| Revision as of 02:08, 24 March 2017 editTheDracologist (talk | contribs)378 edits →Not_My_Presidents_Day← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:43, 24 March 2017 edit undoJFG (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors53,874 edits →Not_My_Presidents_Day: KeepNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| ::::: Oh, then my apologies as well, as that was not my intent. I genuinely want to know why someone would want to merge this article. I see this as a quality article about a notable event that is accurate, neutral, well-written, and reliably sourced by more than enough secondary coverage. Let's keep the article (hell, let's even promote it to Good article status!), and move on to improving the encyclopedia in other ways. ---] <sub>(])</sub> 02:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC) | ::::: Oh, then my apologies as well, as that was not my intent. I genuinely want to know why someone would want to merge this article. I see this as a quality article about a notable event that is accurate, neutral, well-written, and reliably sourced by more than enough secondary coverage. Let's keep the article (hell, let's even promote it to Good article status!), and move on to improving the encyclopedia in other ways. ---] <sub>(])</sub> 02:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| :::::: I think the event is not likely to have enough lasting impact to be notable enough for its own article and is therefore better off as a subsection of a broader article. ] (]) 02:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC) | :::::: I think the event is not likely to have enough lasting impact to be notable enough for its own article and is therefore better off as a subsection of a broader article. ] (]) 02:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Keep''' – This article was vastly expanded and is well-sourced, and the target article is already long; merging them would make no sense at this point. Sure, the AfD discussion yielded a Merge outcome but opinions were split (for example, I !voted Delete quickly after nomination, but some editors such as {{u| Jdcomix}} switched from Strong Merge to Keep in a matter of hours) and today's article would probably get a Snow Keep. Regarding process, if some people think the AfD outcome must be enforced first, I reply ] and ]. Final note: the AfD was closed as Merge with an absolutely correct reasoning by {{u|Sandstein}} at the time, therefore DRV should not seek to Overturn the outcome, just acknowledge that the article has evolved so much that the prior decision cannot apply to its current state. — ] <sup>]</sup> 02:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:43, 24 March 2017
< 2017 March 23 Deletion review archives: 2017 March 2017 March 25 >24 March 2017
Not_My_Presidents_Day
Listing for the page creator, who believes that the discussion and consensus were premature, but refuses to open a discussion to overturn it. TheDracologist (talk) 01:11, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- I personally Endorse the original consensus, per the discussion. TheDracologist (talk) 01:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Keep article: I'm tired of trying to explain my actions on so many different pages, but I will just reiterate here that I strongly disagree with the merge vote and strongly vote to keep this article, which is very close to being nominated for Good article status. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- @TheDracologist: Do you care to explain why you'd like to merge a near-complete article with 100+ reliable sources into an (arguably already too) long article, Protests against Donald Trump? User:Megalibrarygirl and I will be nominating this article for Good status very soon, so we're in this odd state of limbo re: merge vs. Good article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- I think the reasons laid out in the AfD by users far better at articulating themselves than me still stand. Also, @Another Believer:, do you care to explain why you were trying to ignore/undermine the result of an AfD with no attempt to create a discussion to overturn the current consensus? TheDracologist (talk) 01:48, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Honestly, can we please keep the chastising to a minimum? Everyone has been acting in good faith throughout this article's history. Can we focus on the future of this article? ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry for getting defensive. For some reason, I read your comment to me as accusatory. TheDracologist (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, then my apologies as well, as that was not my intent. I genuinely want to know why someone would want to merge this article. I see this as a quality article about a notable event that is accurate, neutral, well-written, and reliably sourced by more than enough secondary coverage. Let's keep the article (hell, let's even promote it to Good article status!), and move on to improving the encyclopedia in other ways. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- I think the event is not likely to have enough lasting impact to be notable enough for its own article and is therefore better off as a subsection of a broader article. TheDracologist (talk) 02:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, then my apologies as well, as that was not my intent. I genuinely want to know why someone would want to merge this article. I see this as a quality article about a notable event that is accurate, neutral, well-written, and reliably sourced by more than enough secondary coverage. Let's keep the article (hell, let's even promote it to Good article status!), and move on to improving the encyclopedia in other ways. ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry for getting defensive. For some reason, I read your comment to me as accusatory. TheDracologist (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Honestly, can we please keep the chastising to a minimum? Everyone has been acting in good faith throughout this article's history. Can we focus on the future of this article? ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- I think the reasons laid out in the AfD by users far better at articulating themselves than me still stand. Also, @Another Believer:, do you care to explain why you were trying to ignore/undermine the result of an AfD with no attempt to create a discussion to overturn the current consensus? TheDracologist (talk) 01:48, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Keep – This article was vastly expanded and is well-sourced, and the target article is already long; merging them would make no sense at this point. Sure, the AfD discussion yielded a Merge outcome but opinions were split (for example, I !voted Delete quickly after nomination, but some editors such as Jdcomix switched from Strong Merge to Keep in a matter of hours) and today's article would probably get a Snow Keep. Regarding process, if some people think the AfD outcome must be enforced first, I reply WP:IAR and WP:NOTBURO. Final note: the AfD was closed as Merge with an absolutely correct reasoning by Sandstein at the time, therefore DRV should not seek to Overturn the outcome, just acknowledge that the article has evolved so much that the prior decision cannot apply to its current state. — JFG 02:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)