| Revision as of 16:30, 6 September 2009 editHammersoft (talk | contribs)Administrators91,236 edits →1948 in England← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:15, 7 September 2009 edit undoYellowAssessmentMonkey (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers15,460 edits →1948 in England: +Next edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| ::I'd suggest that it may be time to withdraw this AfD now... it clearly isn't going to have any end result other than "Keep" or "No Consensus" at the moment, and it seems to be generating more heat and ill-will than light and insightful discussion at this point. ] <sup>(])</sup> 11:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC). | ::I'd suggest that it may be time to withdraw this AfD now... it clearly isn't going to have any end result other than "Keep" or "No Consensus" at the moment, and it seems to be generating more heat and ill-will than light and insightful discussion at this point. ] <sup>(])</sup> 11:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC). | ||
| ::*I have no intention of withdrawing the AfD. I have noted with interest that as of yesterday all but two of the 'keep' votes were from people with an inherent bias in favor of the topic. None of the delete/merge votes were from people with such bias. I find that telling, and intend on raising the issue if the pattern continues. I think the AfD is polluted. --] (]) 16:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC) | ::*I have no intention of withdrawing the AfD. I have noted with interest that as of yesterday all but two of the 'keep' votes were from people with an inherent bias in favor of the topic. None of the delete/merge votes were from people with such bias. I find that telling, and intend on raising the issue if the pattern continues. I think the AfD is polluted. --] (]) 16:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC) | ||
| There is no OR in the Loxton article, or any of the others. ''']''' ('']'') 05:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:15, 7 September 2009
User:Hammersoft/NotFreeAnymore
Stanley Kubrick
Hammersoft, I have replied on my talk page to your concerns about the Kubrick article. Feel free to remove this from your page when you have viewed it.--WickerGuy (talk) 17:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I have posted a bit of rethinking on photo priorities. --WickerGuy (talk) 20:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've limited time today, and given the severity of the debates I am currently in elsewhere involving tens of thousands of articles, one article isn't enough to draw my attention today :) My apologies, but I won't get to this for a while. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
1948 in England
I tend to agree about the excessive details in these articles, so pending 1) the outcome of the AFD and 2) YellowMonkey's comments, I'd be happy to work with you in trimming said details. –Juliancolton | 00:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- I doubt YM will be an easy roll over. Aaroncrick (talk) 08:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'd suggest that it may be time to withdraw this AfD now... it clearly isn't going to have any end result other than "Keep" or "No Consensus" at the moment, and it seems to be generating more heat and ill-will than light and insightful discussion at this point. Lankiveil 11:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC).
- I have no intention of withdrawing the AfD. I have noted with interest that as of yesterday all but two of the 'keep' votes were from people with an inherent bias in favor of the topic. None of the delete/merge votes were from people with such bias. I find that telling, and intend on raising the issue if the pattern continues. I think the AfD is polluted. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'd suggest that it may be time to withdraw this AfD now... it clearly isn't going to have any end result other than "Keep" or "No Consensus" at the moment, and it seems to be generating more heat and ill-will than light and insightful discussion at this point. Lankiveil 11:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC).
There is no OR in the Loxton article, or any of the others. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC)