On 4/16/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Daniel_Brand... seems to disagree with your view that a speedy can be undone by any admin. In fact, it seems to suggest that a consensus is required to undo any speedy which isn't "obviously out-of-process".
"While undeletion policy permits admins to reverse an obviously out-of-process deletion, discussion is the more appropriate response when there is disagreement. The proper venue for such discussion is Wikipedia:Deletion review. As a general rule, articles listed there are left deleted at least until a strong consensus begins to emerge in favor of overturning the deletion of the article, or are marked as "temporarily undeleted" if undeletion is necessary so that participants in the review can see the article's contents. Where consensus is unclear, the article should remain deleted until the five-day comment period has elapsed."
The idea of speedy deletion is that only articles where there is no room for debate get deletion without debate. If someone (esp. an admin) disagrees, then that is very clear evidence that the deletion was out-of-process. There should be no room for opinion or judgement in speedy deletions, so anything controversial is, by definition, out of process.
So, what are you saying, that you disagree with the arb com decision? If so, hey, I do too, but as long as people are getting desysopped for restoring controversial out-of-process speedy deletions I think you're going to have a tough time convincing admins to do so without a deletion review.
Anthony