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.