Timwi wrote:
And since [[Draconity]] itself has already been recreated as a redirect, what is the point of keeping the history deleted anyway? The article's inaccessible to readers either way. As long as an article isn't deleted for copyright or libel reasons, if we've got a redirect sitting there we might as well preserve the article history in case something salvageable is discovered in there one day.
I have restored the article history for [[Draconity]].
Unfortunately, I can already foresee people coming and arguing that "the article has been up on AfD and the decision was to delete", and it annoys me already.
Since there are potentially legal issues involved here (I'm not a lawyer but the GFDL seems pretty clear on this matter), perhaps it would be reasonably straightforward getting the deletion policy amended to prevent this kind of history loss. Strict adherence to rules can work both ways.