Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October 11: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Boom goes the dynamite!]]: Guy - are you saying that Brian Collins should be undeleted? |
|||
Line 19:
*'''Relist.''' SPA = bad faith until proven otherwise. (Yeah, I know it's not policy, but I can dream....) --[[User:Aaron|Aaron]] 23:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
*:Absolute rubbish and a monumental violation of [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. Not just not policy, but explictly anti-policy. I urge you to read my above post to Aaron and reconsider this attitude. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 23:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
*::But I '''am''' Aaron! --[[User:Aaron|Aaron]] 00:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
*'''Endorse deletion''' per Guy, no compelling reason to overturn the AfD, which had a near-unanimous consensus for deletion bar one editor who argued for keeping (but gave no reasoning). It's neither necessary, reasonable nor always beneficial to inform a relevant WikiProject (of which there are a hundreds of varying degrees of utility), as depending on the WikiProject it may amount to votestacking, inadvertantly or deliberately. I would take an educated guess that telling WikiProjects on fictional universes (or fancruft if you prefer) that something is up for deletion is more likely to result in reflexive 'keep' !votes than, say, WikiProject India or WikiProject Science. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 23:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
| |||