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 discussion was: no consensus. It seems like a bad idea for minors to self-identify. That said, WP:Child Protection doesn't cover this scenario, and this userbox also includes 18-19 in its scope. This MfD lacks consensus, but it seems like there is a need for a wider discussion on children self-identifying. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 21:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC) The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 21:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Scepia/teen2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Notrealname1234 (talk) 18:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BEANS; we should not make it easier for minors to identify themselves onwiki. — Prodraxis {talk • contributions} (she/her) 16:36, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Public knowledge that the child is a child gives them protection from the majority normal population. If they need more protection, education is far better than doing it for them. Email them all your advice. Link to Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. I don’t see on that page advice against merely identifying as a child. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:48, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. per the arguments already presented at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Octane/userboxes/User iGeneration. There is no policy that explicitly forbids underage users from disclosing their age. "Teenager" is also defined as 13-19, the upper range of which would not be a child. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Knowledgekid87: Re: There is no policy that explicitly forbids underage users from disclosing their age. Yes there is. Oversight policy states a reason for oversight is removal of non-public personal information. Clarified at WP:OSFAQ, Q: Do you suppress personal information posted by editors under eighteen? A: Yes — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as with Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Template:User_Young_Adult we lose nothing by removing this. [1] is a rabbit hole down which nobody need venture. —DIYeditor (talk) 00:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, consistently with my vote at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Young Adult. This is basically the same issue. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 14:29, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Notrealname1234 (talk) 18:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's not against policy for a user to say uncontroversial things about themself. IMHO it's bad precedent to tell users what they can and cannot say about themselves. Deleting this would remove the userbox's ability to self-identify by transcluders, but not the ability of any user to self-identify in text as as youthful, or French, or a knight of the round table, or even smelling like elderberry. IMHO we sometimes worry too much about worst-case scenarios which are largely none of our business. There is no policy or guideline presented which prohibits expressing self-identification of this particular user characteristic (or most others). BusterD (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not against policy and minors are not prohibited from editing Wikipedia Qwv (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete Age information about minors under 16 is oversighted. Userboxes should remain consistent with this, and honestly this shouldn't even be up for public debate and opinion. Relevant links are: Wikipedia:Child protection and Wikipedia:Oversight/FAQ. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 03:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The Oversighters have got ahead of themselves and out of sync with child protection. The real policy is Wikipedia:Child protection and it does not forbid children self identifying.

  Hiding the children is contrary to protecting children. You do not help the vulnerable by banning them from public spaces, and forbidding self identification if very close to banning.

  If they need advice, given them advice, don’t remove their agency. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Having reviewed the discussion above, the policy pages linked, and the other (no consensus) MFDs linked, I don't find the delete rationales provided persuasive enough against the general freedoms afforded to all users in their user space. I understand that oversight policy allows the removal of non-public personal information by minors, but I believe that refers to more detailed personal information like "Hi I'm Steve and I'm 13" not "I'm a teenager, not a stereotype." The former is eo ipso indication the poster's maturity may not be sufficient for them to respond appropriately to inappropriate outreach. The latter merely that they have a beef how the broad category of people they're in (which includes ages above and below various official age of maurity cutoffs) is sometimes treated. Martinp (talk) 11:18, 25 July 2023 (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.