- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Soroka (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
As the author of this joke AfD, I ask for its G7/MfD (I participated in both discussions) be overturned to userfication. Although I will disagree with the MfD's reasoning that the April Fools AfD aren't funny (I think they are), I believe that userfication would be harmless enough that it would not disturb the consensus too much.NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:48, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment NotReallySoroka I'm not sure why I was notified on my talk page as I had nothing to do with this at all. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:55, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- CambridgeBayWeather, you closed the MfD involving my AfD. I will notify the deleting admin soon. NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't see a problem with userfying it. The result of the MfD was to move them to a subpage of Wikipedia:April Fools/April Fools' Day 2021, so moving it somewhere else shouldn't be a big deal. Hut 8.5 18:20, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Help me out here. This appears to have been deleted by G7. Was the G7 correct? And why isn't this at WP:REFUND per the statement by the deleting admin at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Soroka&action=edit&redlink=1? Hobit (talk) 20:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm still unclear on why this is here, but assuming the nom was the one who requested a G7, I'm fine with restoring it--ideally where the rest of that MfD were restored to, but userfication is okay too. Hobit (talk) 11:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Like the others above, I can't imagine why this went straight to DRV instead of REFUND. Noting for the record that I was not consulted/contacted prior to this DRV nomination. -FASTILY 02:14, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Hobit and Fastily, I am sending the page here because my decision to G7 the page has to do in part with the MfD. Had I sent it to REFUND, I might have been referred back to here. The deletion entry even included a link to the MfD page. Lastly, I am not sure whether I am obligated to notify anyone except the closer. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:03, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a peculiar logic because it *might* have happened I came here, yet here *might* have just bounced you to REFUND. Given the deletion log specifically directs to REFUND (it even includes a link), and the deletion discussion doesn't result in a deletion, I'm really doesn't seem likely it would have been directed here. The point in using REFUND and/or talking to the closer/deleting admin is that it tends be a quicker resolution in simpler cases (which this appears to be), rather than going to a multi-day discussion here, though I guess since this is april fools from a year ago, time isn't really of the essence. The instructions say notify the closer, because that's whose decision is usually being discussed, in this case it was someone else who did the actual deletion so it's their decision, the pre-instructions also suggest discussion where the closer, who I'm sure would have directed you to the right person if that had happen. Of course none of this really matters now, since we are here and discussing it. --81.100.164.154 (talk) 07:32, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Don’t come here because someone *might* say something at REFUND. Go to REFUND, and If rejected, then consider coming here. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
|
