Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:05, 17 August 2005

Warren Benbow

This is a disputed speedy. The article asserts notability, is verifiable, and is encyclopedic. The only question is whether the person in question is notable enough for an article. --Tony Sidaway 16:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

• I vote Keep, but I think a merge with another article, say James Ulmer, with a redirect, would also be fine. --Tony Sidaway 16:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Andrew pmk 18:58, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, seems notable enough. -- DS1953 19:24, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Does not appear to meet deletion criteria. Trollderella 20:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Someone seems to have speedied it again. Naughty boy. Restoring in order that this deletion discussion can continue. --Tony Sidaway 20:43, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - New article is worth keeping. Old article was a valid deletion. Mr. Sidaway's war with other admins is inappropriate and against policy and the community. - Tεxτurε 20:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. I hereby utterly and completely refute any and all suggestions that I am at war with other administrators. I restored this in good faith as a bad speedy and the fact that I have successfully expanded it using as my original source the contents of the original article confirms that this speedy was at best disputable. Bad speedies can and should be corrected. --Tony Sidaway 21:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Are you serious? How can you refute being at war with other administrators when your comment above is "Someone seems to have speedied it again. Naughty boy." - Tεxτurε 21:16, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Just because someone has performed an invalid speedy, does not mean that someone who observes that fact is at war with him. --Tony Sidaway 21:24, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
      • A revert war is when two users start reverting more than once each. An admin war is when two admins begin deleting/undeleting more than once each. How many times have you undeleted it? - Tεxτurε 21:31, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

        1. 16:14, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway restored "Warren Benbow" (6 revisions restored)
        2. 16:13, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway deleted "Warren Benbow" (To placate geogre I will delete and then selectively undelete only the parts I worked on.)
        3. 16:03, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway restored "Warren Benbow"
        4. 15:47, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway restored "Warren Benbow"
        5. 15:46, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway restored "Warren Benbow"
        6. 11:48, 17 August 2005 Tony Sidaway restored "Warren Benbow"

• • • • You claim that it's war but you've only listed my actions. 11:48 I recovered a bad speedy (the article you currently see sailing through VfD). 15:46-16:03 I repeated the operation because again a rogue administrator had speedied an obvious non-speedy candidate. 16:13 and 16:14 I took action to take away the rogue's excuse for speedying. I'm not at war with geogre. At most I'm in dispute with him. His actions in the dispute are to delete, concealing a blatantly non-speediable article from editors who are not also sysops; my actions in the dispute are to restore, making the article visible, and give the editors a chance to decide. This isn't war, it isn't even a police action, it's just a man with an ego being silly enough to think he can push it so far as to repeatedly delete content from Misplaced Pages without any scrutiny and get away with it. --Tony Sidaway 22:00, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
        • I would respond that "it's just a man with an ego being silly enough to think he can push it so far as to repeatedly " UNDELETE "content from Misplaced Pages without any scrutiny and get away with it". Can you explain why you violated WP:3RR by undeleting six times? That's an edit war. Or do you think that such concepts only apply to non-admins? The way you think VfU is only for non-admins? - Tεxτurε 22:04, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per WP:Music. Capitalistroadster 21:00, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Capitalistroadster. Please note that at the time of this vote the article appears to be deleted and hopefully will be restored? Hall Monitor 21:15, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
  • So as to remove any further excuse for deletion, I have deleted and then restored *only* those versions which are indisputably unspeediable. The original versions are gone. --Tony Sidaway 21:17, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
    • The link appears to be restored, thank you Tony. Hall Monitor 21:18, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
    • My pleasure. I hope that we will now be left to continue building the encyclopedia. --Tony Sidaway 21:24, 17 August 2005 (UTC)