as an individual don't like? Are you the sole arbiter of truth and justice? Leroy Patterson IV (talk) 03:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve repeatedly reverted your comment because it contains abusive, goading language like “ You lost the fight on the ground, why do you want to come to Wikipedia? Should we entertain you? Should Wikipedia silence any views that you as an individual don't like? Are you the sole arbiter of truth and justice?” And instead of simply criticizing arguments or conduct you’ve doubled down on this with borderline trolling like “If you don't support the Syrian government, how about the raping and looting 'moderate rebels'?” I have no opinion on any of the factions in this war, I just read on Assad’s article the UN implicated him in human rights abuses so thought maybe a box supporting him was a bit over the “divisive” line. That’s literally it. Dronebogus (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Any faction in Syria, or in any modern war or any historical conflict or state or political or military leader of the past will inevitably be "implicated in human rights abuses". Leroy Patterson IV (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.