Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Universism 2

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete. Deathphoenix 00:50, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Universism

It's back (see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Universism). This probably falls under speedy as recreation of deleted material, but since there was such a big debate over it last time, I think it deserves a new vote. Correct me if I'm wrong. BTW, the creator and sole editor of the page, User:Allanrevich, made his first edit today, and so is a potential sockpuppet. Note: I'm not voting either way at this time, just nominating. -- Scott e^iπ + 1 = 0 23:04, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

• Oh, god, Speedy delete as a re-creation this sock-puppet magnet. --Calton | Talk 23:20, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Speedy Delete as re-created material. Last VfD was sock-puppet hell, and was only a couple months ago! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:26, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete it now. I hear the footsteps of the sockpuppet army on the march. They will be here ere sundown. -R. fiend 23:30, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as recreation of VfD'd article (with, may I add, absolutely no correction of the factors that got it deleted last time.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:16, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy deleted. RickK 00:17, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Reconsider? Have now (finally) managed to find the original vfd pages and read some of the ongoing discussions regarding problems with sock puppets etc. First, I am not a sock puppet. Second, I do not have any ties to the movement or its creator. Third, the Wikipedia guidelines suggest strongly that when clear consensus can not be reached, admins should always err on the side of inclusion rather than exclusion. Fourth, as the movement has several thousand members, most of whom are probably more intersted in Universism than in the Wikipedia, it is fair to assume that many votes from unregistered users are legitimate. I have no stake in the outcome of this discussion, but worry that administrative egos may be blinding some admins to common sense. allan

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.