Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinguish

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 was already merged, redirected. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 15:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pinguish

Non-notable fictional language -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

• At 19:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC), User:Parsssseltongue attempted to close this discussion with the comment "Speedy merge and redirect". Non-admins have never been permitted to speedy-close deletion discussions except in blatently obvious cases of vandalism. I can find no evidence that this was anythong other than a good-faith nomination. While Parsssseltongue is entitled to his/her opinion, there are no grounds to unilaterally close this discussion. Rossami (talk) 01:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Pingu, I suppose. Danny Lilithborne 01:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect and merge. Daniel.Bryant 05:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
• Actually, non-admins are allowed to close discussions when there's a clear consensus to keep, or a conclusion has otherwise been reached. I'll push this nomination a step closer to a consensus to Redirect. Zetawoof^(ζ) 10:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Indeed, but closing it as "concensus" when not a single person has given their input is not allowed - see WP:DELPRO. Daniel.Bryant 01:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
    • That is indeed correct. On the other hand, a merge/redirect doesn't have to go through AfD anyway (though asking people on the Talk page is generally considered a Good Thing). Zetawoof^(ζ) 02:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Indeed. I wonder how much attention a talk page discussion would bring on this topic, however. Daniel.Bryant 02:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and Redirect. RickReinckens 07:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and Redirect The material is already in the parent article. Also admonish Parsssseltongue (talk • contribs) for out of process closure. Non-admins should not be closing debates that have not run the full period. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 12:05, 9 October 2006 (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.