Ron Ritzman (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
:::PS Hold on, I've just read through that AfD. That was an inappropriate non-admin close. [...] How do I go about getting this one relisted? |
:::PS Hold on, I've just read through that AfD. That was an inappropriate non-admin close. [...] How do I go about getting this one relisted? |
||
</blockquote> |
</blockquote> |
||
::::At the time it was closed, there were no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator and a "sitting on the fence" !vote from [[User:DragonflySixtyseven|DragonflySixtyseven]]. It was a proper reading of consensus and waiting an additional 15 hours would not likely have affected the outcome. If this were to go to [[WP:DRV|DRV]] I would '''endorse''' the close. However, I would advise Tim to be more careful when closing AFDs where the magic letters [[WP:BLP]] are invoked. I usually let the clock tick the full 168 hours on those or leave them for an admin to close. --[[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 13:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I will tell Peace and Passion to contact you if he has further issues. cat yronwode (still not logged in) [[Special:Contributions/64.142.90.33|64.142.90.33]] ([[User talk:64.142.90.33|talk]]) 05:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC) |
::I will tell Peace and Passion to contact you if he has further issues. cat yronwode (still not logged in) [[Special:Contributions/64.142.90.33|64.142.90.33]] ([[User talk:64.142.90.33|talk]]) 05:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 13:35, 19 October 2009
Please note the following when leaving me a message:
- Please link to the article you are talking about, as I sometimes do dozens of CSD taggings or reverts each day, and might not know what you are talking about. A diff is preferred for reverts.
- If you think my CSD/PROD tagging was in error, please review the version at the time I tagged it before leaving a message.
- If you think one of my reverts to have been improper, please leave a message. I generally try to add informative edit summaries to all my non-vandalism reverts.
- In the interest of maintaining a coherent thread of discussion, I will reply here unless you specify otherwise. If I left a comment on your talk, I'll be watching it and so you can reply there. You may, but do not have to, use {{tb}} tags here; I may remove such tags without notice once I read the message to keep the page clean.
- This page is archived quite aggressively because I see no need for resolved messages occupying the page. Check the archives first if you can't find a message you left for me.
- Messages containing defamatory content about a living person will be summarily removed without a response due to WP:BLP concerns.
Template:Archive box collapsible
AfC submissions Random submission |
3+ months |
Note to self
Article to work on: High School Affiliated to Renmin University of China
Courtesy blanking
Oh ok. Could you courtesy blank Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Ruttle Martinez and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane ruttle as well then? Senatrix (talk) 19:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Slater Bakhtavar
Submission revised with several third party reputable sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.176.62.131 (talk) 23:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Hook for United States v. Georgia at dyk
Could you take a look at the alt hook for United States v. Georgia at dyk and see if it is ok now? (I realize that I may not get the nuances of many legal issues.) Many thanks for commenting. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 12:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you's
Editing help
Dear Tim, thank you for your edit on the wikipedia page re: Jonathan Fisher (lawyer) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Fisher_(lawyer)). I'm afraid I'm at a loss as to the problem with the content of the page as it currently stands, please could you help me edit the page so that it satisfies the wikipedia guidelines. Thank you for your help, Hannah (Hannah.rachel0801 (talk) 19:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC))
Improper Close on Joe Halderman AfD
You brought the Joe Halderman AfD to a close one day early. You are not an Admin. You implemented the close incorrectly, leaving the AfD notice on the article page. As a supporter of the article, i was looking forward to a "keep" consensus close on the 7th day (October 18) and now i find that because of your improper close on October 17, you have caused another editor to want to relist the article for AfD a second time. Please be aware that your meddling had caused unpleasantness among those editing the article and may force us to waste our time on a second AfD. Please do not do this again. cat yronwode, not logged in 64.142.90.33 (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- The AfD tag was not removed because of an inexplicable failure of my AfD closure script. I fail to see any other way that AfD could have been closed. You can tell the second editor to contact me directly if he disagrees. Tim Song (talk) 05:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I see that the AfD notice is now gone from the article page. Here is the complaint that was lodged:
- Peace and Passion ☮ ("I'm listening....") 02:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
- PS Hold on, I've just read through that AfD. That was an inappropriate non-admin close. [...] How do I go about getting this one relisted?
- At the time it was closed, there were no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator and a "sitting on the fence" !vote from DragonflySixtyseven. It was a proper reading of consensus and waiting an additional 15 hours would not likely have affected the outcome. If this were to go to DRV I would endorse the close. However, I would advise Tim to be more careful when closing AFDs where the magic letters WP:BLP are invoked. I usually let the clock tick the full 168 hours on those or leave them for an admin to close. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- I will tell Peace and Passion to contact you if he has further issues. cat yronwode (still not logged in) 64.142.90.33 (talk) 05:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Trouted
Whack!
You have been trouted for: Placing a number of AfC's on hold that have no reliable sources. They should've been quick-failed! ^_^ --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 09:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)