Three people saying they like an article *and no-one saying they don't* is consensus.
It's consensus among those three people, maybe, but it's hardly an established consensus among Wikipedians.
No, you haven't understood my point. It's a consensus among those three people AND everyone that read the page and decided there was no need to comment, which is probably much larger than just 3 people.
Generally, it is only necessary to speak up if
you disagree with something. Yes-men serve little purpose in consensus driven decision making.
And that's exactly what Tony is doing. He's speaking up, because he disagrees with something.
No, he made a unilateral decision. He just happened to inform the mailing list afterwards, he didn't do so in order to get a review of his decision.
Tony has both objected and started this discussion. To say that these articles have a consensus of support for FA status is nonsense. Three people agreeing on something doesn't automatically bind the rest of us to refrain from correcting their mistake.
The discussion should have come first. "Bold-revert-discuss" only applies when there hasn't been a discussion before hand.