Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October 21: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
NawlinWiki (talk | contribs) →21 October 2006: close, endorse deletion |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:''Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October)]]'' |
:''Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October)]]'' |
||
</noinclude> |
</noinclude> |
||
===21 October 2006=== |
|||
<!-- |
|||
New entry right below here. Please put the entry in ==== a subsection ==== (For example, ====[[Page that was deleted]]====) Please notify the administrator who performed the action that you wish to be reviewed by leaving {{subst:DRVNote|page name}} on their talk page. |
|||
--> |
|||
====[[Loserz]]==== |
|||
The AfD was closed with a decision to delete, despite there being a large majority of users who voted to "keep" or "strongly keep" and a note stating that there was no clear consensus reached. |
|||
The comic itself is very popular with a wide fanbase and as such cannot be considered to be "non-notable". |
|||
I would like the deletion to be overturned- please review this. |
|||
Thank you for your consideration. |
|||
[[User:Snipergirl|Snipergirl]] 16:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*You may be looking at the wrong AfD. The correct listing is: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loserz (second nomination)]]. [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 16:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*I opened (with an abstention) and closed the precedural nomination on this one after its last DRV in September, and still have no personal opinion on the merits of the subject. The consensus was clear-cut, though. I suspect nominator mistakenly examined the first AfD, and hence is confused. Anyway, '''endorse my own deletion'''. [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 16:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Endorse deletion''', as the second AfD was a clear consensus to delete. No evidence was given that the comic meets [[WP:WEB]]'s guidelines for notability. [[User:NeoChaosX|NeoChaosX]] <font size="1"> <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[User talk:NeoChaosX|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/NeoChaosX|contribs]]<nowiki>]</nowiki></font> 23:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Endorse deletion''', the first AfD was unrestricted and so had several new users, SPAs, and such. The second AfD did not suffer from this issue, showed clear consensus to delete, and those who wanted to keep the article failed to provide any decent reasoning. -- [[User:Consumed Crustacean|Consumed Crustacean]] <small>([[User talk:Consumed Crustacean|talk]])</small> 00:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Endorse deletion''', per second AfD and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review%2FLog%2F2006_September_5&diff=74912717&oldid=74911128 review]. The loserz who spammed the original AfD can safely be ignored. Try Comixpedia. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> 10:32, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Endorse deletion'''. First AfD was abused by puppets, second AfD had a clear consensus to delete. AfD closure and article deletion are completely valid. [[User:JIP|<font color="#CC0000">J</font><font color="#00CC00">I</font><font color="#0000CC">P</font>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 14:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Endorse deletion''', move along. - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 00:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:49, 30 October 2006
- Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October)