ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 21:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Reply Yeah, there should definitely be be a talk page discussion to see where consensus is, but our redirect policies do not necessitate an AFD discussion. At this point people are just trying to bruteforce to get their way. Namcokid 47 (Contribs) 21:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Reply The third revert didn't even have an edit summary no less. It gets redirected for failing WP:N, then the article creator reverts it, then somebody reverts them, etc." Redirecting is a suitable alternative to deletion. WP:REDIRECT says: "Somebody made a page for a non-notable weapon in a game. ImaginesTigers ( talk) 21:09, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Reply No it shouldn't. Edit warring over this is really silly come on. I didn't care much for the article when it was pointed out to me, but for now the article should be restored until the nominator initiates a discussion and consensus is established. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 19:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Reply After the first redirect was contested, it should have become an AfD. But this kind of thing is just WP:GAMING behavior. I'm fine with the article going to AfD if people think it's not notable, I'd be happy to defend it there. A day after it became a Good Article no less. Can I get some admin eyes on this article please? A group of editors are basically attempting to subvert the AfD process by converting the article to a bare redirect.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |