522:'s close that I disagree with is the notion that the ambiguity of the redirect was a strong argument for deletion. That holds true for mainspace redirects but not for projectspace shortcuts of which a vast number, if not majority, are ambiguous. There are some regulars at RfD that seem to consistently disfavor redirects that are profane or not politically correct, but BDD is not among that group. I cannot quite endorse the close, but I am not at an overturn either. I would not oppose a relist if that were to gain support.
461:. I read the discussion as decidedly on the side of delete. “No consensus” may have been defendable, but “delete” is easily defended. The close was well explained and well reasoned. The two “keep” !votes were weak in being philosophical rather than on point, and I urge them to consider that philosophy belongs in essays, not these ONEWORDSLOGANS. —
271:
Thank you for your opinion, however I would like to point out that I was only notified of the speedy-deletion nomination at 2:20 AM in my timezone, with the deletion occurring at 3:37 AM, which had pretty well rendered any discussion from my end impossible. Otherwise, I agree with the points you are
650:
The RfD was open for 17 days. The issue is a triviality, nothing of substance was at stake, editors had already voiced opinions as to which result is better. More !votes expressing opinions would just better populate to distribution of opinions, probably as I read them moderately favouring the
436:
This RfD closed as "delete" when I think "no consensus" should have been more appropriate. The closing rationale admitted there was a split between views, said "there isn't a clear numerical majority" (which is fine, as long as one side isn't making !votes against policy or stating arguments to
441:
to be deleted too, which I'm not sure we want to go that far. While I did think, "it's just a joke, the encyclopedia isn't going to crash and burn if it gets deleted, get over it", the result of the RfD has been challenged on the closing admin's talk page, so DRV seems the logical course here.
482:
are okay, which is agreeable to me but that's not why it was nominated for deletion. The last sentence of the closure encapsulated that perfectly. It's fine to have profane redirects, but they should at least make sense, which is where this redirect failed.
655:
is a thing, the XfDs need to be practical working systems that produce implementable decisions, and RfA-vetted&baptised closers are entitled to reasonable discretion to make a decision so that the project can move on.
173:
Dan Dubeau is notable to the
Knowledge as an encyclopedia, as he spent over a year as Acting Commissioner, (a position in which, aside from the individual's physical rank, is identical to that of the Commissioner), of the
500:
the argument that the redirect should be deleted because it's profane or offensive was rebutted but the argument that it doesn't make that much sense wasn't, and that's a good argument for deletion.
290:
I don't object to your asking for another look, but it is customary to discuss on the deleting admin's talk page before coming here. Not a big deal. But just file that away for future reference. -
607:
The delete rationales are refuted, the keep ones are not. You said you were trying to avoid a supervote, but it was a supervote, and not just a tie-breaker, but ignoring the stronger rationales.
437:
avoid, which they weren't), and said "I'm wary of such closes looking like supervotes". Well, quite. The problem is here is this gives a signal for all the other "joke" shortcuts listed at
282:
per author's request and upon review. I have doubts about WP:N but I will concede that an officer at that rank of the RCMP probably meets the much lower bar of A7. Courtesy ping
564:
419:
634:
There was no consensus, and in a case like that, the closer should say juast that. If they thought one result was better than the other they should have commented instead.
407:
573:
May be battlegroundish/pointy; plus a claim – with zero evidence of any kind – that it's directly a cause of "so much drama", which is not actually plausible.
428:
48:
34:
43:
595:
point to other pages than they do, but we do not delete them. In fact, we tolerate potentially ambiguous project-space redirects all the time.
190:, both of whom have held the position of Interim/Acting Commissioner in the past, and thus have their own pages. Therefore, my vote goes to
600:
Other respondents joked around, and made an observation this way or that way but didn't strongly advocate anything in either direction.
619:
339:. There's some plausible arguments made why this should be considered a supervote, but overall, there's consensus to endorse. – --
39:
450:
149:
245:
175:
21:
533:
164:
377:
438:
518:- I think the close can be viewed as reasonable solely because of the creation circumstances. The main portion of
695:
357:
310:
248:, the deputy commissioner of the RCMP should qualify. AfD would be the place to figure out if it does or not. --
99:
17:
373:
331:
78:. The deleting admin has restored the article on request. Anyone who wants to send this to AfD can do so. –
616:
585:
295:
283:
684:
665:
645:
624:
555:
541:
510:
492:
470:
452:
346:
299:
255:
207:
88:
553:
448:
233:
178:. Data collected from the RCMP website, although he is not listed as an official Commissioner (like
661:
478:, I thought it was a terrific close by BDD. The "keeps" were mainly arguing that profane redirects
466:
237:
187:
179:
584:
No evidence of disruption, and similar to many other humorous but vulgar redirects that we keep (
343:
252:
563:
I'll just copy what I posted at the closer's user talk page: I have to call shenanigans on the
570:
Two respondents suggest deletion. The only rationales they offer (same as the nominator) are:
203:
232:, but it's a credible claim. One could make a reasonable argument that since we don't have a
226:... does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance
680:
611:
291:
217:
652:
550:
443:
183:
119:
657:
651:
delete side. Waiting for more participation on an unimportant question is exactly why
462:
220:. You really should do that before you come here. In any case, I think this was a poor
641:
340:
266:
249:
229:
503:
287:
221:
199:
81:
676:
565:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 July 13#Knowledge:NOTTHISSHITAGAIN
525:
484:
216:. Nit: It doesn't look like you discussed this first with the deleting admin,
115:
70:
242:
Held the top-level military command position of their nation's armed forces
228:. I don't know if being deputy commissioner of the RCMP is enough to pass
636:
519:
581:
Two respondents say to keep, with the following rationales:
244:
would apply here. Certainly, if we've got all the people in
414:
400:
392:
384:
156:
142:
134:
126:
591:Almost any more-or-less natural English shortcut
182:), leads me to believe that he is as notable as
240:might be a reasonable stand-in, in which case,
8:
356:The following is an archived debate of the
98:The following is an archived debate of the
324:
63:
549:, roughly in line with Hut 8.5's view. --
286:. You may want to send this to AfD. @
576:It could have pointed somewhere else.
7:
698:of the page listed in the heading.
313:of the page listed in the heading.
28:
694:The above is an archive of the
309:The above is an archive of the
246:Category:American police chiefs
1:
609:
176:Royal Canadian Mounted Police
721:
439:User:Ritchie333/Euphemisms
374:Knowledge:NOTTHISSHITAGAIN
347:15:14, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
332:Knowledge:NOTTHISSHITAGAIN
685:10:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
666:02:07, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
646:17:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
625:04:30, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
556:23:21, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
542:03:39, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
511:18:20, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
493:15:46, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
471:11:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
453:09:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
300:20:55, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
256:20:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
208:20:05, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
89:21:36, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
18:Knowledge:Deletion review
701:Please do not modify it.
363:Please do not modify it.
316:Please do not modify it.
214:Overturn and list at AfD
105:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
360:of the page above.
188:Zachary Taylor Wood
180:Zachary Taylor Wood
102:of the page above.
708:
707:
540:
323:
322:
712:
703:
623:
536:
530:
523:
506:
490:
431:
426:
417:
403:
395:
387:
365:
325:
318:
284:John from Idegon
270:
218:User:Ad Orientem
192:Allow recreation
169:
167:
159:
145:
137:
129:
107:
84:
64:
53:
33:
720:
719:
715:
714:
713:
711:
710:
709:
699:
696:deletion review
653:rough consensus
539:
534:
526:
504:
485:
427:
425:
422:
413:
412:
406:
399:
398:
391:
390:
383:
382:
361:
358:deletion review
314:
311:deletion review
264:
184:Beverley Busson
163:
161:
155:
154:
148:
141:
140:
133:
132:
125:
124:
103:
100:deletion review
82:
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
718:
716:
706:
705:
690:
689:
688:
687:
670:
669:
668:
628:
627:
608:
604:
603:
602:
601:
598:
597:
596:
594:
589:
586:WP:NOTCENSORED
579:
578:
577:
574:
558:
544:
532:
513:
495:
473:
434:
433:
423:
410:
404:
396:
388:
380:
368:
367:
352:
351:
350:
349:
321:
320:
305:
304:
303:
302:
276:
275:
274:
273:
259:
258:
171:
170:
152:
146:
138:
130:
122:
110:
109:
94:
93:
92:
91:
61:
56:
47:
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
717:
704:
702:
697:
692:
691:
686:
682:
678:
674:
671:
667:
663:
659:
654:
649:
648:
647:
643:
639:
638:
633:
630:
629:
626:
621:
618:
615:
614:
606:
605:
599:
592:
590:
587:
583:
582:
580:
575:
572:
571:
569:
568:
566:
562:
559:
557:
554:
552:
548:
545:
543:
537:
531:
529:
521:
517:
514:
512:
509:
508:
507:
499:
496:
494:
491:
488:
481:
477:
474:
472:
468:
464:
460:
457:
456:
455:
454:
451:
449:
447:
446:
440:
430:
421:
416:
409:
402:
394:
386:
379:
375:
372:
371:
370:
369:
366:
364:
359:
354:
353:
348:
345:
342:
338:
334:
333:
329:
328:
327:
326:
319:
317:
312:
307:
306:
301:
297:
293:
289:
285:
281:
278:
277:
268:
263:
262:
261:
260:
257:
254:
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
212:
211:
210:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
166:
158:
151:
144:
136:
128:
121:
117:
114:
113:
112:
111:
108:
106:
101:
96:
95:
90:
87:
86:
85:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
700:
693:
672:
635:
631:
612:
560:
546:
527:
515:
502:
501:
497:
486:
479:
475:
458:
444:
435:
362:
355:
336:
330:
315:
308:
279:
241:
238:WP:MILPERSON
225:
213:
195:
191:
172:
104:
97:
80:
79:
75:
69:
59:25 July 2018
58:
49:2018 July 26
35:2018 July 24
675:per Tavix.
613:SMcCandlish
292:Ad Orientem
236:guideline,
551:joe decker
480:in general
445:Ritchie333
196:undeletion
116:Dan Dubeau
71:Dan Dubeau
658:SmokeyJoe
463:SmokeyJoe
44:2018 July
632:Overturn
561:Overturn
341:RoySmith
280:Restored
267:RoySmith
250:RoySmith
234:WP:NRCMP
224:, which
20: |
673:Endorse
567:close.
547:Endorse
516:Neutral
505:Hut 8.5
498:Endorse
476:Endorse
459:Endorse
429:restore
393:history
337:Endorse
288:Fhsig13
272:making.
200:Fhsig13
165:restore
135:history
83:Hut 8.5
677:Stifle
344:(talk)
253:(talk)
230:WP:BIO
642:talk
593:could
528:Godsy
415:watch
408:links
222:WP:A7
157:watch
150:links
52:: -->
16:<
681:talk
662:talk
535:CONT
489:avix
467:talk
401:logs
385:edit
378:talk
296:talk
204:talk
186:and
143:logs
127:edit
120:talk
76:Moot
32:<
637:DGG
622:😼
520:BDD
420:XfD
418:) (
194:or
22:Log
683:)
664:)
656:--
644:)
610:—
524:—
483:--
469:)
335:–
298:)
206:)
198:.
74:–
42::
679:(
660:(
640:(
620:¢
617:☏
588:)
538:)
487:T
465:(
432:)
424:|
411:|
405:|
397:|
389:|
381:|
376:(
294:(
269::
265:@
202:(
168:)
162:(
160:)
153:|
147:|
139:|
131:|
123:|
118:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.