The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: keep. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 23:53, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Airhogs777/Wikipedia: The Musical[edit]

User:Airhogs777/Wikipedia: The Musical (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

Missed this my bulk nomination of everything involving this MfD:

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JulieMinkai/Planning for seventh Wikipedia movie. Dronebogus (talk) 15:45, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is pure WP:UP#GAMES, not to mention the inappropiateness of writing fan-fiction about real Wikipedia editors. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 22:02, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It is creative reflection on the project, and so has educational value relevant to the project. The header humor tag is not perfect, it need not be humorous, and there are serious educational uses for reflective creativity. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This clearly constitutes writings [...] not closely related to Wikipedia's goals (quote from Wikipedia:User pages#What may I not have in my user pages?), and thus not an acceptable use of userspace. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep. Obvious value to the project contributors and interested community. Socializing, developing lore and exchanging kindnesses and art of all kinds are central to building lasting groups, whether they are educational, practical, or aesthetic. And our work is about presentation and communication as well as raw data dumps, so that too is related to how effectively we can educate and enthusiastically propagate knowledge. I have seen no complaints from the referenced editors, but should one arise there are easy solutions other than deletion. – SJ + 20:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep and Remove names of anyone who objects, because otherwise why should we care about some goofy sandbox page? If this were created by someone WP:NOTHERE (which does happen with this "humor" content sometimes), then I'd probably suggest deleting, but it's just a bit of goofiness in userspace, where one is allowed to be goofy, experiment with wikicode, collect userboxes, be part of the Wikipedia community, etc. as long as you're otherwise here for the right reasons. WP:UP#GAMES specifically links to Category:Wikipedia games, of course, which has all manner of silly stuff that doesn't really have "educational value", yet some manages to find a home in projectspace. It seems like fine practice not to include the names of users who object and/or banned users who cannot object, and it certainly shouldn't depict anyone in a negative light without proactive consent, but otherwise, what is the deletion rationale for this vs any other "asdfasdf" sandbox? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:29, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I see no reason why deletion would actually improve Wikipedia. Let users have a bit of goofy fun, so long as it's WP:CIVIL and otherwise non-disruptive to Wikipedia's core purpose. — Mhawk10 (talk) 08:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.