Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Rec.sport.pro-wrestling (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Deletion of AFD first time round
In spite of the nominator, this AfD has taken on a life of its own apart from who nominated it. This AfD has garnered a large amount of consensus in its favor, and deleting it will only delay the inevitable. Sometimes it is more important to put what is best for the community above the word of the policies. Deleting this AfD will simply delay the community from enacting what it has already established consensus on. Wikipedia is about consensus, not lawyer games. -- The Hybrid 21:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please note, some (not all, not even a majority) of the delete votes are from suspected sock accounts, as well as various other tendentious editing, such as tagging non-SPA accounts with SPA tags. The well has been poisoned in this debate, from the start, and I think that it would be best to start fresh. Of course WP:IAR could come into play, but I think a restart should be necessary. SirFozzie 21:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I highly doubt that particular CSD applies to AFDs, nor should it. Maybe you should take the AFD to AFD. Recury 21:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- That's preposterous! It should go to MfD. Actually, this reminds me, weren't some AfD discussions recently halted on some nn Australian wrestlers for similar reasons? Any way to get their names so that they can be re-nominated? GassyGuy 21:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- CSD G5 does apply per the admins at the notice board: [[1]]. Any page created by a sock of a blocked/banned user may be speedied under that category (without prejudice for renomination) SirFozzie 21:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- They have been re-nominated. There is nothing to prevent this from being re-nominated, in fact I would strongly suggest it. However given the rampant sockpuppetry, SPAs and edit warrings that have been exhibited to date, I concur with SirFozzie that it would be better to start afresh. And as before, I have no interest in this article and will not be participating in a debate started by an editor who isn't blocked. One Night In Hackney 21:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Per WP:SK The nominator is banned, so they are not supposed to edit. In that case, the nominated page is speedily kept while the nomination can be tagged with "db-ban" and speedily deleted as a banned contribution. SirFozzie 21:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, it was I who closed the last two as speedy keeps and I think I'll do it again. I'll set up a renoimation straight away, though, as its clear this warrents a discussion. Robdurbar 21:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- CSD G5 does apply per the admins at the notice board: [[1]]. Any page created by a sock of a blocked/banned user may be speedied under that category (without prejudice for renomination) SirFozzie 21:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- That's preposterous! It should go to MfD. Actually, this reminds me, weren't some AfD discussions recently halted on some nn Australian wrestlers for similar reasons? Any way to get their names so that they can be re-nominated? GassyGuy 21:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I highly doubt that particular CSD applies to AFDs, nor should it. Maybe you should take the AFD to AFD. Recury 21:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
