| Revision as of 07:59, 24 March 2019 editLegacypac (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers158,031 edits →24 March 2019← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:02, 24 March 2019 edit undoNorthamerica1000 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators708,032 edits +cNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| Closed three days early in a way that does not reflect the discussion or what happened. The discussion found that the Portals Classification system is too inconsistent to follow in batching nominations, so I withdrew the nomination about halfway through the 7 day discussion. Note all the Oppose votes instead of normal Keep votes, which goes to the heart of the merits of using the inconsistent classification system for MFD selection, hence the withdraw so individual pages or topical groups could be nominated instead. The closer is a member of WikiProject Portals, signed up for their newsletter, and appears to have jumped at the chance to finally tag a series of pages as Keep after so many have closed delete. I prefer a more accurate close of '''Withdrawn''' and a finding statement that most of the voters found the classifications to be inaccurate or inconsistent. Note this whole portal issue is now at ArbComm plus AN plus other places so getting an accurate close is important. ] (]) 07:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC) | Closed three days early in a way that does not reflect the discussion or what happened. The discussion found that the Portals Classification system is too inconsistent to follow in batching nominations, so I withdrew the nomination about halfway through the 7 day discussion. Note all the Oppose votes instead of normal Keep votes, which goes to the heart of the merits of using the inconsistent classification system for MFD selection, hence the withdraw so individual pages or topical groups could be nominated instead. The closer is a member of WikiProject Portals, signed up for their newsletter, and appears to have jumped at the chance to finally tag a series of pages as Keep after so many have closed delete. I prefer a more accurate close of '''Withdrawn''' and a finding statement that most of the voters found the classifications to be inaccurate or inconsistent. Note this whole portal issue is now at ArbComm plus AN plus other places so getting an accurate close is important. ] (]) 07:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Endorse close'''. The discussion was not closed three days early, it was closed eight hours early. The discussion was started on 11:19, 17 March 2019 () and was closed on 03:20, 24 March 2019 (). While it would have been optimal for the full 168 hours to have transpired, re-opening the discussion at this point for another eight hours likely won't change the outcome. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 08:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:02, 24 March 2019
< 2019 March 23 Deletion review archives: 2019 March 2019 March 25 >24 March 2019
====Portal:Bacon====
See Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Bottom Importance Portals
Closed three days early in a way that does not reflect the discussion or what happened. The discussion found that the Portals Classification system is too inconsistent to follow in batching nominations, so I withdrew the nomination about halfway through the 7 day discussion. Note all the Oppose votes instead of normal Keep votes, which goes to the heart of the merits of using the inconsistent classification system for MFD selection, hence the withdraw so individual pages or topical groups could be nominated instead. The closer is a member of WikiProject Portals, signed up for their newsletter, and appears to have jumped at the chance to finally tag a series of pages as Keep after so many have closed delete. I prefer a more accurate close of Withdrawn and a finding statement that most of the voters found the classifications to be inaccurate or inconsistent. Note this whole portal issue is now at ArbComm plus AN plus other places so getting an accurate close is important. Legacypac (talk) 07:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Endorse close. The discussion was not closed three days early, it was closed eight hours early. The discussion was started on 11:19, 17 March 2019 (link) and was closed on 03:20, 24 March 2019 (diff). While it would have been optimal for the full 168 hours to have transpired, re-opening the discussion at this point for another eight hours likely won't change the outcome. North America 08:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC)