On 7/8/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Bryan Derksen wrote:
K P wrote:
Here's an article about a crash that didn't happen, to two planes on two different runways, although apparently one is in the take-off line of the other, where there were no injuries or damages to either aircraft that didn't crash into each other, with speculation about a controller error, and no NTSB report yet issued.
I love Wikipedia, Britannica eat your hear out.
One of my old favorites is up for deletion right now, for the fourth time, and looks likely to go the way of the dodo this time around. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Prime_%28person%29. Just in time for the release of the new Transformers movie, too.
It was heavily referenced, non-controversial, and a fun little piece of trivia. I really don't understand why some editors feel the need to get rid of such stuff. There are days that Wikipedia makes me depressed.
I've added my vote. Perhaps too each previous "keep" decision should automatically add two keep votes to a nomination; each "no consensus" should add one.
Perhaps we should also ban the use of that great weasel word "obviously" from all deletion nomination statements.
1. AfD is not a vote; 2. Admins who count votes should not be closing AfDs. 3. An objective vote count is rarely an accurate gauge of whether an article ought to be kept or deleted; admins should be taking into account other factors like AfDs when they gauge the consensus of the debate.
Johnleemk