On 3/26/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 26/03/07, Denny Colt wikidenny@gmail.com wrote:
About the current DRV... is there a reason why the article's history is still obfuscated? Makes it hard for non-admins to judge/evaluate fairly.
I
see people saying "RS were there" and others saying "No RS was there",
but I
recall seeing some. However, it's currently just the word of people who
can
see it against all else...
Shouldn't it be restored?
Well, the point of a deletion review is to decide whether or not the article should be undeleted. Surely undeleting it in order to decide to undelete it seems a bit odd...
--
- Andrew Gray
I'd seen some DRVs where the article history (but not the article, which stayed locked as that protected stub page) was restored for the duration of the DRV so people could judge. is that an exception then? what makes something qualify for that?