Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Category:Lists of rivers in Romania

Please, no "vote section". This is not a vote, but a discussion. Respectfully, NonvocalScream (talk) 04:34, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, but this is going to directly affect how I will participate in this project in the future. Razor flame 04:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think threaded discussion is preferable to the divided sections... I want to encourage discussion. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 04:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote elongated?[change source]

Could you please elongate the vote from one week to two weeks please? I believe that this is a sore issue that will need a thorough discussion. Thanks, Razor flame 04:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The clear consensus is that they were to be deleted, and you are only objecting because you put work into creating them. Extending the vote will only hurt your cause. Shappy ^talk 13:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, this should be speedy closed, not extended. You have not argued any fault in the process at all. You have only argued that you are upset that people did it while you were gone. For a request for undeletion, you must argue that consensus was formed on some misunderstanding or fault in the process. Your arguments amount to "these are my articles!" Either way (talk) 13:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above, and I would give it at least 24 hours, before application of the speedy close. In deference to respecting one of our good contributers. NonvocalScream (talk) 14:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, which is why I haven't closed it already. Waiting 24 hours. -Djsasso (talk) 14:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages[change source]

Since when do we use subpages for undeletion request? Barras || talk 13:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Since we decided that bureaucracy was the main goal of Simple English Wikipedia. Either way (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - We don't need extra subpages for two or three such requests each year... but it doesn't matter to me. Barras || talk 13:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Barras, I gathered there would be a good deal of discussion, so subpaging was better for organization. In this one case, I did it. Either way, I don't appreciate your edits amounting to smart assery, especially about something done in good faith. We have a guideline that might help you... assume good faith. NonvocalScream (talk) 14:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - And I don't appreciate you patronizing me by linking to AGF as if I'm some newbie who's never been involved with a Wikipedia discussion before. Either way (talk) 14:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        Guys...cool it. No use bickering. -Djsasso (talk) 14:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]