Namefag talk:Supreme

jannies delete this page and ban me if you goon to xis posts — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandt (talk • contribs)

I guess he's notable enough to have his own page. Also while he's a disturbed fetishist, he is not a pedophile. 〜 MarketPliers (leak here) 22:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey, I there's an article debunking the idea that people that post drawn depictions of sexualized kids somehow arent pedos, it's in the same wiki we edit together TheCatalan1977 (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

The current stance of the administration is that babyjak is an adult ABDL fetishist and therefore is not a drawing of a child. 〜 MarketPliers (talk) 21:59, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't care what this administration says. The law, and morals says otherwise: Babyjak has the proportions of a child, his height matches one of a baby, so does his head shape and body. "BUT HE HAS HAIR SO HE'S CLEARLY AN ADULT YOU HECKIN' ANTI", no faggot, there are babies born with body hair, and I was one btw, so I know what i'm talking about. Babyjak is also treated as a kid in the soysphere. As you can see in the janny approved template (And you are one), Babyjak is widely considered to be a child. Australia bans sexual depictions of minors even in "fictional media", so does the European Union, and no "In the U.S it's legal" is not a fucking argument because many people in the sphere are not from BBC mutt Israel land, so fuck off with that shitty "argument". Specifically, it's considered 'p when characters share child like characteristics, lets see which ones Babyjak complies with: Big head, bigger than body, common in babies, small body and extremities, baby eyes, child-like behavior. Repent and face judgement, go sin no more TheCatalan1977 (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

what fucking baby has a beard and wears glasses you retard

Nothing to do with award. I talked about body proportions faggot. No adult, not even with dwarfism looks like this, and if it does, its an extremely rare exception, and babyjak clearly does not match any trait or stereotype related with adults with dwarfism. You are using the same arguments lolicons use faggot. TheCatalan1977 (talk) 16:11, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

OH AND HAVE YOU FUCKING CONSIDERED THAT BABYJAK IS A BABY AND A SOYJAK AND ALL SOYJAKS HAVE BEARD AND GLASSES, NOT AS A SIGN OF THEIR AGE BUT RATHER BECAUSE THEY REPRESENT SOYBOYS? AND THAT YOU CAN LITERALLY PUT GLASSES ON BABIES WITH LANUGO? TheCatalan1977 (talk) 16:11, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Oh you poor thing, not signing comments thinking I dont know who you are... TheCatalan1977 (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

>he is not a pedophile.

sonion

Well, he sure got the attention he wants. OopooPoopoo (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

MVST. NQT. GIGAQVQTE. Shadilay (talk) 23:24, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

dead

>hasnt posted in over 3 weeks

packwatch nigga, aint nobaldi missing you Aryan_warrior aka MINT (talk) 15:28, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Why the fuck isn't he banned?

We are talking about a fucking lol*faggot and pedocuck who posts babyjak 'p, who even knows where it's traced from. Werent we opposed to drawn 'p? TheCatalan1977 (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

and yes I know it's a booru user... but still, why booru mods haven't moved a finger when the 'party has proudly served in raids and 'oxes against tranny niggerpedos TheCatalan1977 (talk) 18:14, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

yes, xe should have been banned a long time ago. but now xe is gone for good, i guess the shalalas that are the admins think that there is no point in banning xer anymore. Aryan_warrior aka MINT (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

This nametoilet isn't even relevant anymore just move on. 〜 MarketPliers (talk) 21:59, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep

I feel we should keep it. Tar (talk | email) 13:13, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

why? G-Man (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

keep it because he has the most downvoted post and he started the entire babyjak bait trend so obviously notable enough, anyone who says otherwise just wants to delete it because they hate him (bias) Cobblestone (talk) 13:28, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

>anyone who says otherwise just wants to delete it because they hate him (bias)

No, my problem with it is that it's very messy, coally and outdated and nobody wants to actually improve it. I've tried to do it before but I always give up because it's so shitty it's unsalvageable. Furthermore, I don't see why we need pages on attentionwhores who only got popular for a month due to people falling for their bait. I guess he is relevant but he could just simply be mentioned on List of SoyBooru namefags G-Man (talk) 14:13, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

>Messy, coally and outdated Meds its fine. Tar (talk | email) 14:19, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

We cant let him just be "a namefag" on a list. He has to be remembered as the worst kind of such, a depraved individual who deserves getting spit on his grave TheCatalan1977 (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

this pedonigger attentionwhore isn't even relevant anymore let it go, stop giving him attention AwardedAccountAward (talk) 14:51, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

If he doesnt use the site anymore how are we giving him attention with this page? Its not like he cares if his wiki page exists or not anymore. Tar (talk | email) 14:52, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

profound mental retardation AwardedAccountAward (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

What is your point? Tar (talk | email) 14:54, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

stop giving him attention, that's all, this pedonigger attentionwhore doesn't deserve his own page. AwardedAccountAward (talk) 14:56, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

He doesnt care about this page. And if he was actually a pedonigger he would have gotten nished. Tar (talk | email) 14:58, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

"Mane if dat black who was cout stabbin a gurl in kamra akchsully did i' we would have 'rested him" same argument used by black judges, just because someone hasnt been 'nished for being a pedo, doesnt mean he isnt, in fact, that means the jannies and admins are defending such stuff TheCatalan1977 (talk) 15:02, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

what is your point? he is irrelevant, that means we can safely make this page a redirect, stop bootlicking cobblestone AwardedAccountAward (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I am not bootlicking cobblestone this is my personal opinion. Dont turn this page into a small one line sentence just because you dont like him. Tar (talk | email) 15:06, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

right... AwardedAccountAward (talk) 15:13, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Do it then. We can dispose this article and upload it into SNCAPedia as dump TheCatalan1977 (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

good idea thecatalan AwardedAccountAward (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Yeah but did you save the HTML code of the article? TheCatalan1977 (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Newsoi its called wikitext and you realize the page history is still viewable...? Tar (talk | email) 15:12, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

You can see it at Special:PermanentLink/445649 G-Man (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

What do we do with this page?

You are not entitled to vote.
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.

Keep

Redirect to list of SoyBooru namefags

There were 13 votes since the poll was created on 15:04, 24 July 2026.

poll-id 7249924D70B5AE3A2D5DD9DAEE0CA494

the fact that he even caused this discussion shows that he's obviously notable, the page can be polished very easily. the point of the wiki is to document notable people and that includes people you dislike, stop trying to use sncapedia as a garbage bin for stuff that makes you leak Cobblestone (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

tl;dr stop censoring the wiki Cobblestone (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

>two jannies and it's just tar. And we are still documenting him on the namefag list G-Man (talk) 15:31, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

marketpliers said he's notable at the top, he has the most downvoted post in booru history, also the list doesn't have nearly enough detail until you bloat the entry with so much info that you might as well have this article. Cobblestone (talk) 15:34, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

marketpliers also supported merging it to the list Special:PermanentLink/429313 G-Man (talk) 15:36, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

????????? what is she doing after THIS happened Talk:MarketPliers#do_I_get_my_page_back_or_nah, i guess only namefag pages that the jannies approve of get to exist? ok i give up Cobblestone (talk) 15:42, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

idgaf about my page anymore and often forget it even exists, it can be merged into List of Soyjak Wiki namefags 〜 MarketPliers (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

He was barely notable enough at the time and I really didn't even want this page to exist in the first place. We shouldn't be giving people like him attention for toeing the line of what is acceptable under the rules. 〜 MarketPliers (talk) 15:50, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

he has the most downvoted post in booru history, I feel that is notable enough, dont you think? How is it not? Sorry, but I think I am going to have to agree with Cobblestone on this one Fenriris 🐺 18:22, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

clearly another solution is needed if you're gonna flip flop on every single namefag page, and every page on anyone who is too icky for you is at risk of getting redirected into a 2 sentences stub, so i'll work on something new Cobblestone (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

We don't have set notability criteria, of course we're gonna flip flop on who deserves it. 〜 MarketPliers (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I recently added an clarification thing to the manual of style to avoid this kind of exact situation WTH! @User:G-Man in the future, please do not blank articles like that just because you think we should not document anyone notable in a negative way. Soyteens are totally allowed to write articles negatively, we already do that all the time here for as long as I can remember. Its their freedom to do so. wth would that change now of all times? Besides, you need to consider how this looks to the ad verge user, it looks like we are complete clitty leaking. Anyways, if you think an article deserves to be deleted, use the {{delete}} template instead of just blanking it like an idiot, even I the admin uses that template before actually going around and deleting articles. Please refresh yourself up on the Manual of Style before coming back to janny duty. Thanks Fenriris 🐺 18:19, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Just want to clarify I didn't "blank the page because it was negative", it was marked for deletion before and I made it a redirect instead, and another janny agreed with my decision. It was then brought back for the Namefag namespace which was for less relevant namefags and since the idea about it got rejected, I thought the page should have went back to being a redirect. I never said anything agaisnt writting pages in a negative perspective, I don't know where that came from. But if he is relevant enough to warrant a page I accept that. I also didn't know about what you added to the Manual of Style, just found it now. G-Man (talk) 18:53, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Just be careful man @User:G-Man. I dont want you to do something retarded and as an result lose your roles. First time I am heraring it was marked for deletion, didnt know about that. I normally like to just let jannies handle that on their own since they are good at doing just that without me having to. Maybe I should start watching that closer now. The purpose of this wiki is to document anyone and anything with significance to the soysphere, regardless of if their actions were "good" or "bad", so please keep that in mind when going through deletion requests. Cobblestone told me that the real reason why you did that was because you don't think someone who is notable in a negative way should be documented, I really disagree with that as it ruins the whole point of the wiki which is to document anything notable as She said. Feel free to tell the user who made that deletion request off if you want Fenriris 🐺 19:23, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I agree with cobbo on this one, the purpose of this wiki is to document anyone and anything with significance to the soysphere, regardless of if their actions were "good" or "bad". If we made pages only on people that we liked, gemmy pages like Giggly Goonclown or Kuz wouldn't exist. Supreme is a nigger but the babyjak porn incident undoubtedly caused a lot of controversy on the 'ru, making him notable enough for his own page imo. -- Neptune (talk | 'butions) 18:31, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Since this whole situation was do to being confused on what consiutiets an notable namefag, I will just copy this here from the manual of style to help you guys out. Hope this clears the confusion with you all. This is also in response to agreement with you @User:Neptune :)

• You WILL NOT make pages on random namefags. In general, namefags qualify for the main namespace if they:
  • Played a substantial role in the creation or popularization of a meme, event, variant, trend, community, or soysphere website.
  • Held a significant administrative, cultural, or historical role within the soysphere.
  • Have enough independently documented history to justify a full article. For example, Supreme

The point is that at one point they were significant after all. The same reason I probably have my own page cause I am technically an namefag myself, and people dont really care that much about me. It's history Fenriris 🐺 18:42, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Understood G-Man (talk) 18:54, 24 July 2026 (UTC)