User:Dustihowe/AFD Coaching

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an AFD Coaching page for users Dusti and Keeper. These users will be working together to allow Dusti to gain knowledge and experience in closing AFD's.


Contents

[edit] 4/29/08

  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African Diamond Mines
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republican vs. Democrat
  3. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hema Sinha (2nd nomination)
  4. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Rongan
  1. I'm going to answer all four of these together instead of in separate sections, because overall, I feel that you've made valid and valuable statements in each discussion. I'd like you to watchlist these four. Also, I'd like you to not contribute any more to the discussions, just let them grow and eventually close. Once all 4 are closed, I'd like you to report back to me how each of them was closed, whether the closer agreed with you or went "the other way", and whether the closer closed it how you would have closed it (in other words, did he/she determine consensus correctly and without bias?). I won't be closing any of these four myself. So, here they are:
    Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/African Diamond Mines
    Result:Closed early per WP:SNOW
    Agree or disagree with result? What would you do differently?
Agree with close. At the time of my !vote, I didn't realize the issue with the {{inuse tag.
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republican vs. Democrat
    Result:Redirect
    Agree or disagree with result? What would you do differently?
Agree, as that was my !vote
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hema Sinha (2nd nomination)
    Result:Delete
    Agree or disagree with result? What would you do differently?
Disagree, I feel that the article should have been found as a "No Consensus" due to the large amount of discussio taking place. I would have let the article remain, then if there was someone still wishing to take it bak to AFD again, I would have participated in the conversation with my opinion.
A large amount of discussion is not necessarily a "no consensus", it just means that it probably complicated or controversial. That in itself is also not "no consensus". The result of the debate was a clear delete, and was explained well by the closer.
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Rongan
    Result:No Consensus to delete, default to Keep
    Agree or disagree with result? What would you do differently?
I am neutral on this. Pastordavid raised a good point on accepting royalty as notability, but I still don't see the reason to have the article. Lke above with Hema Sinha, I am glad the article was found under no consensus and will look to see it again at AFD sometime, that is if someone raises an issue with it. But as we like to say, yesterday's newspaper, yesterday's news.
I agree with the closer on this one as well. Royalty, in general, has been argued successfully as being inheritable notability, and I've seen articles started on newborns that are born into royal families that have survived deletion. Us Americans don't get it perhaps, I try to stay away from "royal" articles as I frankly don't get the fascination with royalty and my bias would probably show...

[edit] 6/2/2008

  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warstock closed as keep on 6/2/2008
Hilarious! How do you nominate something by mistake? "Accidently added templates to three pages guys, my bad". Good chuckle...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
That's the million dollar question of the day!! Dusticomplain/compliment 19:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akim Aliu Closed as a Keep on 6/10/2008
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The World's Got Talent Closed as Delete on 6/7/2008

only three for today, as you told me not to participate in too many discussions in one day. Dusticomplain/compliment 18:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Keep them watchlisted, let me know when they close. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
2 out of 3! Excellent. I was impressed with your statements at those 2 AfDs. We'll see how the third one is closed momentarily I presume. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 00:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree. I was wondering, since this is going better, is there a way we can trim some of the dates to move this along a little faster? I'm finding myself getting bored of just commenting. I want to do both, assuming you agree. However, we did have a deal, so I'm willing to go with how you feel about the situation. Dusticomplain/compliment 00:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm only hesitant because you were gone for a month+. Closing AfDs is rather unpleasant, whether you're an admin, or doing a NAC. I'm willing to up the timelines (note I left the "dates" blank below? Let's see how the last one closes, then we'll talk...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 00:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Sounds ok to me. Dusticomplain/compliment 15:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
3 for 3 this round. Better progress than before. What are your thoughts? Dusticomplain/compliment 20:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 6/11/08

[edit] Month Two: June____ through June _____

Performing Non-admin closures in subsets, 4 per session, twice per week (8 total per week)

[edit] Month Three: June 30th thru July 30th

Same as month two, assuming it goes well. Otherwise back to Month one activities.