User:Alansohn/CFD

A few wise words from various editors about the value (or lack thereof) of precedents. Highlighted remarks are in bold italics which was added in all cases, while text only bolded or only in italics is as in original:

I'm not sure that this was nominated in bad faith. The nominator does nominate a lot of categories and I wouldn't be surprised if he had forgotten about the previous nomination. I closed both discussions and I (in good faith) hadn't recalled the earlier one. I'm not convinced, however, that deletion was an inappropriate result for the second nomination. The reason is that normally assessments of consensus in a second discussions are considered afresh, without resort to the old discussion. That said, I think this would be a good issue to discuss at deletion review, where you could raise these issues. If other users agree that I should have considered the previous discussion as well, I'll accept that, but I'm not going to do so unilaterally. Good Ol’factory 1 June 2009 - (here)

Endorse/relist OK (closer). This is essentially a complaint of "I didn't know about the discussion and would have opposed deletion had I known." That's a valid feeling to have when a category you like gets deleted, but it's not something that I as closer can foresee and therefore not a valid reason to overturn. (2) The previous discussion is irrelevant, except for an indication that more participation/interest in the topic is theoretically possible; (3) therefore, I'm fine with a relisting, but I echo Kbdank71's comments in suggesting that anyone who's concerned about a category add it to their watchlist. It saves the community a whole lot of wiki-drama and going back and forth from CfD to DRV if you just watch what you want to track. It's very easy and lots of folks do it. (4) In my experience, very few proposals or administrative actions to delete categories are done with bad faith motives. I'd like to see a review nomination for a category propose a review without insinuating that there was. Good Ol’factory 2 June 2009 - (see here)