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 Moved to userspace already, so debate has become moot.

Wikipedia:Jimbo makes mistakes[edit]

Attack page. Has been speedied several times, has been recreated several times. Do the rules of WP:NPA not apply to Jimbo? User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain what about this page is an attack? Over at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_July_21#Wikipedia:Jimbo_makes_mistakes, a few people have agreed that it's NOT an attack. Friday (talk) 23:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the page speaks for itself. Some people can be wrong. And in this case, are. User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Still no reasonable rationale given for deletion. I encourage people to write Wikipedia essays, if it's a good-faith effort to improve the project. Friday (talk) 23:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does this improve the project, when all it says is that people should ignore Jimbo? User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're misrepresenting what it says. But, that's an issue for Wikipedia talk:Jimbo makes mistakes, no? Friday (talk) 23:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly does not tell people to ignore Jimbo - that is a misrepresentation of what it says. Johntex\^talk 05:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• To be honest I like this page; unless this is a duplicate of another page I'd say this could be one of the things I'd refer people who are stressed out from some of Jimbo's descisions to so they can relax :). RN 03:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt the earth, Wikipedia-cruft for lack of a better term. --Deathphoenix ʕ 03:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• No Likey. Not good enough to be a Wikipedia essay, is all. The first sentence is rather a bit too flip, amd the rest is just obvious. Of course Jimbo makes mistakes. Nobody has ever claimed that he is incapable of error, for crying out loud. There have, after all, been only two perfect people so far (Christ and General Washington), so you're pretty much just knocking down a straw man. However, it's OK by me if it's in moved into userspace and not listed as an essay. If essay space gets crufted up with hundreds of third-rate essays that makes essay space less useful. Sorry. Herostratus 04:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, or userfy. Doesn't say anything of interest, only plausible use is disruption. Also agree with Herostratus. Christopher Parham (talk) 04:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep: It's not an attack page. Maybe you should nominate all the essays you don't like for deletion. Azmoc 11:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that User only has one edit to article space and spends all of his time trolling Talk pages, and making attacks on me. User:Zoe|^(talk) 19:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you want to discredit Azmoc's opinion, please provide diffs showing the attacks and your attempts at dispute resolution. Johntex\^talk 05:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Some things belong in user-space. --Improv 16:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to userspace and/or improve, like I already suggested elsewhere. If we can do that now, I think we can safely skip this MFD as being redundant even. That and people looking in here might want to check if perhaps they have symptoms of Adminitis? :-) Kim Bruning 22:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete from Wiki-space... it's not signifcant enough to be an essay by much any regard, and is a matter of opinion which is not backed up by fact. If it belongs anywhere at all, it belongs in user-space. Utopianheaven 23:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Zoe, and protect. I feel it's an inappropriate tone and could be seen as an attack page. --Firsfron of Ronchester 00:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep: There is no personal attack contained in the essay. It is a perfectly valid essay and there is no grounds for deletion. Johntex\^talk 05:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete from WP: per Herostratus. I don't see it an attack page; it's just a random thought not interesting enough to be called an essay. I don't expect to agree with every WP: essay but I do think they should at least be well written and interesting, which this isn't. Putting it in userspace is fine. It seems to express just one cogent idea, which is "if you don't like Wikipedia you can always fork it". That could be mentioned in some other appropriate WP: essay. Phr (talk) 07:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This does not belong on a WP page. Move it to your user page. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 11:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to user namespace per Herostratus. PS: I don't think it's an attack page - maybe the first sentence is a bit harsh, but from the talk page, it seems even that sentence wasn't intended as an attack. --Zoz (t) 16:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is just a hair's breadth above crap.UberCryxic 17:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Junk, poor quality essay.--69.178.41.55 17:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep. Although not a good essay, it's an essay that should be here. Jimbo doesn't speak for Wikipedia; the Foundation does. (If Jimbo did speak for Wikipedia, it would no longer be a non-profit.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• No Comment. (Changed vote.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename and Keep. Nothing about this essay is a personal attack, it's simply titled in a fashion that instantly gets a large number of wikipedians riled up. The actual contents of the essay are fine, it just needs a different name. --tjstrf 19:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if Wikipedia: essay space is an appropriate venue for every random Wikipedia-related thought that pops into anyone's mind, I no longer understand why we have user space. Phr (talk) 20:40, 23 July 2006 (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.