User talk:24.170.192.181

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm quite amazed that your second contribution to Wikipedia (after a test at the sandbox) is a personal attack. Could you explain the deletion of which articles in particular you disagree with? Could you also explain why I have a significant number of major edits to (including the creation of some) articles, if I'm only a Mr. Delete? Deleting articles that are not within the scope of Wikipedia is an important part of keeping this site as a good encyclopedia, not a place where anyone can post everything. There are guidelines and so on for a reason, and I didn't make them. Anyway, all my nominations for deletion have either been executed by an unknown administrator (in case of a speedy delete), or after a thorough examination by a lot of other editors. I can not delete articles on my own. I do think that most of my nominations have been met with agreement by the majority of editors, and I am happy that some of them have not been deleted. Either I learned more about what is and what isn't an acceptable article for Wikipedia, or the article in question got vastly improved by the push of the AfD discussion. Anyway, as you refer to "why not allow articles that have been around a while", I don't think that that is an argument either way. I have had criticism from an offended contributor because I AfD'ed an article too soon, now you complain that I AfD when an article is around for too long... But the only articles I remember having proposed for Speedy Delete and/or AfD that had been around for a while where Gotem (which is now vastly improved, as in, referring to a real hamlet instead of an imaginary one), and Eiland, Polfbroekstraat, and Kottem, which have all been deleted after a discussion. I suppose you are one of the countless friends of the people that created those articles involved in that story? Fram 19:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)