[WikiEN-l] Deletion for its own sake (was MUD history)

[Michel Vuijlsteke]

2009/1/12 Philip Sandifer <snowspinner at gmail.com>

>
> On Jan 11, 2009, at 8:56 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> > Well, not really. If they don't believe a given item can have reliable
> > sources - the sort of rabid nutters who brag about deletion tallies on
> > their user pages - then they just won't accept anything. I speak here
> > from observation of the phenomenon.
>
> This has been one of the most toxic things I've seen in a long time,
> and it's a real problem. In the Threshold debate, I have seen, in all
> sincerity, the following.
>
> 1: The dismissal of a print source as "unverified"
> 2: The rejection of a source because of the possibility (with no
> evidence) that its author played the game in question.
> 3: The rejection of a third source because it allowed games to be
> submitted for review (even though it didn't review all games submitted)
>
> And, most recently, the article has been the subject of a second AfD
> where the nominator flatly lies about the sourcing in the article,
> asserting that it is sourced to things it isn't, and ignoring sources
> it does have. That particular glory can be found here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Threshold_(online_game)_(2nd_nomination)
>

Anyone any idea where I could find the original AfD? It seems to have
disappeared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Threshold_(online_game)&oldid=263769784

The edit summary just says "oops".

Michel