Jump to content

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 May 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2 May 2023[edit]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
List of Sony Exmor image sensors (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (article|XfD|restore)

This article was created after a very long discussion on the talk page for Exmor concerning a large table which had been repeatedly removed from the article, during which many people opposed its removal. While the talk page itself had some dozen editors arguing for its inclusion, a formal RfC afterwards drew seven against and one in favor. Thus, the table was moved to a standalone article, which seems to have been quickly nominated for deletion. This process drew only four !votes, none of which made an argument beyond citing WP:UPPERCASE (and some of which were copy-pasted from others). I don't think this reflects an honest account of consensus, and I would like the decision to be reviewed. jp×g 06:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Endorse. Could not reasonably have been closed any other way. Stifle (talk) 08:03, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I was a participant in this. If a topic does not merit inclusion as part of an article, it certainly doesn't merit a standalone article. That every person involved in the first discussion didn't participate in the second does not mean the consensus changed. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse. Clear consensus not for a standalone article, which followed a clear RfC consensus that it does not belong in the parent article, is pretty clear. If you think the wrong decision was made, follow advice at WP:THREE and do it in draftspace. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:26, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse There as unanimous consensus to delete here. AfD is superior to discussions elsewhere per WP:CONLEVEL. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse I notice a lot of people in the initial talk page discussion, turn up as their one primary interaction with the encyclopaedia. The RFC concluded the table wasn't needed, not that it should be spun out (suggesting as it was in history it be taken to a different wiki which might like such content). The AFD was also pretty clear cut. --81.100.164.154 (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.