Wikiquote talk:Votes for deletion/GordonWattsDotCom

A Few Replies to selected concerns of Cbrown1023 talk - point-by-point
"The images above are not used," Of course they are; (??) They are used on the user page. "and are not able to be used anywhere on Wikiquote except in the userspace." Well, technically, that is not correct. Since they are GDFL licensed, anyone is able to use them. Since they are small and don't require much disk space, this should not be a concern either, but you may raise good points below. When I get to these points, I will address them. "The images are non-sourced" Incorrect. Please see e.g.,, where I explicitly cite my source. As you can see, I cite myself as the source, so your claim of unsourced is incorrect. "and pretty off-topic." The topic is the user and user page, and a photo of a user is commonly used by many Wikipedians and Wikiquotians, and is not off-topic for them, so I don't see how I should be treated any differently, unless, perhaps, I am being picked on for some reason. Am I? (I am not being sarcastic. I simply don't know.) "The userpages are of a user who has not edited for over a year" This is one possibly valid argument, but before you go deleting pages, you should make it a policy, and then, if policy permits, I would not oppose deletion. However, even admins must follow the rules, so I oppose this on principle, due to the bad precedent it would set. "and are just advertising his webpages." Again, MANY Wikipedian list links to their personal pages on their User Pages, so I don't see how I would be any different. Unless I am being picked on. Am I? (Again, I simply am asking, not being sarcastic. I simply do not know. If the answer is 'yes,' please tell me why. If the answer is 'no,' then please treat me and others the same.) "It contains personal information that we are not sure he still wants made public since he no longer edits here." Thank you for your concern. That is a valid question, but when in doubt, assume that the editor in question (me) acted of his or her free will. Also, when in doubt, ask! It is not safe to assume anything -to be on the safe side. "Finally, his username is also blatant advertising for his website and would have been blocked had it not been made prior to the writing and enforcement of the blocking policy." This may be a valid concern. If you like, please change my user-name to GordonWatts, as it is on Wikipedia. However, this user name does not constitute advertising, if for no other reason, simply because my web-tracker shows that almost NO referrals come from Wikiquote. By the numbers, it is not advertising.

However, in closing, I find it poor taste and rude to delete a user page without either an OK from the owner -or by permission of a policy (since Wikimedia is the true owner, and we are all merely 'stewards' or 'managers,' so to speak, of this space).

My point in the above sentence is not to state that MY user page is important (is is not), but, rather, deletion of it without following proper procedures sets bad precedent and sends the wrong message: That admins are able to violate policy. I do not believe you admins are trying to cause trouble or violate policy, so I make this observation for your review and assistance.--GordonWattsDotCom 08:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * not able to be used meaning that we cannot use them in the articlespace.  Cbrown1023  talk  10:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

2 take-home messages; 2 main points
Specifically, two (2) things REALLY concern me here: #1: Although Cbrown1023 does have some valid points, he/she did NOT check with me or seek my input or opinion. Since I am a "principal," this seemed rude to me (but I will give CBrown the benefit; Maybe he-she did not intend to be rude -or simply forgot to check with me). #2: Some things suggested are probably not supported by policy. (I would not know, but I have seen admins in the past violate Wikipedia policy, instead of suggesting policy be changed to allow things to be done. This is not right, morally speaking, that is: That would be no different (morally) than a police officer saying "I can break the law because I am a cop." Thus, my 2nd point is that admins may do as they like -IF the policy permits it. IF and ONLY IF. No one is above the law. Not even the judges or police officers or admins, themselves. Anything else is simply lawless and anarchy.--GordonWattsDotCom 08:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is different, admins may delete here if there is a consensus to delete, even if it violates no policy.  Cbrown1023  talk  10:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a fundamental point. Wiki works by consensus, not by rules, which are, or should be, a reflection of consensus and may need to be changed when consensus changes. However, policies and guidelines are established by consensus, so normally prevail. But w:WP:LAWYER. Tyrenius 01:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Address Fys' concerns
"I don't like the pretend messages bar that directs to the user's own website; I don't like the personal information;" Please see e.g., WP:IDONTLIKEIT. "I don't like the soapboxing," A user page is nothing BUT soapboxing. This policy applies to mainspace articles. EVERYBODY'S user space, to some extent or another, soapboxes. Would you like me telling you that you should be deleted, simply because I didn't like your opinions?? Eh?? This is not good at all, folks. That a user complies with the rules is ALL that matters. Most if not all of my mainspace edits have been responsible, so this is a not good thing. I have noticed that bullying has been occurring with more regularity on Wikipedia, where users' pages are either deleted or locked -or vandalized -by admins, simply because they don't like them -vandalism which is in stark violation of the policy there. OK? However, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Neither does might make right. "and I don't think this page meets userpage policy." you might be right, but you must cite your sources if you with to make such a claim. You show me the policy which supports this accusation -it is your duty and obligatory responsibility, since you are the one who made the accusation. If you are right, then I will support you -even if it results in my page(s) being deleted or altered. But, you are not above the law. This trend here (let's pick on people who can not defend themselves and not notify them; Let's just do what we want even IF it is in violation of the policy) is not a good trend. This is a bigger issue than the review of my small page. If you want to be a bully and violate policy hither and yon, fine, that is your choice, but I will not condone or support it, and so far, what I've seen does not look good. However, I could be wrong. If so, it is your duty to prove your claims and verify your story. I am 'innocent until proven guilty,' remember?? (To 'prove' me guilty requires a cite to the policy.) I await your answer -and am unbiased and fair, and I do not pronounce sentence on the "final" matter before I heard it. (But what I said about my initial review stands.)--GordonWattsDotCom 08:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Your comments here makes it seem like you believe this is a personal attack on you, it is not, it is asking for a deletion of unused userspace.  Cbrown1023  talk  10:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:IDONTLIKEIT is a Wikipedia policy not a Wikiquote one. Wikiquote is a lot smaller. Please stop talking about "the law", "guilty" etc because it's totally irrelevant. The confrontational approach isn't helping you. Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 11:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't like to delete a userpage since only the user is inactive, but I understand some other folks think it a good idea. Also I would join the choir to firmly state Wikipedia policy is not automatically our policy unless it is crystal-clear the policy in question should be applied Wikimedia project wide (e.g. NPOV, GFDL, Privacy Policy). And if you think it can be applied to Wikiquote, I think we expect you respect other Wikipedia policies including WP:AGF & Wikipedia:Wikilove. Confrontational approach isn't the direction we would like to enforce. --Aphaia 17:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If I over-reacted or appeared rude, Aphaia and Cbrown1023 , I apologise. I do not wish to offend or insult anyone. Yes, I agree that Wikiquote does not necessarily have to follow Wikipedia's policies, but it is a good guideline -and perhaps the action that is usually taken. It is in fact complex, so I hope that any review or analysis is academic and looks at the facts without offending or insulting anyone. I will cast a vote to delete one image, keep another, and remain neutral on a 3rd picture. This compromise and flexibility should help show my good faith.--GordonWattsDotCom 02:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Normally, I wouldn't delete the user spaces of inactive users either, but this is a different and more complex case.  Cbrown1023  talk  21:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In that case the choir is being a little disingenuous. Policies and guidelines states:
 * The policies of Wikiquote's sister project, Wikipedia, usually apply equally well to Wikiquote. In addition, most of them are more mature and hence more polished than Wikiquote's policies, which are still in the process of being developed. Where not specified in Wikiquote, use Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and linked articles.
 * Also most of the stated policies on that WQ page are links to WP pages. Ironically NPOV is a policy that InvisibleSun rejects on Talk:John Betjeman:
 * Editors have the option of personal preference; it could even be said to be encouraged to a great extent and is part of what makes our project distinctive.
 * (And see other points he makes there.)
 * Tyrenius 01:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your remark, Tyrenie. I commented you on WQ:VP and will appreciate your giving a glance to there. --Aphaia 10:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Concluding remarks
CBrown, I saw that you had intended to email me or that you saw someone else had. I am not mad at you, and I hope I gave you the impression that I assumed good faith. (I certainly did assume good faith, even when in doubt.) I just cast my vote to keep the user and talk pages and to rename them to simply "GordonWatts" and to delete all images. I have saved copies of the images, and I can upload to Commons if I later decide to use them. (PS: JeffQ's suggestion for people to vote on each thing individually was a good idea, one that sometimes does not happen on the "real" Wikipedia, sadly. Oh well. We are not paid enough to do a good job here!) My compromise (keep some and delete some and rename space) should make everyone happy. Best of luck and blessings to your Wikiquote community if I don't see you all again in the near future.--GordonWattsDotCom 03:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)