- Wikipedia:Wikipedians who are not a Wikipedian (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
relisting because required notice was not put on Mfd page when drv filed NE Ent 12:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse deletion per overwhelming consensus at MfD and previous DRV. Time to ring down the final curtain on this regrettable and divisive drama. JohnCD (talk) 12:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be a slap to me then. Did the DRV instructions say to do it? Could it be twinkleified? Does this mean another seven days? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse deletion per prior discussion; oppose speedy close of this review as it will be more disruptive in the long run. Best to let everyone have their say. NE Ent 12:51, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If I could say it better than Writ Keeper, I would. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 13:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy close and slap the childish trolling. This is beyond vexatious. A CfD on a pointless category - it gets deleted. Listed at DRV. DRV sends it back to CfD. This CfD is closed with delete. Recreated as an essay. AfD'd and deleted again. Listed at DRV. Deletion endorsed overwhelmingly at DRV. Now a DRV on the DRV on a tagging technicality that any disgruntled person was free to fix at any point - and a DRV started by someone who is endorsing the deletion. Grow up people! Someone close this, and stop this immature nonsense once and for all.--Scott Mac 13:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The oyster makes the pearl. We would have been done long ago if we had been "grown-up" about it; a ridiculous amount of the discussion has been due to speedy this and speedy that. Sure, you can slap a close tag on something and tell people to shut up, but unless you're willing to start indeffing critics the conversation will just bubble up again somewhere else. (And if you do indef people they'll likely to end up on wikipedia criticism websites, which can be disruptive themselves, as not all Wikipedians are smart enough to totally ignore them.) Letting any of discussions run the full time would have cut the legs out from a lot of the criticism of powers-that-be. NE Ent 13:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse and hopefully wave goodbye. This is getting absurd. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse per each of the preceding discussions, and a round of trout for the process-worship that's forcing us to go through this again. Mangoe (talk) 13:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you kidding me? Haven't we had enough of this shit yet? this is an "endorse" per WP:STOPTHEMADNESS, if it needs to be spelled out Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
|