User talk:Sandstein

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

  • Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.
  • If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].
  • If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/N. Balasubramaniam[edit]

Sorry, but I do not see how this can be closed as anything other than a no consensus. Opinions are being expressed on both sides and there is absolutely no reason to give one opinion any more or less weight than another. If it's not reopened or closed as no consensus I shall have no option but to take it to DRV. Thanks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

No; I did explain why I considered it necessary to give some opinions more weight than others.  Sandstein  19:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate that, but I do not agree with your reasoning, for the reasons I have given in the DRV. There was absolutely no reason to give the opinions of one 'side' more weight than those of the other. This was a clear no consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Deletion review for N. Balasubramaniam[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of N. Balasubramaniam. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:43, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Big Brother Criticism page[edit]

Why did you delete this? I use it every day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Please link to the page or discussion at issue.  Sandstein  17:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)


This closing has multiple problems. 

AfD is not a vote count, yet that is how the ruling is stated for this closing. 

A closer look shows that two editors objected to delete and redirect, so even the raw !vote count is erroneous.

There was only one editor who objected to keeping the edit history with a redirect, and the argument for not keeping the edit history was to handicap future efforts to improve the encyclopedia.  This is not a policy based argument.

It is never correct to delete the edit history with WP:DEL8, as the edit history contains content, and notability is not a content guideline. 

The simplest fix is to restore the edit history, but if you want to delete and redirect, I suggest that you !vote in the AfD and make a content argument for the deletion.  While there may be such an argument, it needs to be a considered opinion that can be reviewed.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:55, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

No, only one person (Cunard) wanted to explicitly keep the history. The other, Tigraan, wrote that in the case of deletion the article should not be redirected. That opinion is therefore not a basis for contesting the decision to delete the history. It may be a basis for contesting the decision to create a redirect, but deleting the redirect is apparently not what you want.  Sandstein  11:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
What I "want" is policy-based closes.  On further review, I think that Mandruss's point involved WP:DUE, so I've struck that comment above. 

(1)  Checking the AfD I see that it is still stated as a !vote count.  As per WP:Deletion guidelines for administrators, "Consensus is not determined by counting heads..."

(2)  Another problem with the closing is that it has not taken down the !vote of an editor opposed to the editing of contributions, while WP:5P3 states, " editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly edited".  Note that the previous quote contains a Wikilink to WP:Editing policy.  As per WP:Deletion guidelines for administrators, "Arguments that contradict policy...are frequently discounted."

(3)  A third problem with the closing is that it is never correct to delete the edit history with WP:DEL8, as the edit history contains content, and notability is not a content guideline.  As per the WP:N nutshell, "The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles."[1][2]


  1. ^ WP:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion states, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."  Redirecting the page in this case is improving it.
  2. ^ WP:REDIRECT#Reasons for not deleting states, "...avoid deleting redirects if...1. They have a potentially useful page history..." Potential uses include merging, expanding the redirect into an article, harvesting references, and reviewing the edit history to understand the AfD.
Unscintillating (talk) 01:58, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I cannot follow your arguments. This is not a headcount but consensus that there is no basis for an article here. I fail to see what ownership has to do with anything here. And of course we do delete articles - really delete, with their history - for non-notability all of the time, just look at AfD on any given day.  Sandstein  05:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Frederick Sherwood Dunn[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 24 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Frederick Sherwood Dunn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that scholar Frederick Sherwood Dunn led a move that was described by a university president as "Yale fumbled and Princeton recovered the ball"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frederick Sherwood Dunn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Frederick Sherwood Dunn), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sandstein,

In the month of August 2016, you had deleted the page for Author 'Gian Kumar' citing reasons that the page seemed promotional. I had requested you to re-activate the page, citing references from various sources both online and offline.

For reference, I am sharing with you the URL of Author's website which talks about the author and all his books:

I want your help to recreate the Author's page on Wikipedia. Please help me with the same. Link to the deleted page:,

Looking forward to a positive reply from you.


Warm Regards, Nidhi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nidhi Arora (talkcontribs) 07:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)