Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Community sanction noticeboard

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 sheer number of participants in this debate, as well as the many opposite arguments that have been articulated in either sense (some of which are mutually exclusive), makes it very difficult to weigh the balance towards a single, unequivocal result. Furthermore, opinions are virtually split evenly between both positions, reinforcing the division that this discussion creates in the opinions of editors. Therefore, it is impossible to reach a result other than no consensus achieved. However, this instance has also revealed itself fruitful, as several comments have raised important points that should not be overlooked, and which have been acknowledged even by many of those who support keeping this Noticeboard.

It is clear that the intentions of those who have invested great effort in creating and maintaining this Noticeboard are good, and they should be praised for this. However, in the opinion of big part of the community, it is slowly but steadily losing its focus and turning itself more into (to put it bluntly) some sort of execution platoon rather than a centralized forum for discussion of possible actions by the community. Revealing testimonies of this tendency are:

  • its current !vote form to support on endorse bans;
  • the request of sanctions by default, not only by those who bring a case, but as a demand by those commenting in order to even start discussing it;
  • even its present name has been questioned since it allegedly presents an immediate image of a disciplinary court;
  • a significant part of the requests currently being filed appear to be bad faith efforts by users in editing disputes.

It has been suggested, and I agree, that this Noticeboard should and needs to be closely monitored to correct these flaws and remove its newborn subtype of bureaucracy before it becomes too established. In its present form, the theory intended by those who created it and by others who've worked hard to make it a viable venue for discussion is getting remarkably different from its every day practice. A couple of things to keep in mind when observing its future development could be summed up as:

  • it should not work as a "Votes for Banning", like it has been repeatedly described below and commented above;
  • it should not create a new and futile kind of self-perpetuating bureaucracy, i.e. ratifying old community bans;
  • a change of name that emphasizes its nature as a venue for discussion instead of a search-for-sanctions' noticeboard should also be considered.

As conclusion to this rationale, I also consider relevant the possible advantages that this Noticeboard potentially possesses, and which have been aptly put by several users below; namely, being a separate forum to discuss a very delicate matter that normally takes a longer time frame than the Administrators' Noticeboards permit. Whether said benefits are augmented with a corrected functionality remains to be seen and observed, and will ultimately decide its fate in the future. - Phaedriel - 12:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]