Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Why not create an account?

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: Speedy keep. Per WP:SK1 and WP:SNOW. To nominate a page and then to say the page shouldn't be necessarily be deleted is... Something. Also, there's no harm in keeping conflicting essays (take WP:COSTLY & WP:CHEAP for example), even when one is a minority viewpoint, especially when that essay in question makes very good points. (non-admin closure) Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 14:47, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Why not create an account?

While this may make good points on why you shouldn’t make an account, the problem is, the opposing viewpoint is not a minority, but part of basic knowledge of Wikipedia (as evidenced by its navbox). I feel that either this page is deleted, or that that page gets a re‐evaluation on how integral it is to Wikipedia (not saying that that page should be deleted, just that both should be essays with the same amount of worth and supporters). Wikipedian^{Talk to me!}_{or not…} 22:30, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain I may be completely off the mark, which is why I’m abstaining. This also means that if this gets 0 comments, don’t soft delete the page, just leave it be. Wikipedian^{Talk to me!}_{or not…} 22:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Nominator nominated the page to be deleted then go on say "not saying that that page should be deleted,.." which is a conflicting of view point. And after this nomination of deletion edit, they went on stating "Abstain" and "Goodbye for now" - see here and stated he disappointment for being unfairly block for sock on their user page. Their reasons for this page to deleted is not good enough and to keep the page has plenty of good reason as we can see in the "Summary of benefits" section of the page. Cassiopeia talk 01:09, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perhaps even speedy keep per WP:SK1. Incredibly bizarre nomination. If you're going to say that you're not saying that that page should be deleted in the nomination reason, then why nominate the page in the first place? 88.97.192.42 (talk) 10:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
close in... uh... how do i even... absence of a nomination? i'm not even sure this should count. if the mere presence of this case somehow doesn't fry your brain as much, then i guess keep, as there's no real inherent problem in ideas conflicting, especially in the contexts of personal opinion and humor. but really, what in gork's teef went on with the nom? he doesn't look blocked to me, and i don't think it's gonna be particularly hard to talk his way out of further consequence, whatever the initial one was consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:19, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[1] 88.97.192.42 (talk) 14:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oh, it was that one. i thought it was something recent, whoops. still not any less confusing that this would all happen now consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 15:13, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: essays are allowed to put forth minority views. My best guess is the nominator is trying to make some sort of WP:DUE argument, but the policy strictly applies to mainspace. Essays are given greater latitude in that regard — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 20:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A perfectly fine essay. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the essay makes good points. We don't delete things just because we have an opposing view --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:25, 22 August 2025 (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.