Misplaced Pages

Brandon_Cyrus (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

Overturn: Hello, I semi respect Tokyo's decision on the deletion. However, I believe that my page was deleted over harassment which is something that Misplaced Pages strongly discourages and does not allow. Following the talk page on User/BrandonCyrus, you can see the harassment that I'm talking about. Being called names such as a liar, accused of things, and just a bunch of crap was started which I simply asked for peace. When the page was first put up for deletion, it was because of an issue with citations. The user BGWhite stated that it should be fixed within 7 days and had some issues. A user encouraged him to remove the PROD, which he agreed to and decided with the other user to add a template that stated it needed major fixes to meet Misplaced Pages's guides... Which I had agreed to and understood, and yes I was working on getting the citations and such. However, this rude bias and absurd user listed it under an article for deletion, when I explained to him that everything was going to be worked out, that the other 2 authors and I talked it out he was all like "done" as if he understood, but then he got totally invested in the article and started hating and such. Tokyo didn't give me enough time to edit my page, as if it was BGWhite who gave me 7 days to do so. She deleted it under another administrators thought because she thought it was a good idea, to me it seems a little bias and confusing and yeah, as a normal human being you do get offended. As I worked over 6 hours editing this page, just to see it deleted in 1 day is horrible... It was deleted before I could even cite my newer sources. I am respectfully asking that the page is to be reinstated, as the admin and I cannot come to a decision on it. Brandon Cyrus, in all faiths, is indeed an actor who has starred in Hannah Montana, High School Musical 2, The Hunger Games, and more. Even though, he has starred in a lot of small scenes, he is still indeed an actor and should be on Misplaced Pages, not for just the big parts, but for all the work he has done. I know you can't give pages to every actor, however, Brandon Cyrus has starred in over 20 different things, he is indeed a "famous persons" under Misplaced Pages's guidelines. He should be awarded and known for his hard work and not just called a small actor because he has guest starred in a few films, even though he guest starred he was invited over and over again as a main guest. Please help reinstate the page, as the page does meet notability, brought hundreds of views to Misplaced Pages, and will indefinitely be updated with newer sources as I promise. Please give me another chance. Also, the page was a stub, and stubs start from the bottom and make their way up, as they are intended to be small and updated in several weeks or months to it's full potential.

Allow recreation:

---REFERENCES---

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm6060051/ (I know not to use IMDb, but if you were to use PRO, it states that everything, including the management was verified)
TVDuck: http://www.tvduck.com/Brandon-Cyrus-celebrity-photos.html (small but uneditable by users)
Personal Website: http://www.brandoncyrus.com/

All my sources to explain this current article. (I'm reviewing and getting more for Brandon_Cyrus Wikipage) Thanks! --Reigningbc (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse deletion as closing admin. I personally did a search for Cyrus via Google, Bing, Highbeam, and my typical search engines. I can't find where he's been the focus of any in-depth reliable sources. All of his roles have been trivial, as he's only performed as an extra in his various film and television roles. None of them have ever been the focus of any coverage in reliable sources. As far as my early closure goes, I closed it per WP:SNOW after seeing the amount of delete rationales by the various editors (some of whom are people I am very familiar with) and after my search results showed that there would be no difference in whether the AfD ran for 7 days or for 1 day. As far as IMDb goes, it still can't be used to establish notability- that can only be done through coverage in places such as news articles in the New York Times, Dread Central, Cinema Blend, and the like. None of the other places listed are reliable either and most are WP:PRIMARY sources. Again, I'd like to caution you Reigningbc about stating that people are doing this out of a personal bias against someone or as a way of personally attacking Cyrus. I do acknowledge that people were rude, but the issue here is ultimately whether or not Cyrus passes notability guidelines, which he does not. I do not recommend userfication in this instance, as I don't see where Cyrus will pass notability guidelines any time soon. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: It looks like there is already a userspace copy here. I'm not going to nominate it for deletion at MfD at this point in time as it can help our DR, but I still have extreme doubts about Cyrus's chances at recreation and about it potentially being promotional or misrepresenting the roles performed. (IE, saying that a minor role as an extra is a major role.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:32, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse A WP:SNOW close was completely justified, and I agree that at this time, the person unfortunately does not meet notability requirements. There were some uncivil comments on both sides and one editor was perhaps a bit too harsh towards a new contributor, but the deletion process was followed, the only violation being the removal of AfD tags (which was evidently done in good faith through a lack of understanding of the process). Because of the COI involved I would recommend deletion of the userspace version after the deletion review has closed; once the person becomes notable, somebody, preferrably somebody who is not involved in their marketing team, can create an article about them from scratch. --bonadea contributions talk 12:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello bonadea, thanks for your comment. However, I don't feel like I was being too harsh, I was simply asking the other person to back off and mind their own business. I was a 'newer editor' than he was. He has clearly been on this website longer than I have. Also, I am not a COI. Yes, I do work under the user, however that doesn't mean I'm not a fan of his work. Even though I work under him, doesn't mean I know him personally or talk to him at all other than email once in awhile. However, I believe my page still fits under notability due to the FAN CLAUSE. Which states users with a large fan base, indeed his large fan bases can be found here, here, and here on his website with thousands of hits a day. He does meet some criteria which is notable with Misplaced Pages's guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reigningbc (talk • contribs) 13:25, 10 May 2014‎ (UTC)

Quoting WP:COI: "COI editing involves contributing to Misplaced Pages to promote your own interests, including your business or financial interests, or those of your external relationships, such as with family, friends or employers." Given that Reigningbc previously referred to Cyrus as his/her "client" (diff), I respectfully submit that Reigningbc has very clearly declared a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 13:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

In nowhere in the article I called him my best friend, my partner, I didn't even put myself in his article so how am I submitting any personal interests about myself? How am I posting unfaithful stuff about him when I barely even know the guy? All I do is work under a management team, I work under him, however, I have my OWN boss, my own manager, which means I barely have anything to do with Brandon Cyrus himself. --Reigningbc (talk) 13:37, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

That's totally disingenuous, I work for a large company, I doubt I'm even in the top 5 tiers to the hierarchy, does that mean that no one should think I would be working in the interests of my company? If I'm not working the interest of the company who pay me, I'm likely to get fired. --86.2.216.5 (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I meant that another editor was maybe a little too harsh on you, since you were clearly a brand new editor - but that does not change the fact that I think that the deletion discussion was carried out and closed in good order. --bonadea contributions talk 13:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh! Oops! I'm so sorry Bonadea! Didn't mean to read it wrongly - however any tips? Anyway you can help me and not endorse the deletion? Can someone PLEASE on here help me at all? --Reigningbc (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl79, I thought you referred me here to get another admins opinion? Instead of hurting my chances... --Reigningbc (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also admins, take note of this LEGAL rep who edits Misplaced Pages pages and has done thousands:
"Keep I feel the subject meets WP:NACTOR (specifically: "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.") ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 08:06, 9 May 2014 (UTC)" --Reigningbc (talk) 12:20, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

What I don't get is how people assume IMDb is not a "trusted source", it's ONE OF THE LARGEST MOVIE DATABASES, theres nothing else like it on the internet! It really does VERIFY its submitted information, it is also MORE IN DEPTH if you get IMDbPRO. Read it's terms, etc, before justifying it as "Misplaced Pages". IMDb doesn't have an "edit" button located everywhere. You can't just submit something and get it automatically approved. It goes through a process FYI. --Reigningbc (talk) 12:23, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also under "Misplaced Pages:Notability" /Entertainers section/ it states "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following." Brandon Cyrus has millions of fans on Twitter, hundreds of thousands on Instagram, was also invited to the exclusive invite celeb only website WhoSay.
"Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Brandon Cyrus has appeared in multiple films and television series, significant doesn't have to be only a main character. Significant characters can be extras and guests, just like on live shows. Theres many possibilities for the word 'significant'. --Reigningbc (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

If Misplaced Pages bots and users can get profile pages then I highly suggest Brandon Cyrus gets to keep his own personal page, as his acts and entertainment career has done more significance, also when he posts his Misplaced Pages page he will be welcoming millions to the Misplaced Pages universe, engaging these users with Misplaced Pages, and these new users will either sign up, visit more pages, or even donate to the Misplaced Pages Foundation. --Reigningbc (talk) 12:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

When has Cyrus had a "personal page" on Misplaced Pages? The page about Cyrus was an encyclopedia written about him, preferably by independent parties. He should not be "post his Misplaced Pages page". —C.Fred (talk) 12:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry C.Fred, I meant like his own page on the database, not a personal page - like a user only page. By post his own page, I meant social media sites such as Twitter where most of his fanbase is! --Reigningbc (talk) 13:10, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also "Notability is inherited" indeed it is inherited. He was welcomed to work with his family co stars. In this page: it states to keep. Which then states that it's also allowed if the person of the famous relative has their own work done. --Reigningbc (talk) 12:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it states "Family members of celebrities also must meet Misplaced Pages's notability criteria on their own merits." Based on the AfD comments, the article about Brandon Cyrus never showed that he met those criteria. —C.Fred (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Once cannot meet it when one isn't allowed to edit their article anymore.. --Reigningbc (talk) 13:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also I can't cite things when other users removed 90% of my current work, just a little note. --Reigningbc (talk) 12:45, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse The AfD discussion was conducted within guidelines, and the close was a correct interpretation of the positions presented in the discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 12:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

C.Fred the close wasn't even conducted, she did it out of a whem. Tokyo didn't even give me time to fix my article! --Reigningbc (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

The close was conducted. Tokyogirl closed the discussion early, deeming that, based on the arguments presented, the article didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of being kept if the AfD ran the full duration. —C.Fred (talk) 13:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you the one who makes the decision? Did you just make it so my page can't be reinstated? Or is this just a opinion? How do I know when a decision is fully made? Also, how does she have common sense if she doesn't even know how to study the topic, if she doesn't even know who the person is? If she doesn't even give me a chance to add certain citations? Does she know the person at all? Common Sense would of gave the author more time to fix things... and would've paid attention to the notice of being a STUB. --Reigningbc (talk) 13:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

All of you are acting as if one article is going to kill Misplaced Pages! This is unbelievable. I didn't even have the time to do any fixes! Let me remind you the article was a STUB. It will be fixed! --Reigningbc (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll fix the page! Please trust me! I will add newer sources, I promise! Just give me a second chance! What about the fan clause??? He meets it! --Reigningbc (talk) 13:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Nobody's suggesting deleting your userspace draft (yet); I suggest you work on User:Reigningbc/sandbox and bring it up to standards. Then we can look at submitting that as a new article. —C.Fred (talk) 13:51, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse - While IMO it may have been more prudent to let it run the full 7 days to avoid any pretense of drama, an early snow close is within the discretion that admins are afforded, and the consensus of the discussion was clearly in favor of deletion. The "acting career" consists of bit parts and uncredited appearances, there's no way this person meets the project's notability guidelines, either for actors specifically or people in general. Tarc (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

^ If you say so, kind of really rude. It doesn't consist of only guest starring, etc, he has had main roles and recurring roles for your information. I stand behind the fan clause on the notability guidelines, which you all seem to be ignoring. --Reigningbc (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Can you point out which of this person's roles you believe qualify as "main" ? Recurring, sure, in the technical sense, e.g. 4 listings as "Extra (uncredited)" for Hannah Montana, 4 listings for Zoey 101 that doesn't even have character/position name. Then there's two D-list reality shows about beach ex'es and Beverly Hills rich kids...I can't bring myself to suffer through watching a full episode, but judging by the cast pics and videos on eonline.com and mtv.com, respectively, this person does not appear at all. For all intents and purposes, he is a background character. Everywhere. Tarc (talk) 21:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

FWD: :: WillyD - Either way, having over 20 credits is impressive. Even being a background character in those shows and movies are impressive. The entertainment business is not easy at all and things such as those definitely require a lot of work and talent. I just don't believe any of you know how the entertainment business runs. I contacted Misplaced Pages one on one, also I sent the legal team, who asked that the page will be reinstated on legal terms and that the page cannot be touched. --Reigningbc (talk) 22:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also guest stars are outside PERFORMERS and ENTERTAINERS they still qualify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reigningbc (talk • contribs) 22:25, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Comment - if those are the only sources, it's unfortunate that your time has been wasted, but it has. You can't hope to to write a neutral encyclopaedia article without some decent, independent sources. If there are others, it might be sandboxed to allow development, but undeleting now would be pointless, as it would just be deleted again soon. WilyD 21:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

WillyD - Either way, having over 20 credits is impressive. Even being a background character in those shows and movies are impressive. The entertainment business is not easy at all and things such as those definitely require a lot of work and talent. I just don't believe any of you know how the entertainment business runs. I contacted Misplaced Pages one on one, also I sent the legal team, who asked that the page will be reinstated on legal terms and that the page cannot be touched. --Reigningbc (talk) 22:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you making legal threats? Your presense in this project will be extgremely short-lived unless your tune undergoes a course-correction. Quickly. Tarc (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Once again, you editors are targeting me. I never said I was posting legal threats. I simply said my legal team is talking this over with Misplaced Pages, and that appropriate actions will be taken for a user who had harassed me on this website.

Read the page he pointed to. Suggesting that you will use legal might to get your way is a legal threat. However "who asked that the page will be reinstated on legal terms" - wikipedia has no obligation to host a page on anyone, there are no legal terms under which it needs to be here. "and that the page cannot be touched" - which is laughable, wikipedia is not a free webhost to have just what person X want's posted, we are a user contribution encyclopedia. --86.2.216.5 (talk) 09:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Whether it's impressive or not isn't really a consideration. If there aren't reliable references from third parties, it's simply impossible for us to write a neutral, encyclopaedic article. Since we can't, we don't. WilyD 12:29, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The only legal action we are requesting is against harassment for a user, we are only requesting that the users account gets either 1. suspended, 2. deleted, or 3. their information such as IPs is sent to the police. Nothing too major. It's against the law, and should be dealt with and not ignored! --Reigningbc (talk) 17:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Please read the NLT policy. You are allowed to take legal action, what you aren't allowed to do is use the threat of such to have a chilling effect. Telling editors that you will take legal action if you feel harassed is a legal threat. --86.2.216.5 (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

When asking to read a policy please make sure the page is clickable. --Reigningbc (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Also, I meant that the page is to be reinstated under certain legal conditions that Misplaced Pages follows and the page to be locked. All websites are to follow the law. --Reigningbc (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Please tell me which law requires any website to include an article and only in the form approved by the subject of the article? --86.2.216.5 (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll get back to you on that. --Reigningbc (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

All legal comments that were made are highly suggested to be ignored by users and passed-over as they have been striked out. Sorry for all the confusion and I will keep things to myself revolving any of the issues listed above. Thanks. --Reigningbc (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Under discussion with two fellow authors or editors and under a board standpoint --- Here I am announcing that I do not wish to pursue any legal actions and will not do so. However, I still am asking that the user on my talk page - action's to be reviewed by an administrator and any discipline at all to be taken. --Reigningbc (talk) 20:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Comment - to address the "large fan base" criterion, there needs to be multiple reliable secondary sources that show this. The person's own website or his accounts on Twitter or Instagram do not count, as they are not secondary sources. --bonadea contributions talk 22:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh trust me Bonadea, there is a lot of secondary sources floating around. There are a lot of forums, etc, and I believe that Twitter can be a secondary because users can post individual things about celebrities, expanding and making the fan base appropriate. --Reigningbc (talk) 22:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You may wish to review Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources at some point. Fanforums are not sources. Twitter fan counts is not a source. We're talking reliable newspapers, television, reputable online outlets, etc... that have written about the subject. Actual journalists, not fans. Tarc (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI, people such as journalists only post tabloid stuff, stuff hating against celebrities. If Brandon Cyrus' name isn't in their mouths or articles, it's a good thing! --Reigningbc (talk) 22:36, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI, you may think it's a good thing that no one is interested in him, but from the point of view of notability for inclusion in wikipedia you can't have it both ways. --86.2.216.5 (talk) 09:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI, we will see what Misplaced Pages thinks in the next several days.

• Endorse and wish that we had an accessible introduction to our notability guidelines. (I'm pretty sure I"m not a good enough writer to manage it myself, but oh boy, do we need one.) --j⚛e decker 14:08, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I still believe that my page fits under certain notability guidelines and I stand by that. Websites such as IMDb and Twitter should be used as secondary sources. --Reigningbc (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse while I agree with Tarc that it should have been allowed to run its course to prevent drama, the closure was within the snowball clause. Note joe decker, while quite long, Misplaced Pages:A Primer for newcomers is MQS's beginner's notes (written in plain English). --kelapstick 15:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for suggesting that it should've ran its full course and I'm sorry you feel that way, however, I still feel as if the page meets some criteria. --Reigningbc (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Reigningbc please keep in mind that this is not AfD take 2. This is a forum to discuss the appropriateness of the closure of the AfD, not to rehash the merits of the article.--kelapstick 18:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm just saying that the page shouldn't of been absurdly deleted as it was and should remain intact for certain criteria. --Reigningbc (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse as an accurate reading of consensus. The article was not salted, but it would be prudent for the OP here to participate in the WP:AFC process rather than continuing this fruitless argument. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 19:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

This fruitless argument, as immature you have put it - is for good faith and good reasoning. I'm not simply letting you all attack a new editor because he doesn't fit in your cliques. My page deserves to remain and does fit criteria and hopefully will be reinstated. Thank you. --Reigningbc (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse - followed procedures for a WP:SNOW situation. It may be necessary to salt this one, given the COI editor's IDONTHEARYOU problem. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Lol, I don't hear you problem? Are you serious? That's immature and irrelevant. The WP:Snow bullcrap does not reflect my page and I'm not a person of interest, simply just a worker and a fan. --Reigningbc (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse A correct reading of the consensus. The use of the snowball clause was justified. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I believe that the snowball clause was incorrect as Tokyogirl did not know the famous persons, she never heard of them, and furthermore does not know how to correctly search their works and as to her --- was irrelevant. --Reigningbc (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Comment. I didn't see the article before it was deleted but it sounds like the review was closed properly. Reigningbc, this is not the forum to discuss another user's behavior. If you feel like you were personally attacked, you should alert an administrator, either on their user talk page or by bringing a case at WP:AN/I (which will require the presentation of evidence of misconduct). But the bad behavior by another editor has no effect on whether the deletion discussion was fair or not.

Plus, you argue that you want the article to exist so you can continue to work on it. But it DOES exist, in your sandbox and you can spend your time now, looking for reliable sources, tweaking the article until it is better and more likely to pass Misplaced Pages's standard of notability. You don't need to article to be undeleted to continue working on it. If there is indeed material in the deleted version that isn't in your sandbox version, ask the administrator who deleted the article for the article to be "userfied" and that content of the article can be put in your sandbox.

And, rather than arguing with the system that's in place, I recommend you work with the system. Make your way over to WP:AFC and talk with editors who specialize in reviewing new articles. It is very common for first articles to be deleted very quickly so you shouldn't take this personally. It is harder than most people think to get an article accepted on Misplaced Pages and several hundred articles are proposed for deletion every day. So, talk with those editors who work with first time contributors, get them to review your article, take their suggestions to heart and work on improving the draft that you have. What you will end up is going to undoubtedly a better article than what you originally had. Good luck! Liz 20:29, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much Liz! AT LEAST SOMEONE IS WILLING TO HELP instead of THROWING all this nonsense into my face that I do not understand! I'm NEW to Misplaced Pages you can't expect me to understand all these stupid clauses. Either way, I'm very happy that you have chosen to help and show me some tips and tricks. But until then --- I'm still waiting on Misplaced Pages's decision.

• Endorse. DRV is not a new AfD on the merits, instead is at worst a de novo review of the closing administrator's evaluation of consensus and the closure procedure. While there is some merit to the argument that a snow close was incorrect insofar as there was a good faith and reasonable keep !vote by someone other than the article creator, this at worst constitutes harmless error. That is, the outcome would have been no different regardless of how long it stayed open. For better or worse, AfDs tend not to attract more than a certain number of valid !votes, especially where the AfD does not address a very unusual case. It is tremendously unlikely that this AfD would have attracted any more valid !votes in the remaining period. Evaluating the consensus based on when the closure took place, there is a clear consensus for deletion. As an aside, I suspect that Reigningbc's behavior in this DRV merits sanctions, at the very least on civility grounds. Furthermore, a NLT block may be merited until there is an unqualified and unconditional disavowal of an intent to undertake legal action against other editors for matters that occurred on-wiki. —/Mendaliv//_Δ's/ 20:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI, I was reported to the administrators by another user, who then offered a proposal that I'm waiting on it, which was to strike out all the legal comments, I adhered to that, and she should be deleting the block request. However, if you feel as if you have to submit one --- then submit one, either way I'm a NEW EDITOR --- I deserve a break, a ligancy, and I wrote an apology and did the strike outs to fix everything. --Reigningbc (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Then you need to follow what I say above and make an unqualified, unconditional, and explicit disavowal of any intent to engage in legal action against Misplaced Pages or its editors for matters that occurred on-wiki. Editors who make legal threats on Misplaced Pages are not permitted to edit until their legal actions are resolved. —/Mendaliv//_Δ's/ 20:51, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Done. Happy now? --Reigningbc (talk) 20:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse I also would have liked for the AFD to run its course but I don't see how the outcome would have been any different. No additional redeeming evidence has been presented here so far that could place the closure in doubt. §FreeRangeFrog 21:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)