Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Dictator Userboxes

Dictator Userboxes

Since I have seen some appetite for deletion of similar userboxes recently, I am doing a group nomination of userboxes clearly and unambiguously supporting historical figures that were or are clearly and unambiguously considered dictators. It is in my opinion obvious that these boxes egregiously violate WP:UBCR, because there is no way any of these could not be considered "inflammatory or substantially divisive".

Since I have not done a group nomination before and am unsure if I am doing it right, here are the links to the six individual boxes:

Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋 20:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't you heard? Dictators are back in style. Orange is the new black. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as inflammatory and divisive in a way that harms collegiality. Them being dictators does not in itself make the userboxes inappropriate—it's the fact that these userboxes are harmful to the project, which would be the case for any userpage content praising or criticizing a controversial figure. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Same points I made about the Qaddafi and Ian Smith userboxes, I think its important to know people's biases, especially on an encylopedia anyone anywhere with any perspective, can edit. Its arguably even more useful to know a person's biases when those biases are radical and extreme, because those people are probably more likely to use wikipedia as a soapbox. These are useful to the project to have. -Samoht27 (talk) 04:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I am increasingly able to appreciate political or other opinionated user boxes as handy red flags, I still think their potential to drive newcomers away is greater than their usefulness when dealing with POV editors. Even with this kind of editors, I still want to be able to AGF, otherwise it quickly becomes difficult to not assume WP:TENDENTIOUS editing at every corner. I guess the question is, do we really want to keep stuff only because it is useful "bait" to the benefit of other editors? I am not sure it is worth it honestly. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋 12:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This just in, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 05:38, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Salazar at least. It doesn't violate UBCR any more than userboxes promoting modern US presidents, which are just as divisive. There was actually more political violence in the US in the past decade than in Portugal under Salazar. I don't care if it exposes any "bias" of mine because I don't edit those kinds of articles really.

— THORNFIELD HALL^(Talk) 08:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely like to see US presidents user boxes gone as well, this nomination is about testing the waters by attempting to get rid of the worse offenders in terms of political leaders userboxes. Your bias disclosure (if I may call it that) somewhat proves my point, which is that if an MfD discussion can engender discussion about if it's worse to live in the US currently or in Portugal under Salazar, then the existence of the miscellany in question is clearly counterproductive to building an encyclopedia. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋 12:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

STOP DELETEING USERBOXES! NO MATTER WHO'S LEADER! Mrclubgreentokyo (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom, for obvious reasons. I should stress that I created a couple of these userboxes, some years ago. At this point, I have no idea why (probably as some kind of test edits/creations). As their creator, I have no problem to see them gone. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 14:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am suprised that User:UBX/Rojas Pinilla and Template:User Fidel Castro are not here since they are also dictators. Catfurball (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2025 (UTC) Even these politician userboxes are weird User:BondCJM/Userboxes/Gillard Voice, Template:User Lasso oppose, User:UBX/Anti-Duque, User:UBX/Anti-Santos and User:UBX/Anti-Uribe. Catfurball (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]