Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikibombing

Wikipedia:Wikibombing

Wikipedia:Wikibombing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This essay should be deleted for a number of reasons.

1. I believe that in it's current for the article is primarily an attack on a single editor--User:Cirt. The single largest part of the article is about where the term comes from which is primarily Cirt. Further two editors have been re-adding an article as "further reading" that involves, you guessed it, Cirt. Some of these editors have made their opposition to Cirt's actions quite plain both on the talk pages and in other forums. Oh, we have a graph showing that the number of edits to the article grew rapidly, which has nothing to do with wikibombing at all, but since those edits are, again, Cirt a fair bit of the time. These same concerns have been expressed by a number of editors on the talk page, and have been largely ignored.
2. This essay is claiming that activities like "article creation", "DYK" listings, and featured article work are "Typical Wikibombing activities". I think that's like coming out against motherhood and apple pie.
3. The essay has created a lot of heat and little light. Enough heat that one editor felt the need to go to WP:AN and ask that 3RR enforcement be waived/reduced.

I don't deny a good essay could exist under this name (though only one instance an essay does not make), but this one isn't it. It's an attack on an editor. RfC/U is the right venue, not an essay. Hobit (talk) 23:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

• Userfy Per my initial thoughts when I saw the announcement of the essay. Even in it's improved state it's still a thinly veiled attack on Cirt's work on the article and natural progression of events that you would do if you thought the article was up to the community standards. Perhaps in the future when we get another example of WP being used to enhance support for something already existing that is controversial a article along these lines could resurface, but not now and not with this example. Hasteur (talk) 00:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
• Preferably delete, if not then userfy. It's patently obvious that the essay is focused on one editor and one incident and expresses one faction's point of view about the episode, based on assumptions that are disputed (to say the least) about motives and effects. This is not a proper use of an essay. And some of the content is frankly completely crazy (c.f. Wikipedia talk:Wikibombing#Craziness).Prioryman (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)