Forum:Removing a controversial "forum"

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Removing a controversial "forum"
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 30 October 2010 by Degenret01.

As you may know if you frequent the wiki forums, there is a link made by User:Wejer to his talk page, which he used as a political/religious forum for the wiki. Since my desysopping, I have loathed Wejer, but that hatred is not the motivation for this topic. I would, quite simply, like his talkpage deleted using RS:IAR as justification, and the topic linking to his forum deleted, too, as there are quite a few problems this creates. Here are my reasons:

  1. Wejer is/was a known troll, who, though not quite a rude, abrasive person, has commented on controversial topics with scorn, disdain, and hatred of those he does not like. He defended other known trolls in the community, as well. He is also an athiest and liked to force his opinion of religion (or, in his case, his lack thereof) on a few others...not to mention he has been gone for a long time now! If he is not going to be around to moderate his own "forum", he should not even have one.
  2. The topics at hand are politics and religion, two very touchy subjects in real life. Need I say more?
  3. NO ONE needs to have their own FORUM on a wiki. If you want people to congregate around a topic you love, go make your own wiki. If he is able to have his own forum, why can't we make exceptions for everyone else on OTHER subjects?
  4. Finally, in conjunction with Wejer abandoning us and leaving his talk page to rot, the page itself has not had any activity in a long time. I believe that I made the last comment, but that was in the past, so...yeah.

Support if you support removal, oppose if you oppose and want to keep it for some Godforsaken reason. I'm just trying to remove a potentially harmful aspect that Wejer made and then left here to fester. Oh, and please do NOT invoke RS:DDD, since we're trying to delete a harmful one. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 23:17, October 22, 2010 (UTC)


Strong oppose - There is nothing wrong with political statements on user or talk pages. It's called free speech. We must defend the right to reasonable free speech. It may be controversial, but it does not violate any policy (the only one that really matters is the UTP). Also, I'd like to mention that this has been brought up before and rejected. See Forum:Of Userpages and Politics. My page and Azaz's page both have a lot of political stuff on them; why are you targeting Wejer instead of me or Azaz? --LiquidTalk 23:22, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose - If he has been gone for a long time, what does it matter what is on his talk? RS:DELETE doesn't allow this and you can throw RS:IAR at anything you want (delete main page? RS:IAR! DERP!). There is also RS:DDD (invoking), you could probably move the contents to the page's archive (sort of deleting), but not deleting. This also sounds like a personal vendetta against this guy. Also, provide more links, "the topic linking to his forum deleted", I would like this topic link. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 23:29, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose deleting talk page, Support removing forum link - I'm going to break it down into all four points. 1) Wejer's character is irrelevant to whether or not such a forum should exist, even if it's hosted on his talk page. 2) If two wikians are interested in discussing politics or religion, that's their choice. If you don't want to get involved, then don't. 3) I agree that the link should not be stickied and on the forums, but Wejer can do whatever he wants with his talk page as long as he allows it to be used for regular messaging. 4) Also irrelevant.
To summarize, Wejer can do whatever he wishes with his talk page (within the allowance of policy), though a link to it should not be stickied on the PHP forum. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 23:35, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Oh, come on. He has a right to free speech and he can say what he wants as long as it doesn't break any rules here (which, as far as I can tell, it does not.) We already had another forum on this a year ago, and we decided things like these are fine. You obviously disagree with him ideologically, but that's not a reason to remove anything. Him being away for a while isn't, either. I can't believe you're calling this harmful. You have problems with his religion? I don't care. He's got a right to be atheist just as much as you have to be Christian. ʞooɔ 23:41, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose and Request for Closure - Wikia is based in the US, henceforth this forum should be closed. --中亚人/中亞人 (Chinasian/Jeffwang16) 跟我谈话 23:42, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but the first amendment does not prevent an organization such as this one from setting their own rules. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 23:47, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant to say that Wikia never said anything against this. BTW please close this thread. --中亚人/中亞人 (Chinasian/Jeffwang16) 跟我谈话 23:54, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
The community, not Wikia, creates all the wiki's policies. All legitimate discussions must be left open for at least one week, per RS:SNOW. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 00:05, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose per above - Also, how was he a troll? Take care, Elijah doucheface.png 23:57, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

This request for closure was denied A user has requested closure for Removing a controversial "forum". Request denied. The reason given was: Forums must be open for at least a week

Comment - The forum link issue is something that should be decided on the forums, no? Andrew talk 04:27, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

  • Please don't delete it. It's hilarious. (wszx) 05:07, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Helm. Also, how can it possibly hurt when he is inactive anyways? bad_fetustalk 07:02, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Per Liquid. HaloTalk 07:09, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Also when have we removed something just because it's controversial? That's not a good reason at all to remove something. HaloTalk 07:11, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
You are removing something controversial when you revert vulgar vandalism. Farming cape (t).png Lil cloud 9 Talk 07:21, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
Politics=vulgar? I fail to see the connection. HaloTalk 07:38, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
I am providing an example to answering your question of when we have removed something controversial. Farming cape (t).png Lil cloud 9 Talk 21:48, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Per Liquidhelium. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 12:11, October 23, 2010 (UTC) 

Strong partial support/Weak partial oppose/Tasty waffles - I don't think the forum should be deleted, but I don't really care that much if it is. However I do strongly support removing the sticky - mostly because it shouldn't have gone up there in the first place, and the rest of the way because its been dead for over a year. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 18:21, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Until it affects the wiki in a mainstream fashion I see no reason why to delete discussions on talk pages, even if it bends what talk pages were designed for. The link on the forum is kind of ridiculous, but if it's not causing harm I don't see a reason to delete it either. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 01:30, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

Closed Wejers talk page will not be deleted.--Degenret01 04:20, October 30, 2010 (UTC)