Phil Boswell wrote:
geni wrote:
On 5/4/06, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
THEN, some admin comes along and says, gee, the vote is 27-3 to delete, but frankly, this bridge guy knows what he is talking about, so I am going to close it with a keep.
Not going to happen. There is no way you are going to get 27 people who care enough to vote delete. With they way AFD is currently set up any significant minority can have the articles they want kept kept in most cases. So all of those "nn, delete" pile-ons are simply a figment of my imagination?
So, what's our bridge guy to do? Well, one thing he can do is go around to all the other bridgipedians (great word, huh?) and point it out to them. Vote stacking? Maybe, but don't we prefer that these bridge people come in and have a say?
He could contact the other people who voted on the AFD. Most of them will be prepared to listen to reason.
You are obviously aware of AfD discussions which have simply escaped my notice.
Please provide links to AfD discussions which contain reasonable arguments like those suggested which are not then countered by piled-on "nn, delete" entries; even better would be a "nn, delete" replaced with a "keep" as a result of listening to reason. I would like to sooth my tortured soul with a bit of good-natured discussion...
It's old now, but I'm proud of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Shooting_Fish