Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Politics

message: If it is necessary, the article currently existing at the location of the new name is seriously lacking, and certain ideology & social issues such as drugs and abortion go beyond politics. ætərnal ðrAعon → 09:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need approval to add a userbox to the page. - Mike Beckham (talk) 11:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: These are highly biased and should be deleted in my opinion. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Borrowed the use of the above as I liked it (Template:Vast_Left_Wing_Conspiracy), and made Template:Might_Support_Conservative, Template:Might_User_Canadian_NDP for personal use, but also for others who want it. I haven't put it up anywhere. I'm not sure where would be best, as I respect that others don't have the same beliefs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturalnumber (talk • contribs) 00:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ?

message: Distinct lack of... =P Larklight (talk) 22:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why, did you want to create one? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 21:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Nazis

message: All political userboxes are in clear violation of multiple Wikipedia policies:
* Wikipedia:User page#What may I not have on my user page
* Wikipedia:Userboxes#Content restrictions
* Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox
* Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
* Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a social networking site
And, of course, any political ramblings on userpages or talk pages.
I don't care if they're liberal or conservative, they have no place in Wikipedia. I'm very politically opinionated, but I recognize that Wikipedia isn't the place for propaganda (in the past I have had political content in my user space, but it's not there anymore).
That means, I don't care about what you think of any the following:
* Religion
* The death penalty
* Abortion
* Family values
* LGBT issues
* The cause of climate change
* George W. Bush
* The United States presidential election, 2008
* etc. etc.
What I'm saying is, don't be provocative. It's fine to make a statement: "I am straight"/"I am gay" (but not a directly political statement: "I am a Democrat"/"I am a Republican"). But it's not okay to say "I believe a marriage should consist of only a man and a woman".
So what am I saying?
I'm saying get rid of every single political userbox. I was tempted to speedy every political userbox, but I thought I ought to discuss it first.
This is really important. Political statements distract from the task at hand: writing a great encyclopedia, and they can infuriate users.
--Josh Atkins (talk - contribs) 20:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What really distract us all from the task at hand are discussions like the one you started. The discussion that is not going to lead anywhere, just waste a lot of everyone's time, like dozens of identical discussions before. BTW, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest would not go away if editors would be silent about their beliefs. Netrat (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Wow, that's pretty absurd. Imagine if every encyclopedia was run this way: no contributions allowed from anybody involved in politics whatsoever, since of course, that's infuriating, right? Only contributions allowed by people who have not voiced one iota of opinions. -- LightSpectra (talk) 20:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's not what I said (sorry if it seemed like that). That's absolutely absurd, of course. What I actually said was that I think that there are some UBXs that are so inherently provocative that they have no place here. And I listed policies. FWIW, I've Mfed several userboxes that used to be on my user page. That I still totally with the content of, and stand by what they say. What I don't stand by is the fact that they exist here on Wikipedia. --Josh Atkins (talk - contribs) 17:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You think that having a userbox that promotes a certain controversial belief is bad for WikiLove, more or less. I have three counter-arguments to that point: (1) If the user was known contextually to hold a certain belief, it would be no different; thus userboxes are simply fun indicators, and removing them would be pointless. (2) They're an excellent check on NPOV; if a user makes an edit that you find to be unusual, you can easily skim through his userboxes to check if there's any apparent bias. (3) I have many "infuriating" boxes on my userpage, yet I have experienced nothing but the utmost politeness from the many users whom I have debated with. -- LightSpectra (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you really believe some UBXs are provocative, why don't you just ignore them? Why do you feed provocators instead? Netrat (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics]] 

message: The userboxes at the bottom of the page will not appear because there's apparently too many userboxes in this article. Can we split Userboxes/Politics into two different pages (i.e. Politics [1] and Politics [2]), or should we try to disperse some of these boxes into other articles? -- LightSpectra (talk) 16:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We could remove some unneeded ones from the list to make more space, for example there are 5 userboxes for supporting Karl Marx. And ones which say almost identical things, such as "This user prefers that the death penalty be used far more often." and "This user believes that the death penalty should be imposed and used more frequently !". Also we could remove some of the stupid ones like "This user thinks Vladimir Putin is badass." Dzhugashvili (talk) 17:25, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Seems like a temporary solution. Even if we filtered out all the duplicate userboxes, that still means that the page would only have room for ~10-20 more. But new userboxes are made every day. What's wrong with splitting it into two pages? -- LightSpectra (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think we need a second page 

message: * Move the U.N. userboxes to this page
* Move the independence/unification movements to politics by country
* Move the monarchy userboxes pertaining to specific countries to politics by country
* Unite all of the anarchy userboxes into one section
Any objections? -- LightSpectra (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Edits 

message: I am having trouble browsing this page. Even on 3.8GHz with 4GB DDR2 RAM on ADSL2+, this page is a complete drag in Firefox. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs  02:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too long 

message: I need userbox with Kucinich on it, for example text "This user considers Dennis Kucinich his favorite member of the US Congress" and then his photo there. Please make it for me :)--Rastko Pocesta (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dennis

message: The big warning at the beginning of the page seems too obtrusive to me. —K. the Surveyor (talk) 02:44, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we really need the warning?  

message: Are there any political beliefs that are inappropriate to express in a userbox? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 01:53, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off-limits politics 

message: Something is wrong with the sections "Media", "Internationalism, Nationalism, Globalization", "United Nations (UN)", "Governance", and "War & Peace" but I can't spot what it might be. Help? ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Think I found it.  If I edit the full page, I see "Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included."  I think that the page just needs to be split, somehow. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  display is borked 

message: I think we should have people be able to have userboxes that tell us what their beliefs are. That way after seeing unsourced edits we can see what they believe, which is useful to me when viewing malicious edits and seeing that a user was using Wikipedia as their platform. That way if somebody consistently vandalizes a page relating to politics and we see they are using wikipedia to further their philosophy by deleting opposing viewpoints or putting up NPOV banners inappropriately we can determine if the person is following Wikipedia's guidelines inappropriately and do the right thing to punish them with probable cause for breaking our clear guidelines, delete and block, to preserve our fair wiki. Even if they are conservative. Thoughts? Comments? Stidmatt (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  These Userboxes help Wikipedia 

message: I'm going to organize the subsections a bit. I'd like to see specific party and movement affiliations have their own subsection, to make them easier to find. ozhu (talk · contribs) 00:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New subsection