- 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: keep – there's consensus that this isn't so problematic as to justify deletion. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This userbox may potentially be NSFW and incompatible with Wikipedia's goals. While I kind of get the socio-political issues that this userbox is attempting to cover, it is basically saying "I am not victim" which is prob just as bad as "I have [insert race here] privilege"; in other words, it could potentially be promoting incivility. Also per our offensive content guideline, we do not include offensive images or text unless if it can be treated in an encyclopedic manner; userboxes and "about me" user pages do not treat this in an encyclopedic manner. Aasim (talk) 11:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: In favour of an RfC on Userboxes and whether random things unrelated to Wikipedia are allowed. Genital issues short of sexuality are not too offensive for work. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - User:Lgk1776/Userboxes/Circumcised exists as well. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Good eye User:Godsy - I added that to the nomination. Aasim (talk) 00:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. "Artistic" representations of nudity get a free pass in terms of social norms. That's why many of our articles use old artistic representations of nudity to illustrate related concepts, since they illustrate the same concepts but in a less licentious manner. I'm somewhat surprised to see someone calling Michelangelo's David "offensive" in light of that (unless you referring to some other image). Reminds me of Itchy & Scratchy & Marge. Chess (talk) (please use
{{reply to|Chess}}on reply) 03:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]- I am thinking this may be inappropriate for user space as Wikipedia is not a dating site. My original reasoning may not be a good explanation but we are not a dating site, and something like this userbox would only serve for prurient interests. In any case, it is a potential violation of Wikipedia:UBX and Wikipedia:User pages. Aasim (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - What is NSFW here? The image of David by Michelangelo? I think not! As for SmokeyJoe's comment on "random things unrelated to Wikipedia", I hope Joe knows that would open an unimaginable Pandora's Box. --SVTCobra 00:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I don’t want to be seen to constrain others on how they should write a new userbox RfC. Personally, I think there is no issue. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - Watched this one for a while, unsure what to do. It's languishing a bit, so maybe helpful to weigh in. I have no idea what would possess someone to want to advertise this on their userpage, but I think that about plenty of things people put on their userpage. While I've supported deleting several userboxes when they were too polemic or discriminatory, I have trouble seeing this as similarly problematic. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:45, 3 January 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.