Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sundostund/Userbox/LGBT3

:{{pagelinks|User:Sundostund/Userbox/LGBT3}} – (View MfD)

Per the precedent [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:UBX/onemanonewoman_4th_nomination here]. It is inappropriate. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment - Given that those have been deleted, comparing the wording is difficult. Similiar (i.e. on the topic of marriage) templates that exist: Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics/Issues/02#Marriage and User:GrammarFascist/Userbox polygamy. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 10:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• Keep, not sufficiently offensive to overcome the perceived censorship of minority opinion. Political and social opinions are allowed on userpages. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:06, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
• Keep, it's not offensive. It's a valid point-of-view. Arcturus (talk) 13:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
• Keep Just being somewhat offensive is not a valid reason for deletion. Zoozaz1 talk 01:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak Delete - seems in the spirit of those deleted [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:UBX/onemanonewoman_4th_nomination before] (adding the equivalent of a "I'm not prejudiced but..." doesn't make it much different). The question is whether we're going to relitigate the whole thing, I guess (some of those above also dissented in the previous MfD). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
• The others were pointedly offensive to others, as opposed to speaking only to the view of the user hosting the statement. If the deleted userboxes are to be treated as prevent for these, they should be undeleted for that purpose, because to my memory, they were not the same. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
• "speaking only to the view of the user hosting the statement" was a defense of the others, too. I cannot see the deleted ones now, but from what I recall they included some egregious and some less so (like this). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
• I think it was a facetious defence, and that the offensive userboxes asserted something that applied to others. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
• Delete [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:UBX/onemanonewoman_4th_nomination per all the delete votes for the others]. E.g., "{{tq|It's clear they exist as reactionary impulse against LGBTQ rights and the existence of those userboxes would likely make LGBTQ editors feel unwelcome or substandard if encountered on other user's pages.}}" "{{tq| Userboxes are for letting others know about you, not stating what you think about other people and their families. All these divisive userboxes advocating against other's human rights and inclusive marriage need to be deleted.}}" "{{tq| The lede of WP:USERBOX says "A userbox [...] is [...] a communicative notice about the user, in order to directly or indirectly help Wikipedians collaborate more effectively on articles." Do these say something about the user? Yes, they most certainly do. Do they aid collaboration? Absolutely not}}" TelosCricket (talk) 21:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: "{{tq|valid point of view}}" and "{{tq| reflect the views of the majority of the world's population}}" are not policy based reasons nor are they based on the goals of the encyclopedia. As someone pointed out in the other discussion, WP:USERBOX, while only a guideline, does state that userboxes are to help Wikipedians collaborate--to build the encyclopedia. Granted this userbox is less harsh than the deleted ones, it still has a chilling effect. It has the potential to indirectly harm the project by making lgbtq+ individuals feel unsafe or unwelcome. It is not about political correctness or not offending someone. It is about ensuring we retain good editors. We are here to build an encyclopedia. This is not a social media site for the expression of personal beliefs. Userboxes such as this one stand in the way of doing so and should be deleted. TelosCricket (talk) 02:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
• Fair point. My argument really wasn't really policy-based. I do not see opposition to same-sex marriage as automatically violating the civility or personal attack sections of WP:UBCR. You could easily argue the same thing about fetal rights. However, I would much rather delete all political userboxes (including the ones in question) on the grounds that they are divisive. However, I do not think it is appropriate to allow pro-gay-marriage userboxes but not anti-gay-marriage userboxes. I removed my political userboxes earlier this year because Wikipedia is supposed to be about setting your biases aside. Scorpions13256 (talk) 03:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
• While having the support of the majority of the population may not be strictly valid from a policy point of view, that's simply because of the lack of policy on userboxes in general; the arguments on the other side don't have a policy (or guideline) basis either. All political userboxes help people collaborate as they show that the user is interested in that particular issue. If this truly isn't a place for the expression of personal beliefs, then we wouldn't have political userboxes in the first place. Yes, the primary purpose is of course to build an encylopedia, but we let people express themselves and their personal beliefs on their userpage. Retaining editors is a worthy goal, but ironically the last discussion on this issue caused the retirement of a long time editor (an admin I believe) who deeply believed in free speech. Creating a welcoming environment means creating an environment with civility guidelines and respectful editors, but also an environment where contributors can express themselves freely (within the bounds of our civility policy.) Zoozaz1 talk 02:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - we do not have to cry about political correctness here. It is a very valid point of view. Signed, ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~^Contact 07:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
• Keep - Also, bring back most of the other userboxes that were deleted back in September. I think it is inappropriate to delete userboxes that reflect the views of the majority of the world's population. For the record, I support same-sex marriage. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:24, 31 December 2020 (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.