Jump to content

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Anarcho-capitalism

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anarcho-capitalism (talk | contribs) at 23:46, 10 April 2007 (→‎[[User:Anarcho-capitalism]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Anarcho-capitalism

I am concerned about the purpose of this page. The page is not a normal user page, as in it does not contain any personal information about the user(s) of this account whatsoever. The page is an extremely length article supporting a fringe POV, which is OK for personal uses, but it goes beyond this. To see what I mean, see this google search for "anarcho-capitalism". To be blunt, I am concerned that this user(s) is abusing the notablity of wikipedia and the google rankings system to push his/her/their viewpoints to the top of google rankings, by editing lots of pages and signing everything, so that lots of pages on wikipedia link to his/her/their page, pushing his/her/their viewpoints up the google rankings. In short, I am concerned that this user(s) is using his/her/their wikipedia user page to publish their own views. -- infinity0 01:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:User_page#What_can_I_not_have_on_my_user_page.3F. ("Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal homepage. Your page is about you as a Wikipedian.") The material on his page is not useful material for any articles, because it fails the WP:NPOV policy, and so is irrelevant to wikipedia.

  1. Delete - for reasons stated. -- infinity0 01:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment I don't see any problem with the googles. The Anarcho-capitalism article is the first link and the userpage of User:Anarcho-capitalism is as far behind as the second page of google's search. And first on his page it says this is not an article but a userpage. Lord Metroid 20:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Keep Wow, now that is real paranoia. I hadn't even though of this "google rankings system." I don't even know what is is. The first half of my page contains an article I wrote so Wikipedia editors could obtain a strong understanding of anarcho-capitalism, in order to assist them in their contributions to articles that have to do with anarcho-capitalism. I have a fundamental understanding of it, so I felt I was qualified to do this. And I think I've written the article pretty NPOV. The second half of my page contains a long list of sources that say that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. I created this as a reference source for Wikipedia editors. There have been lengthy edit wars in the past over whether anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. The purpose of me creating this list was to stop the edit wars over this. And, I think it's worked. Ever since I did this the edit wars have stopped. That is, continual insertions and removals of the anarcho-capitalism section from the Anarchism article has stopped. Now there is no question that there are a tremendous number of scholarly sources that say anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. It's indisuptable now. For those who are unfamiliar, though a philosophy that calls itself a type of anarchism is of course considered a type of anarchism, POV pushers, typically anarcho-communists have been claiming that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism. Silly I know, but they've been causing edit wars over it. Anarcho-capitalism 02:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    1. The "long list of sources" are specially selected ones by you. You have been refusing to allow sources contradicting yours to be used. Your page is extremely POV, as anyone who knows anything about anarchism will understand. Similarly, all the edit wars have been caused by you not allowing removal of such POV from articles. Also, please don't play the "I'm the good neutral guy here" game, your very account name gives you away. -- infinity0 02:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    There are almost no sources that say that anarchist-capitalism is not a form of anarchism. That's the whole point. The objective is to show that there are an overwhelming number of sources that explicitly say it is a form of anarchism, in order to stop the edit wars. And, it's worked. I've noticed you've been deleting sources from the anarchism article which say that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. I think I see what you're doing. You want sources removed so that you can later claim that anarcho-capitalism is not a form of anarchism and delete it from the article, causing an edit war. Am I right? If the sources are removed from my user page, edit wars will definitely ensue. I'm confident of that.Anarcho-capitalism 02:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I provide plenty, including a Noam Chomsky source. You just brush them off as they don't exist. -- infinity0 10:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I just found out that Infinity is a convicted edit warrior on probation: [1] Now it all makes sense.Anarcho-capitalism 02:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahh the old smear-tactic. RJII used to do this. -- infinity0 10:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Another note, I see that Infinity is campaigning by leaving messages to people he knows so that they will vote to delete. Is that allowed?Anarcho-capitalism 02:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Keep'" for reasons listed below,
    • 1. I just clicked on Infinity0's google search link and the userpage he wants deleted doesn't even show up on the first page of links, at least on my computer.
    Anyone can check the link for themselves. -- infinity0 10:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • B. his accusation of the user's motive for creating the page (unless he has some sort of evidence to back it up) is a blatant violation wikipedia's policy on assuming good faith.
    AGF is not a policy, it is a guideline. I have assumed plenty of good faith with regards to his actions. -- infinity0 10:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Third, I think the userpage contains information helpful to editing the article on Anarcho-capitalism and is, hence, relevant to wikipedia. Yes, it may or may not contain some POV that is not suitable for inclusion in an article but, it's on his userpage, and, in balance, it also contains many good sources for researching and editing the wikipedia article about anarcho-capitalism. Lawyer2b 02:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Keep, although it would probably be best to make it clearer that this is the user's opinion, and not intended to be neutral. I'd very much rather know his political viewpoints than not, if I was in a dispute with him over some anarchism article. -Amarkov moo! 03:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. DELETE. Are you kidding? "ANARCHO-CAPITALISM EXPLAINED FOR STUPID ANARCHISTS" is just the kind of attack page and attitude we don't need. Get rid of it. Anarcho-capitalism itself is a troll magnet and an extremely offensive "philosophy", sort of like Fascism with all the good parts taken out. Destroy this. Herostratus 04:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Ehum, are you just being sarcastic? Lord Metroid 20:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Delete. I strongly suspect that User:Anarcho-capitalism is a reincarnation of banned User:RJII. The edit summaries, the sentence structure and attitude conveyed, the areas of interest and nature of POV warring, the conflict with User:Infinity0, the specific objection to including "An Anarchist FAQ", the huge edit counts racked up... there are just too many similarities. Admittedly, I sometimes have trouble telling Randroids apart, but this seems pretty clear-cut to me. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 10:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment You can see the discussion regarding the user's alias on User talk:Anarcho-capitalism#Follow up about your username and if you don't have any evidence to back up your claim that User:Anarcho-capitalism is the same person as User:RJII I found your attitude despeciable! No assumed good faith at all. Lord Metroid 20:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Delete or Merge with new user page. I think that the content is probably ok, even though very polemic, there are other polemic users around. The combination of the content and the username are incompatible. - Francis Tyers · 11:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Delete the treatise on anarcho-capitalism. POV is fine in a userpage, but this is excessive. The user, based on their name and userpage, appears to be using a role account. I also suspect them to be a sockpuppet of the banned RJII, an admitted role account. ~ Switch (✉✍☺) 11:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Delete. This ain't a user page, it's a content fork/polemic with "User:" pasted to the front of it as a figleaf. Geocities, MySpace, or Tripod are that-a-way if you're really bursting to tell the world what you think. --Calton | Talk 13:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Keep. I do think this is relevant to work on Wikipedia, but maybe it could be pared down a bit. And that's coming from an anarcho-syndicalist! Abeg92contribs 14:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Keep. I have used his user page to check out sources, views, etc.. It's incredibly useful. Especially the sources. "Abusing Google rankings" seems a bit ridiculous to be an excuse to delete a page. Maybe violating user-page policy is a better excuse, but even then, I'd say it's too valuable a source to supercede this. If this was really a geocities-ish page, then User: Anarcho-capitalism would've had multiple user-pages, instead of one, straight run-through. Fephisto 15:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Keep there is no reasonable or compelling need to delete. A user can express his opinions on his userpages. WooyiTalk, Editor review 16:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Keep per Wooyi; there's absolutely no reason to prevent users from expressing opinions on their userpage. Also, the comments above describing anarcho-capitalism as a "troll magnet" and an "offensive philosophy" hardly seem to be approaching this from an NPOV perspective. Walton Vivat Regina! 19:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Keep It is a perfectly good userpage made by a person very dedicated to editing wikipedia containting an explanatory essay regarding anarcho-capitalism for people he has to deal with when trying to edit anarchy articles as well as various sources the user User:Anarcho-capitalism uses for his editing. This situation of his userpage being proposed for deletion have appeared several times in the recent past all done by users with contrary believes to User:Anarcho-capitalism. Where the proposal for deletion has been This page violates the "no substantial content" rule for user pages which have been reverted by other users. I am a majorly concerned that User:Infinity0 has angst towards User:Anarcho-capitalism as a part of the bigger problem of which I have asked for help to solve some time ago but the case has yet yet to be opened by the Meditation Cabal: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-07 The anarchy battlefield. Lord Metroid 20:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, I have supported deletion before, and anarcho-capitalism is far closer to my beliefs than anything else which has a name. It's also not constructive to declare that deletion nominations have been made by people who dislike anarcho-capitalism (even though this time it is made pretty clear that everyone who has said to delete does disagree with the philosophy). -Amarkov moo! 20:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The user who created this page has been identified by checkuser as an alternate account of User:Billy Ego, who appears likely to be banned from editing for one year by an Arbitration Committee decision. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Billy Ego-Sandstein/Evidence#Evidence submitted by Mackensen; Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Billy Ego-Sandstein/Proposed decision. As a result, this discussion is likely to soon become moot. Newyorkbrad 22:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser whatever. I'm not Billy Ego. You should get your facts straight before throwing around accusations. Anyway, this vote is on my user page, so why would you say the vote is "moot"? If a person is blocked for a time he still has a user page.Anarcho-capitalism 23:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Anarcho-capitalism&oldid=121813601"