Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Writ Keeper (talk | contribs) at 23:41, 8 December 2013 (→Yo, BK: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Black Kite/Nav

This user may only be available sporadically due to real life. If you have an urgent issue it may be better to contact another administrator.

AfD closure inquiry

Hi Black Kite! You recently closed the AfD discussion for Highest-valued currency unit with the result to merge it into List of circulating currencies. I find this result to be problematic both procedurally and as a matter of policy. There is no indication from the discussion that there was a consensus to merge the articles as only two users backed such a proposal. Additionally, List of circulating currencies is a high quality article that is a featured list. The content proposed for deletion was of dubious notability and cannot easily be accommodated in List of circulating currencies as it is outside of the scope of the list. In light of these problems, would it be possible for you reconsider the closure of the AfD discussion and perhaps close it as "no consensus"? – Zntrip 21:00, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

• The problem with that is that N/C close if effectively a keep, for which there was very little policy-based input. Can you think of another method of resolving the issue? Black Kite (talk) 00:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Admittedly, no-consensus is not the best option for an AfD, but that does seem to be the result of this particular discussion. The problem with the merger closure is that "List of circulating currencies" is a highly inappropriate place for the information and there is no consensus for merging any of the information into "List of circulating currencies". – Zntrip 01:28, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Another editor has opened a new thread about the merger at DRN. In my summary of the dispute, I mentioned that it is my opinion that the result of the AfD was problematic. As the admin who closed the discussion, I would like to invite you to comment on the matter. – Zntrip

AfDs are supposed to be closed on the merits of arguments and their applicability to policy, not vote counting. I did not see a single "keep" vote there which provided evidence of notability or any reliable sources (except for Misplaced Pages mirrors) which address the topic of the article. That's because such sources do not exist - it's a nonsense concept invented by a now-banned Misplaced Pages user with no provenance outside of this project. There were a few people on there saying "well, maybe there's a sentence or two there which could be merged into List of circulating currencies" but that doesn't mean that the whole thing wholesale deserves to be merged. All the "keep" votes - the few that there were - were of the "I like this" sort, mostly by newbie users. I can see closing the AfD as a "merge" with the understanding that "merge" means that only the non-OR, legitimately sourced parts are merged (which is actually a very small chunk of the original article). But that's about it. Other than that this kind of nonsense "content" is just an embarrassment to the project.

Someday I'm going to start an article on the List of all real numbers and some integers thrown in or The highest number someone has counted to at some point just to prove a WP:POINT. That's about the intellectual level we're talking about with these lists. Volunteer Marek  22:42, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Volunteer Marek, I made my previous comment here to notify Black Kite about the dispute resolution discussion, not to discuss the merits of the AfD outcome. I am aware that AfD discussions are not votes. That doesn't change my view that there was no consensus to merge. Merging the articles was brought up in an offhand remark by EditorInTheRye and there was no consensus on what would be merged or to which article it should be merged. If "no consensus" was simply an untenable outcome of the discussion, I think "redirect" or "delete" would have been better than "merge". – Zntrip 23:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I agree with that.  Volunteer Marek  19:03, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The DRN discussion has now been closed because of improper venue and the closing user suggested that the real dispute is the result of the AfD. I understand the Black Kite is busy, but, if time permits, I would like to hear if he or she is open to reconsidering the outcome of the AfD. I will notify interested parties and invite them to give their input here on this talk page. If this cannot be resolved here I will open a new discussion at DRV. – Zntrip 20:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I was originally in favor of deleting the article on policy grounds, but I was OK with 'merge' as a compromise option. In practice, this option hasn't led to much of a compromise at all, so I would still be open to deleting it outright unless the editors involved can figure out an acceptable amount of non-OR content to port over. Breadblade (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree. The one option that wasn't, IMO, available from the result of the AfD was "Keep". Perhaps the best plan would be to re-AfD; but given the issues here, possibly try a redirect as a WP:BOLD editorial decision and see where that leads. Black Kite (talk) 22:31, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I've got sources for both now, although the source for highest value might not be reliable enough. 2Awwsome_{See where I screwed up.} 21:21, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Neither is reliable. And neither actually corresponds to article content. If you have a problem, take it to DRV. I'm getting sick of this charade. Volunteer Marek  21:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

A bold editorial decision to redirect seems out of the question as well. Black Kite, would you be willing to reconsider the AfD closure? If not, I think the only recourse would be DRV. – Zntrip 22:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

• Hi all. I have some comments regarding WP:Copying within Misplaced Pages, {{Copied}}'s "must not be deleted" wording, and WP:Merge and delete. I anticipate that they might be raised at WP:Deletion review or at a new AfD. Since the tables are exchange rate data plus highest valued coin and banknote – all factual – I believe that they fall under WP:Copying within Misplaced Pages#Where attribution is not needed, closest to "Simple, non-creative lists of information". I see little creativity in the list definitions and the top-15 cutoff, but I am unsure about the bottom cutoff at >100/1 US$. A possible workaround is to undo the merges by revision deleting the edits to List of circulating currencies. Flatscan (talk) 05:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Just to keep Black Kite in the loop: 2Awwsome has started a RfD discussion for "Highest-valued currency unit" (doesn't seem like it will go anywhere) and there is still persistent reverting going back and forth on redirecting "Least-valued currency unit". Black Kite, have you thought at all about reconsidering the closure? – Zntrip 21:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The RfD was closed as keep, with the closing statement citing the merge as preventing deletion. Flatscan (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo, BK

Just out of curiosity: did you get any edit-conflict weirdness when you made this edit? As you can see from the diff, it must've edit-conflicted out Modernist's comment. I feel like this is what happens when you get those edit conflict notifications that don't actually show anything different in the diff screen, but for you, did this give you the notice or did it just go through no problem? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)