Third degree medal of the Republic of Azerbaijan for "impeccable service in migration bodies" (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

This was an inappropriate closure by a non-admin of a controversial deletion discussion. The closer did not discuss their reasoning for the Keep close. The closer appears to have simply counted "votes" instead of weighing the policy and guideline based !votes. The keep voters never cited policies, guidelines or sources to dispute the nomination, while the nomination was supported by policies and guidelines. I would request that Nnadigoodluck explain their rationale for the Keep close based on "reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments." per WP:CLOSEAFD and that an admin with experience in AfD evaluates the close. Since they have done this twice in one day, if the close is deemed to be inappropriate either in conclusion or for a non-admin to make, I request that Nnadigoodluck be told to cease closing discussions.   // Timothy :: talk  05:25, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedily reopened and relisted per WP:BADNAC. I agree that a non-admin should not have closed this discussion. While there was a "keep" majority, the "keep" arguments were in the vein of "it's an official award, therefore it's notable", which is at odds with our guidelines and practices. I have therefore undone the closure and relisted the discussion. I leave this thread open to allow discussion of the requested restriction on Nnadigoodluck (which this may not be the right forum for). Sandstein 09:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Even though those that commented keep on the delete discussion didn't mention any policy or guideline, including the delete and merge comment, I saw the discussion as solid and that's why I decided to close it as keep seeing it's going nowhere. Necrothesp cited a previous AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medal of Merit for Blood Donation that what closed by Bibliomaniac15 in that way and they said thus State awards like this are clearly notable and have been held to be notable at AfD in the past. Sources clearly prove its existence. which they all agreed. I know if it's an admin that has closed it, TimothyBlue wouldn't have brought it to deletion review. Anyway, I'll refrain from closing this type of AfD's in the future knowing that it might be utterly controversial and leave it to an admin. Best, —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 10:54, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Medal "For services in the field of military cooperation" (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

This was an inappropriate closure by a non-admin of a controversial deletion discussion. The closer did not discuss their reasoning for the Keep close. The closer appears to have simply counted "votes" instead of weighing !votes. The keep voters never cited policies, guidelines or sources to dispute the nomination, while the nomination was supported by policies and guidelines. I would request that Nnadigoodluck explain their rationale for the Keep close based on "reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments." per WP:CLOSEAFD and that an admin with experience in AfD evaluates the close. Since they have done this twice in one day, if the close is deemed to be inappropriate either in conclusion or for a non-admin to make, I request that Nnadigoodluck be told to cease closing discussions. Thank you for considering this request.   // Timothy :: talk  05:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]