List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

The Afd was wrongly closed by the nom with rage statement. I am not challenging the outcome, but for future reference, it is requested to redo the close by an uninvolved user. Consensus discussion about the bad close at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Afd short circuited with inflammatory and accusatory statements. Venkat TL (talk) 14:21, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Let's cut out the heat and the bureaucracy here. Is there anyone other than the AFD nominator who currently wants the article deleted (or some other ATD)? Iffy★Chat -- 15:00, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  No one that I am aware of. Venkat TL (talk) 15:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Endorse per WP:NOTBURO then. If that changes, anyone can open a new AFD. Iffy★Chat -- 15:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  There were a couple admins in the VP discussion who seemed to think it should be deleted. JoelleJay (talk) 19:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @JoelleJay FWIW, 4 admins commented in that thread and no one said so. Dear admins @Lee Vilenski @Black Kite @Visviva @Redrose64 speak up and clear your position, lest you risk being misrepresented. Venkat TL (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Frankly, I would re-open that AfD, because as a closer I would ignore every single one of those Keep rationales. There isn't a decent source which actually discusses the subject in that article - every single one is a database listing, from a website where it isn't clear if it's even reliable. Obviously, there may be good sourcing for such as list, but it doesn't exist at the moment. This is a pretty strong indictment of the article and its keep rationales. Not necessarily advocating to delete, but I think it's clearly not pro-keep either. JoelleJay (talk) 20:37, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You are quoting Black Kite, I cant speak for him but FWIW I note in his second comment there he said "I'd actually close it as No Consensus [...], or more likely I'd re-list it,". Venkat TL (talk) 20:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse the outcome but not the closing statement. Does it need to be reclosed? no. Would it benefit the project if the closing statement was replaced with something reasonable? Maybe. Would I reclose it if this comment didn't make me arguably invovled? No, I don't think it's that important. Will I object to anyone else doing so? Also no - if someone else feels that it is worth the time then as far as I'm concerned they should feel free to do it. Thryduulf (talk) 17:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Just popping in to say that adminship status should be of no relevance in determining consensus (or the lack thereof) on AFD. (That's not exactly what anyone was saying above, but I think it's a necessary point.) Apart from that I guess I'm with Thryduulf. -- Visviva (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Overturn and relist, per WP:WITHDRAWN as it seems that the early closure is an attempt to force the discussion to close, and that the closing statement does not show that the nominator has genuinely changed their mind. SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:40, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Well the closure is fine, per WP:SK the discussion can be closed as speedy keep if the nominator withdraws the nomination and nobody else supported deletion, which is the case here. I do think the closing statement should be removed though as it gratuitously insults the Keep participants and accuses them of acting in bad faith. Hut 8.5 14:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I have re-closed the AfD with the same result but a neutral statement, as suggested above. Hopefully that resolves this DRV. Another AfD can be filed in due course if desired, though I am not suggesting it. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  With Newyorkbrad's closure, this DRV has served its purpose. This DRV can also be closed now. Venkat TL (talk) 16:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse with ((diet trout)) to the nominator and to the rage-quitter. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse per above.4meter4 (talk) 17:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse the outcome (with thanks to Newyorkbrad for re-closing the discussion). --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]