304:
is trying to say (sorry I don't speak
Extreme Wikilayer yet), is that because WP:N refers to NPEOPLE in the box of the right, NSOLDER becomes an SNG because it is referred in NPEOPLE. By this logic, every essay that is mentioned in any SNG becomes part of the N guideline. Slick as a contract at a
259:
I think citing it remains valid, despite the ongoing efforts of some editors to claim it isn't. Frankly, given the frequency of its use in AfD discussions and the respect it's given by the majority of editors working in the field, I'm really not sure why it has remained an essay. But yes, you are
311:
This is not the place to relitigate the AfD, but the place to review the close. In this case, the closer did examine and weigh the arguments presented in the discussion regarding the existence of RS showing notability. I believe they also properly weighed the "votes" against the !votes
323:
With all the discussion that went on, the Keeps failed to produce any sources for the closer to consider and failed to offer convincing arguments for the closer against the Delete rationale. The Keep votes simply lacked evidence/sources and effective arguments for the closer to
374:". The fact is, after over a decade on the encyclopedia and a week at AfD, the only sources were a database entry at an archived website and the perenially unreliable Find-A-Grave. That tells me that, whatever the "rebuttable presumption" may be, it's been rebutted.
319:
Too often AfDs are lazily closed based on presumption, when the presumption has been objected to in the AfD, instead of the closer taking the time to evaluate the arguments and evidence. I appreciate the closer not doing a lazy presumption close
498:
in view of the SNG being an essay rather than an SNG. I would much prefer to ignore GNG, which I consider troublesome, and rely on SNGs, and would favor overturning if there were an SNG. Can we upgrade the essay to an SNG?
34:
416:
never came up in the discussion, but this seems to be a case where, while the information is worthy, there isn't enough coverage to support a stand-alone article.
159:
48:
308:
I think
Necrothesp's idea that GNG is not a weightier standard than NSOLDIER is outside the consensus. yes GNG has more weight than a misinterpreted essay.
43:
178:
Every
Knowledge article needs to pass GNG. SNGs are simply a shortcut that presumes that sources exist to satisfy GNG when a topic satisfies the SNG.
366:- people look at the words "rebuttable presumption of notability" and, through some trick of eyesight or psychology, read "permanent exemption from
338:
The reasons why NSOLDIER and ANYBIO are not met are clearly explained (and remain unrefuted) in the AfD discussion, not appropriate to repeat here.
395:
I don't think this is an SNG. So the close justification is just mistaken. But then again, it's not an SNG, so the close result it right.
147:
485:
327:
Weighing essays just like SNGs is a problem at AfD and closing AfDs based on votes instead of !votes is a problem at AfD. The closer
39:
168:
433:. Consensus was for a merge and redirect if not deletion. An RfC on spinouts can be held at the redirect target’s talk page. —
532:
244:
200:
21:
549:
504:
97:
17:
477:
459:
538:
508:
490:
463:
442:
425:
404:
387:
350:
273:
250:
224:
86:
412:, although SOLDIER has not had widespread community discussion that I'm aware of, so it's not an SNG.
500:
413:
269:
220:
212:
189:
A topic is presumed to merit an article if: It meets either the general notability guideline below,
438:
117:
535:
472:
455:
421:
332:
313:
255:
That would work too. However, given that despite its essay status, SOLDIER is actually listed at
471:
The closer is correct - GNG must be met, regardless of SNGs. I see nothing else being appealed.
341:
Scottywong, thank you for explaining your close. Doing this (when appropriate) is very helpful.
233:
I'm still mulling this over, but for an SNG instead of the essay (which SOLDIER is), how about
204:
196:
345:
261:
234:
400:
301:
286:
265:
216:
208:
81:
517:
434:
381:
256:
113:
70:
529:
417:
238:
193:
the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right.
528:, which doesn't mean "guaranteed". A presumption can be rebutted, and here, it was.
451:
520:
links to it, which I see as an incorporation by reference. Still, the key word in
371:
367:
316:. This is too often lacking in closes and I appreciate the closer doing it here.
203:, it was incumbent upon the closer to take account of those !votes which quoted
181:
396:
78:
375:
176:
This was a clear no consensus result. The closer's rationale is:
207:
and not suggest that those relying on GNG held more weight. --
154:
140:
132:
124:
260:entirely correct that the MoH also clearly meets
289:: I was a Delete vote, not a Redirect vote, but
450:An article without sources would come close to
522:A topic is presumed to merit an article if ...
8:
96:The following is an archived debate of the
63:
393:Endorse close, overturn closing statement
516:- I think of SOLDIER as an SNG, because
525:
521:
188:
177:
195:Since this article clearly does meet
7:
552:of the page listed in the heading.
28:
548:The above is an archive of the
215:) 23:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
1:
201:Knowledge:Notability (people)
199:, which is listed at the SNG
539:17:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
509:05:49, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
491:09:50, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
464:17:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
443:04:26, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
426:11:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
405:07:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
388:06:05, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
274:23:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
251:23:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
225:23:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
87:07:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
575:
18:Knowledge:Deletion review
555:Please do not modify it.
356:, 20:34, 1 October 2020
293:was the correct outcome.
103:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
331:do this and followed
100:of the page above.
353:
349:
300:I think that what
562:
561:
351:
343:
249:
35:2020 September 30
566:
557:
488:
480:
355:
241:
171:
166:
157:
143:
135:
127:
105:
84:
64:
53:
33:
574:
573:
569:
568:
567:
565:
564:
563:
553:
550:deletion review
501:Robert McClenon
484:
476:
424:
410:Endorse closure
386:
342:
247:
167:
165:
162:
153:
152:
146:
139:
138:
131:
130:
123:
122:
101:
98:deletion review
82:
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
572:
570:
560:
559:
544:
543:
542:
541:
511:
493:
466:
445:
428:
420:
407:
390:
380:
360:
359:
358:
357:
339:
336:
325:
321:
317:
309:
306:
295:
294:
279:
278:
277:
276:
243:
180:However, what
174:
173:
163:
150:
144:
136:
128:
120:
114:James F. Adams
108:
107:
92:
91:
90:
89:
71:James F. Adams
61:
59:1 October 2020
56:
49:2020 October 2
47:
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
571:
558:
556:
551:
546:
545:
540:
537:
534:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
512:
510:
506:
502:
497:
494:
492:
489:
487:
481:
479:
474:
473:SportingFlyer
470:
467:
465:
461:
457:
456:MisterBee1966
453:
449:
446:
444:
440:
436:
432:
429:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:WP:PAGEDECIDE
411:
408:
406:
402:
398:
394:
391:
389:
385:
384:
379:
378:
373:
369:
365:
362:
361:
354:
347:
340:
337:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
315:
310:
307:
305:used car lot.
303:
299:
298:
297:
296:
292:
288:
285:the close by
284:
281:
280:
275:
271:
267:
263:
258:
254:
253:
252:
248:
246:
240:
236:
232:
229:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
192:
186:
183:
179:
170:
161:
156:
149:
142:
134:
126:
119:
115:
112:
111:
110:
109:
106:
104:
99:
94:
93:
88:
85:
80:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
554:
547:
513:
496:Weak Endorse
495:
483:
475:
468:
447:
430:
409:
392:
382:
376:
363:
328:
290:
282:
242:
230:
190:
184:
175:
102:
95:
75:
69:
58:
44:2020 October
333:WP:CLOSEAFD
314:WP:CLOSEAFD
302:Necrothesp
287:Scottywong
266:Necrothesp
217:Necrothesp
209:Necrothesp
205:WP:SOLDIER
197:WP:SOLDIER
435:SmokeyJoe
324:consider.
262:WP:ANYBIO
235:WP:ANYBIO
187:says is:
526:presumed
418:Hog Farm
291:Redirect
239:Eddie891
185:actually
76:Endorsed
20: |
518:WP:NBIO
514:Endorse
469:Endorse
448:Endorse
431:Endorse
364:Endorse
346:Timothy
329:did not
283:Support
264:#1. --
257:WP:NBIO
231:Comment
169:restore
133:history
452:WP:OR
422:Bacon
397:Hobit
320:here.
155:watch
148:links
52:: -->
16:<
505:talk
460:talk
439:talk
401:talk
377:Reyk
372:WP:N
370:and
368:WP:V
352:talk
270:talk
245:Work
237:#1?
221:talk
213:talk
182:WP:N
141:logs
125:edit
118:talk
79:Wily
32:<
536:ich
533:v!v
524:is
383:YO!
348:::
344://
160:XfD
158:) (
74:–
22:Log
530:Le
507:)
462:)
454:.
441:)
403:)
272:)
223:)
191:or
42::
503:(
486:C
482:·
478:T
458:(
437:(
399:(
335:.
268:(
219:(
211:(
172:)
164:|
151:|
145:|
137:|
129:|
121:|
116:(
83:D
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.