On 4/7/07, Christiano Moreschi moreschiwikiman@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
No, not a disgrace.
- Consensus can change. Community standards re inclusion/deletion can
change as well.
From wp:consensus
=== "Asking the other parent"
On the other hand, it is very easy to create the appearance of a changing consensus simply by asking again and hoping that a different and more sympathetic group of people will discuss the issue. This, however, is a poor example of changing consensus, and is antithetical to the way that Wikipedia works. Wikipedia's decisions are based not on the numerical fact of how many people showed up and voted a particular way. It is based on a system of good reasons. Attempts to change consensus must be based on a clear engagement with the reasons behind the previous consensus - not simply on the fact that today more people showed up supporting position A than position B.
A good sign that you have not demonstrated a change in consensus, so much as a change in the people showing up, is if few or none of the people involved in the previous discussion show up for the new one. ===
IMHO The admin who closes a renomination should look for people who voted in the first afd who changed their vote from "keep" to "delete" in determining if consensus really has changed. Lacking that, the article should stay unless the article is substantially different from what it was when the article was first nominated. Even that case there is always the option of reverting it back to its pre-first-nomination state.