User talk:The Bushranger: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 07:34, 17 December 2015 editThe Bushranger (talk \| contribs)Administrators156,837 edits →Deletion review: reply← Previous edit		Revision as of 07:40, 17 December 2015 edit undoFreeatlastChitchat (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users4,942 edits →Deletion review Next edit →
Line 38:		Line 38:
	You recently closed the deletion debate of ] as keep. I want to start a deletion review of this article, and as per the policy I am opening this section to discuss the page with you. The page in question should have been deleted in my opinion because it is complete OR. The articles about ], ] and ] adequately cover all such locations and making this list as "Ziyarat Locations" is just an OR essay. Please give your opinion about this. Please ping me using the re template when you comment. Ty Regards ] (]) 07:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)		You recently closed the deletion debate of ] as keep. I want to start a deletion review of this article, and as per the policy I am opening this section to discuss the page with you. The page in question should have been deleted in my opinion because it is complete OR. The articles about ], ] and ] adequately cover all such locations and making this list as "Ziyarat Locations" is just an OR essay. Please give your opinion about this. Please ping me using the re template when you comment. Ty Regards ] (]) 07:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
	:{{Reply to\|FreeatlastChitchat}} My opinion is that the ] from the discussion was that the article should be kept. If you wish to start a DR then I have no objection or comment to be made there - I simply assessed the consensus and closed accordingly. I will, however, note that "the article should be deleted in my opinion" is ''not'' a justifiable reason for a DR; a DR is to be done when you believe the closure was not in accordance with consensus, not because you believe the consensus itself is wrong. - ] <sub><font color="maroon">]</font></sub> 07:34, 17 December 2015 (UTC)		:{{Reply to\|FreeatlastChitchat}} My opinion is that the ] from the discussion was that the article should be kept. If you wish to start a DR then I have no objection or comment to be made there - I simply assessed the consensus and closed accordingly. I will, however, note that "the article should be deleted in my opinion" is ''not'' a justifiable reason for a DR; a DR is to be done when you believe the closure was not in accordance with consensus, not because you believe the consensus itself is wrong. - ] <sub><font color="maroon">]</font></sub> 07:34, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
			::{{Reply to\|The Bushranger}} I have just found that there are similar articles, so kinda trout moment for me, I did not even provide this as rationale in the deletion. So should I wait some time to start another AFD or just go with review? ] (]) 07:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:40, 17 December 2015

If I leave a message for you: Please respond on your talk page. I'll probably add it to my watchlist, but if I miss something, feel free to leave a talkback.

If you leave a message for me: I will most likely respond here. Either add this page to your watchlist or ask me to notify you of a response on your talk page.

Note: I reserve the right to decline or withdraw from a situation that is escalating or uncomfortable, without giving a reason, or to take further action through permissable means. (See this policy.)

If I mistakenly called your edits as vandalism when I reverted them, it was probably because you did not leave an edit summary. Please realize that, in many cases, unexplained edits are indistinguishable from vandalism! This also applies to Rollbacks.

If you're here to troll, harass, or vandalise, I might not be able to stop you, but you will be reverted...and beware the giant dice.

This editor is an Auspicious Looshpah and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge with Secret Appendix.

Archives

as Aerobird - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 -
9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25

This page has archives. Sections older than 24 hours may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/America: A Call to Greatness

I was editing while the AFD was being closed by yourself, there was an edit conflict when I went to save my post so I went ahead and preserved my post within the discussion even though it was technically already archived. Wanted to let you know, hope that is alright per WP processes. Shearonink (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem - edit conflicts and stuff fall under WP:IAR. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:06, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Wainwright

I'm sorry but you can't close as speedy keep an article that has been through AFD and DRV when the other side of the debate has not had a chance to weigh in. There were strong views on both sides that you would see if you review the previous discussions. Merging and redirects are common AFD outcomes and routinely included in nominations. Please reopen the discussion to allow all sides to discuss this article. Spartaz 09:17, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I've reopened it, however I will note that WP:SK1 states: "The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance an argument for deletion or redirection - perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging, and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted." - yes, merging and redirecting are common outcomes, but suggesting a merge as the nominator is not what AFD is for - that is what WP:PM is for. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:31, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

and if it goes to PM its the wrong venue for those users who have previously indicated they wanted to delete. Thank you for reopening this but it really shouldn't have needed to be said. Spartaz 09:55, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review

You recently closed the deletion debate of List of ziyarat locations as keep. I want to start a deletion review of this article, and as per the policy I am opening this section to discuss the page with you. The page in question should have been deleted in my opinion because it is complete OR. The articles about Holiest sites in Shia Islam, Holiest sites in Sunni Islam and Holiest sites in Sufi Islam adequately cover all such locations and making this list as "Ziyarat Locations" is just an OR essay. Please give your opinion about this. Please ping me using the re template when you comment. Ty Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@FreeatlastChitchat: My opinion is that the WP:CONSENSUS from the discussion was that the article should be kept. If you wish to start a DR then I have no objection or comment to be made there - I simply assessed the consensus and closed accordingly. I will, however, note that "the article should be deleted in my opinion" is not a justifiable reason for a DR; a DR is to be done when you believe the closure was not in accordance with consensus, not because you believe the consensus itself is wrong. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:34, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: I have just found that there are similar articles, so kinda trout moment for me, I did not even provide this as rationale in the deletion. So should I wait some time to start another AFD or just go with review? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:34, 17 December 2015 editThe Bushranger (talk \| contribs)Administrators156,837 edits →Deletion review: reply← Previous edit		Revision as of 07:40, 17 December 2015 edit undoFreeatlastChitchat (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users4,942 edits →Deletion review Next edit →
Line 38:		Line 38:
	You recently closed the deletion debate of ] as keep. I want to start a deletion review of this article, and as per the policy I am opening this section to discuss the page with you. The page in question should have been deleted in my opinion because it is complete OR. The articles about ], ] and ] adequately cover all such locations and making this list as "Ziyarat Locations" is just an OR essay. Please give your opinion about this. Please ping me using the re template when you comment. Ty Regards ] (]) 07:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)		You recently closed the deletion debate of ] as keep. I want to start a deletion review of this article, and as per the policy I am opening this section to discuss the page with you. The page in question should have been deleted in my opinion because it is complete OR. The articles about ], ] and ] adequately cover all such locations and making this list as "Ziyarat Locations" is just an OR essay. Please give your opinion about this. Please ping me using the re template when you comment. Ty Regards ] (]) 07:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
	:{{Reply to\|FreeatlastChitchat}} My opinion is that the ] from the discussion was that the article should be kept. If you wish to start a DR then I have no objection or comment to be made there - I simply assessed the consensus and closed accordingly. I will, however, note that "the article should be deleted in my opinion" is ''not'' a justifiable reason for a DR; a DR is to be done when you believe the closure was not in accordance with consensus, not because you believe the consensus itself is wrong. - ] <sub><font color="maroon">]</font></sub> 07:34, 17 December 2015 (UTC)		:{{Reply to\|FreeatlastChitchat}} My opinion is that the ] from the discussion was that the article should be kept. If you wish to start a DR then I have no objection or comment to be made there - I simply assessed the consensus and closed accordingly. I will, however, note that "the article should be deleted in my opinion" is ''not'' a justifiable reason for a DR; a DR is to be done when you believe the closure was not in accordance with consensus, not because you believe the consensus itself is wrong. - ] <sub><font color="maroon">]</font></sub> 07:34, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
			::{{Reply to\|The Bushranger}} I have just found that there are similar articles, so kinda trout moment for me, I did not even provide this as rationale in the deletion. So should I wait some time to start another AFD or just go with review? ] (]) 07:40, 17 December 2015 (UTC)