Yes, I agree totally, and that is precisely why he should have talked to Neutrality first. I looked at it too, and this isn't some academic discussion on the merits of true consensus decisions, this is an admin that made a clear and obvious mistake. And that's why he should have had the chance to defend himself first ("ohh, sorry 'bout that, i was drunk at the time" or something)
--gkhan
On 9/25/05, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Oskar Sigvardsson wrote:
Even so, you really should have tried to communicate with him before taking it too the list. I agree that the decision is totally absurd, but you should let him defend himself first. And if he does, as you suggest he will, ignore/blank you, you will have more ammo for a discussion.
Okay, he should have tried talking to Neutrality first.
In the meantime, though, I've checked the VfD in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crescent_Park_E... and it appears that the basic complaint is true - this was clearly _not_ a consensus to delete. It's very clear that it isn't, too, since as pointed out there's actually a clear majority of votes for keep/merge versus delete. I'm putting this on VfU, but really, I think this should be a speedy undelete. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l