On 1/16/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I disagree. This was an AfD where no new arguments
were made from the
previous AfD. Yes, consensus can change. But consensus is also not a
random phenomenon based on who shows up on a given day. In the
absence of any new claims about the article, it would have been
wholly reasonable to take into account the previous overwhelming
decision to keep the article,
Seeing as that was in 2005 and we have somewhat tightened up on
sourceing requirements since them it is hardly unepected that things
will change.
to note the egregiously poor reasoning
of some of the votes ("not every game by Nintendo is notable," as one
person argued - a position that is so far removed from our existing
practice as to be unusable.
The comparison is flawed since Nintendo are a multi billion dollar
company (there probably are games without article in any case due to
the various times large numbers of low quality games were put on one
cartridge)
A better one might be "every painting by Picasso" "every compound
featured in "Journal of Organic Chemistry"
If Dayfree Press is of some signifcance surely any referenced info on
"Able and Baker" could be merged into it since the article is hardly
overloaded with information or citations.
--
geni