Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:GroundRisk/sandbox
Note: User had copied draft to the article namespace while this MFD was ongoing, but it has been subsequently deleted to allow this MFD to conclude. 7 23:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
This (at Civilization Jihad) was speedy deleted as an attack page (based on its existing solely to link various living people and groups to this fictional construct), which is not permitted in any namespace. The user was advised by the admin that restored/userfied it that he should not simply restore all of the old content, but did so anyway. Seems like a no-brainer. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- I would ask that you please leave this page alone in my sandbox. I am currently undergoing research to better the page. I am going through the sources and deleting ones that are "questionable" to some and verifying the others. This page is not a blatant attack page and this subject has been researched and written about from numerous scholarly sources. It is in my sandbox for a reason and would ask that you allow me to improve the article. I have talked with wikipedia admins about the page and they suggested I keep it in my sandbox to work on it so people like yourself, would leave it alone until I can finish it. This was a previous page that was unfairly deleted. It had been up for about six months and was a collaborative by critics and others. Even the critics wanted to improve the page not delete it entirely.
- GroundRisk (talk) 15:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- And you just created the article again, by accident?! Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- "I am going through the sources and deleting ones that are 'questionable' to some and verifying the others." I don't think that there's any recent evidence of that at all. In fact, your comment on another editor's page seems to indicate the opposite of this: "The draft that is currently on there is the latest one before it was lost so luckily it didn't' lose all the edits in the previous life." (from User talk:Mrt3366) I do think that one should be allowed to improve upon a previously deleted article before trying to recreate that same page again, but that's not apparently what you've been up to Mr. GroundRisk. Since you have a full copy of the page the way that it was before it was recently deleted, you can always work to try & improve it offline. "It had been up for about six months and was a collaborative by critics and others. Even the critics wanted to improve the page not delete it entirely." That's not entirely true either. As the previously deleted Civilization Jihad history and talk page showed, that page was up for deletion several times, and many edits that were made by other users that were not deemed "friendly" were met with hostility. The Civilization Jihad page was a real mess. The process of coming to any kind of consensus on how to improve the page, so that it wasn't just a Right-wing attack page, was overly difficult and much more difficult than it needed to be IMHO. Wikipedia doesn't need these kind of pages on it that blatantly push a conspiracy theory POV...there are plenty of free blog sites on the Internet where one can do that sort of thing. The page in question here should be Deleted. Guy1890 (talk) 00:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I see you have nothing else to do in your life than track my Wikipedia which is fine. In the meantime why don't you pick up a couple books that are listed in the sources which apparently you have so thoroughly been through , and read for yourself. But since you are a self indicted subject matter expert on this, please inform me how these published books and MB court documents that say "civilization jihad" are fictional, part of a conspiracy and do not merit a page for discussion. read the books on the matter and did a little research tell me how this is a fictional made up thing. GroundRisk (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)