Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005/Vote
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion | Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005
You have new messages (last change).
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was speedy keep, go discuss this at the ArbCom election talk page. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 17:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005/Vote
Open ballots are the tools of tyranny and dictatorships. We used to have a secret ballot. Whatever happened to "this year's election will be held using the Special:Arb-com-vote software" ?
- Delete --Victim of signature fascism 15:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- *Sigh* Look, we're in the middle of discussions about this. If you don't like the way Jimbo wishes to do the election (as close to RfA as possible), talk to him or discuss on the talk page. Don't AfD pages that are being used for discussion. Speedy keep. Flcelloguy (A note?) 15:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- The page isn't being used. It's principally blank. --Victim of signature fascism 15:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's being linked to from the talk page as an example of what a vote would look like. We don't delete proposals; discuss it at the talk page instead. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 15:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think it should be AFD'd. We already know what Special:Arb-com-vote looks like. --Victim of signature fascism 16:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- -Ril-, you're missing the point here: the point is that this page is being used for discussion currently (check out the main talk page and the page's talk page); if you disagree with using open voting in the election, bring it up on the talk page (which several users have already done) instead of trying to get this deleted. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think it should be AFD'd. We already know what Special:Arb-com-vote looks like. --Victim of signature fascism 16:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's being linked to from the talk page as an example of what a vote would look like. We don't delete proposals; discuss it at the talk page instead. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 15:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- The page isn't being used. It's principally blank. --Victim of signature fascism 15:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy close, bad faith nomination. Plus it shouldn't be on AfD, it should go on that other deletion page for wikipedia namespace articles. Proto t c 16:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a clear case of WP:POINT. Further, it is in the wrong place - it should be at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.Further, it is likely to prove useful for many Wikipedians. Capitalistroadster 16:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Nomination out of process. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 17:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
