WooPlus – Endorse. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
WooPlus (talk`\|`edit`\|`history`\|`logs`\|`links`\|`watch) (XfD`\|`restore) The WooPlus page was deleted with a speedy deletion, because it was largely the same as the previous page that got deleted after an AfD. I think that the users in the discussion did not correctly consider the WP:GNG guideline. The page I created contained multiple independent reliable sources that have significant coverage. Throwawiki (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] A couple of questions. #1 do you have anything at all to do with WooPlus? If so, it would be good to declare a COI. #2 You seem to think that the GNG justifies this article. Could you list the three best sources for WooPlus? Hobit (talk) 00:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] The nom seems to be referring to two different things here, both TonyBallioni's G4 and the actual AfD. There was nothing wrong with the AfD and that's not going to be overturned, as even though attendance was on the lighter side you've got experienced voters discussing potential speedy criteria. I cannot speak for the WP:G4 since I cannot compare the deleted versions. SportingFlyer T·C 00:51, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Endorse the original AFD, if that is an issue. Allow Draft to deal with the G4, but with the understanding that the reviewer might request to SALT. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] I see no failures to follow the deletion process here. ~~Endorse~~ both deletions. This does not prohibit starting a draft, based (or not) on the deleted article. Stifle (talk) 10:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Endorse The correct procedure has been followed by the XfD closer. Lightburst (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Just as a note, I've blocked them as a sock. I found the page through SPI and deleted it there and was holding off on the block until after I'd talked to colleagues. It isn't G5, but thought people here might care. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:15, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply] Speedy close, nominator has been indefinitely blocked as an abusive sock and all other recommendations are to endorse. Stifle (talk) 09:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.

WooPlus – Endorse. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.

The WooPlus page was deleted with a speedy deletion, because it was largely the same as the previous page that got deleted after an AfD. I think that the users in the discussion did not correctly consider the WP:GNG guideline. The page I created contained multiple independent reliable sources that have significant coverage. Throwawiki (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of questions. #1 do you have anything at all to do with WooPlus? If so, it would be good to declare a COI. #2 You seem to think that the GNG justifies this article. Could you list the three best sources for WooPlus? Hobit (talk) 00:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The nom seems to be referring to two different things here, both TonyBallioni's G4 and the actual AfD. There was nothing wrong with the AfD and that's not going to be overturned, as even though attendance was on the lighter side you've got experienced voters discussing potential speedy criteria. I cannot speak for the WP:G4 since I cannot compare the deleted versions. SportingFlyer T·C 00:51, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse the original AFD, if that is an issue. Allow Draft to deal with the G4, but with the understanding that the reviewer might request to SALT. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see no failures to follow the deletion process here. ~~Endorse~~ both deletions. This does not prohibit starting a draft, based (or not) on the deleted article. Stifle (talk) 10:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse The correct procedure has been followed by the XfD closer. Lightburst (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a note, I've blocked them as a sock. I found the page through SPI and deleted it there and was holding off on the block until after I'd talked to colleagues. It isn't G5, but thought people here might care. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:15, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close, nominator has been indefinitely blocked as an abusive sock and all other recommendations are to endorse. Stifle (talk) 09:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.