Content deleted Content added
VsevolodKrolikov (talk | contribs) m →Deletion review for List of statistically superlative countries: striking wikify request - found the cache |
Black Kite (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
An editor has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#List of statistically superlative countries|deletion review]] of [[List of statistically superlative countries]]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> [[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 05:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC) |
An editor has asked for a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#List of statistically superlative countries|deletion review]] of [[List of statistically superlative countries]]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. <!-- This originally was from the template {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ --> [[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 05:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
: Hi Black Kite. There's a slightly grumpy note at the deletion review about talking to the closing admin first before DRV, so here I am. I only found out about this article a few minutes ago. Looking at the deletion discussion (and remembering that I haven't ever seen the page itself) my ''impression'' is that your closing did not give enough weight to the possibility of organising the material better, and of making clear criteria for inclusion and thus directly overcoming the problem of being "indiscriminate", which was your grounds for finding the deletion arguments more convincing. (I also think that "being interesting" does carry greater weight than you appeared to give it; as argued, this is the kind of information people often go to an encyclopedia for. The article apparently had high traffic.) Opinions on list articles do differ; I would have thought this at the very least would be a case for closing the debate as no decision, or a re-listing to get more input. <del>In any case, is there a chance you could wikify it to my userspace so I can have a look?</del> (I've just found the cache on the DRV page.) [[User:VsevolodKrolikov|VsevolodKrolikov]] ([[User talk:VsevolodKrolikov|talk]]) 11:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC) |
: Hi Black Kite. There's a slightly grumpy note at the deletion review about talking to the closing admin first before DRV, so here I am. I only found out about this article a few minutes ago. Looking at the deletion discussion (and remembering that I haven't ever seen the page itself) my ''impression'' is that your closing did not give enough weight to the possibility of organising the material better, and of making clear criteria for inclusion and thus directly overcoming the problem of being "indiscriminate", which was your grounds for finding the deletion arguments more convincing. (I also think that "being interesting" does carry greater weight than you appeared to give it; as argued, this is the kind of information people often go to an encyclopedia for. The article apparently had high traffic.) Opinions on list articles do differ; I would have thought this at the very least would be a case for closing the debate as no decision, or a re-listing to get more input. <del>In any case, is there a chance you could wikify it to my userspace so I can have a look?</del> (I've just found the cache on the DRV page.) [[User:VsevolodKrolikov|VsevolodKrolikov]] ([[User talk:VsevolodKrolikov|talk]]) 11:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
:: That's fine, I was fully expecting it to go to DRV so I'm not surprised! [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (t)]] [[Special:Contributions/Black_Kite|(c)]] 14:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:06, 15 November 2010
DRV
Hi, BK. Were you not notified of this?—S Marshall T/C 09:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Upon saving the article, I see that the AfD was closed. I did not mean to revert the decision and I apologize for the mistake. However, I think that the article meets notability criteria...ha I've never undone an AfD like this before, I do not know what happens, but I would like the rewrite I made to be discussed on the subjects inclusion. Thank you - Theornamentalist (talk) 03:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Deletion review for List of statistically superlative countries
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of statistically superlative countries. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 05:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Black Kite. There's a slightly grumpy note at the deletion review about talking to the closing admin first before DRV, so here I am. I only found out about this article a few minutes ago. Looking at the deletion discussion (and remembering that I haven't ever seen the page itself) my impression is that your closing did not give enough weight to the possibility of organising the material better, and of making clear criteria for inclusion and thus directly overcoming the problem of being "indiscriminate", which was your grounds for finding the deletion arguments more convincing. (I also think that "being interesting" does carry greater weight than you appeared to give it; as argued, this is the kind of information people often go to an encyclopedia for. The article apparently had high traffic.) Opinions on list articles do differ; I would have thought this at the very least would be a case for closing the debate as no decision, or a re-listing to get more input.
In any case, is there a chance you could wikify it to my userspace so I can have a look?(I've just found the cache on the DRV page.) VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- That's fine, I was fully expecting it to go to DRV so I'm not surprised! Black Kite (t) (c) 14:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)