On 10/17/05, JAY JG jayjg@hotmail.com wrote: The fact that is was deleted
in the first place means (in 99.9% of cases) that there was consensus to delete.
99.9% of statistics are wrong. Bogus statistics aside, why is you rationale an excuse for the repetition of the false claim that the content of an article should not be taken into consideration in undeletion, which has taken such a hold on VFU that we have ridiculous situations like this that require someone like me to take his reputation into his own hands simply to secure the undeletion of a perfectly good article about a published author who has appeared on Nova documentaries as an expert?