Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Why do admins so often act like dickheads?

Wikipedia:Why do admins so often act like dickheads?

Hostile attack page. This would fall under WP:HUMOR if there was anything funny about it, but there isn't. WaltCip (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I thought it was well-crafted (e.g. succinct), insightful, and a productive way of blowing off steam. In the words of Baruch Spinoza, "I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them." How will we understand (and thereby better deal with, and maybe even prevent or overcome) dickish behavior without analyzing and theorizing about its root causes? In the interests of progress, this essay must stay.

If I found an Institute for the Study of Mental Retardation, does that mean that I'm launching a hostile attack against those with mental disabilities, because I call attention to the problem? Far from it! I'm just trying to UNDERSTAND and HELP them, and offer aid to those who interact with them in the home, the workplace, etc. This essay is the same way. In the case of admins who behave dickishly, understanding their behavior is a first step to eliminating hostile attacks that they launch on others, thereby reducing the amount of hostile attacks. So the deletion request is 180 degrees off in its assessment.

To those who propose deletion, I ask, can you point to any flaws in the page's observations, reasoning, or conclusions? Because I think it's rather cogent. St. claires fire (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You come off like you have a big axe to grind, but there is nothing in your edit history where that may have developed. So, my question is, is this your first account?--v/r - T P 21:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in my edit history because I exercise restraint! When I get in a conflict, I don't keep escalating it. I just take a step back and say to myself, "Why?" And then I write essays wherein the lessons learned are distilled down to fundamental truths for the benefit of the masses. St. claires fire (talk) 21:51, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not remotely beneficial to the project. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:46, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Attack page, pure and simple. Ravensfire (talk) 22:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The page is well put together and brings up good points which many editors share. If criticism of admins is not allowed how are they to know if they are doing something wrong.Brexit123 (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]