Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:History of WHL viaducts
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was delete. MER-C 02:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Refused CSD [personal attack redacted] Andy Dingley (talk) 11:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - all resolved. RandomPerson137 (talk) 11:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Speedy was requested because of "Erronous move, Template namespace version seemingly restored already", but since the page had never been moved, and since it had multiple differences from a related template, I declined it saying basically "this isn't clear, so please re-tag with further explanation". Per the further explanation, the tagger meant something else, including that the differences aren't substantial enough. I would have speedy-deleted it if I'd seen this explanation before the MFD was created. Nyttend (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- You could (and should) have speedy deleted this if you'd bothered to look before acting. But no, one admin moves the stuff around in the first place because they couldn't be bothered to look at what the little people have been up to. Then, when trying to sort the mess out, you're [redacted] to believe that anyone else might actually have correctly tagged something, so you have to start throwing your substantial admin weight around to edit-war off a valid and uncontested CSD. Pathetic. But of course, admins are always the only arbiters of content matters. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Read WP:CSD. Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. I wasn't clear what was going on, and I prefer to obey our policies and wait until I understand what's going on. As I already explained, I did investigate. Nyttend (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- When two independent editors add a CSD tag, even after you've removed it, that's pretty obvious. But you'd rather threaten to block them instead. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- Read WP:CSD. Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. I wasn't clear what was going on, and I prefer to obey our policies and wait until I understand what's going on. As I already explained, I did investigate. Nyttend (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- You could (and should) have speedy deleted this if you'd bothered to look before acting. But no, one admin moves the stuff around in the first place because they couldn't be bothered to look at what the little people have been up to. Then, when trying to sort the mess out, you're [redacted] to believe that anyone else might actually have correctly tagged something, so you have to start throwing your substantial admin weight around to edit-war off a valid and uncontested CSD. Pathetic. But of course, admins are always the only arbiters of content matters. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.