3 ms·
without a clear consensus to delete, the article isn't going anywhere This isn't true. A blog I like got deleted from wikipedia a while back (IMAO.US back when
by xlnt 18y ago
without a clear consensus to delete, the article isn't going anywhere
This isn't true. A blog I like got deleted from wikipedia a while back (IMAO.US back when it was only Frank J) on the charge of not being notable. There wasn't a consensus to delete. There was a huge argument, then they just deleted him.
- tptacek 18y agoWP has a "special" definition of "consensus". It isn't a vote. The way it's supposed to work is, the closing admin reads every bulleted "keep" or "delete" argument, makes a spot decision about whether the arguments are valid, and then keeps unless there's an overwhelming number of "deletes". WP has a "special" definition of "valid", which is codified in the 8043734897 pages in the WP: namespace that document the valid and invalid arguments. If you care --- and as your attorney in this matter I'm obligated to advise you not to --- you could start by reading WP:ATA. This is frustrating because if you're not an AfD lawyer, you're left wondering why the closing admin ignored you but paid attention to the "WP:NN"! "WP:RS!" "WP:V!" codes other people used. But that's how the system worked. In this case, there are keep votes pointing to reliable sourcing in the article. O'Reilly definitely counts. Nobody is going to delete it; it'd wind up in WP:DRV, wasting everyone's time some more. Isn't Wikipedia fun?
- xlnt 18y agolol :) In addition, they seemed to have decided that any reason given by a recently-created account could be ignored, without caring if it's valid. Oh and the real reason it was deleted is that it's a right-wing humor blog and some of the wikipedia people were offended by it's content.
- tptacek 18y agoWhat was the blog?
- xlnt 18y agoimao.us it still exists, but now it's a group blog and not as good. if you want to try reading a post, this is a good one: http://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm http://www.imao.us/docs/NukeTheMoon.htm
- tptacek 18y agoI'm super liberal, I just wanted to see the AfD for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Imao_blog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion... This got deleted because, if you read the "keep" votes, the only arguments were that (a) it had been nominated for several awards, and (b) that it got lots of traffic. Neither are strong arguments. It definitely didn't help that the blog was conservative and wikilawyers tend either towards shrieky Green Party turboliberalism or, worse, Paulbotism.
- xlnt 18y agoEdit: Oh hell, they deleted some of the keep arguments. I think they deleted keep arguments by people with recently created accounts, or which were not formatted properly. I am absolutely certain of this. For example, my keep argument isn't there. I don't remember what it said, but I do remember that I posted one. Also there used to be significant vertical scrolling.