The result was weak keep. The main article is already > 100k, so policy suggests that merger is right out. With an exceptionally compelling case and strong support perhaps that could be overlooked, but neither exists here. That this list is "indiscriminate" or "loosely associated" is asserted several times, but never explained or argued, so it can't be given much weight. Which leaves "Meets WP:N" as the main policy driven argument (some of both ILIKEIT and IDONTLIKEIT, but there's no policy weight there). Headcount sort of favours keep (merge is really a keep vote, but merge to an article that's already 100k is not a viable vote - it's unclear to me whether it's a poorly informed merge vote (that should then be discounted) or a poorly phrased redirect vote)) That said, policy favours keep, headcount marginally favours keep. Wily D 11:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Ugh, another one of these "international reactions" articles? These violate WP:NOTDIR and WP:N. NOTDIR#1 says "lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as (but not limited to) quotations", and that's what this is. While this is all on one subject, it's still quotations from various heads of state, saying more or less the same exact thing. It also violates N because the international reactions as a subject are not notable; the shooting they're referring to is what's notable. – Muboshgu ( talk) 21:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC) reply
— 198.228.228.153 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. WWGB ( talk) 10:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was weak keep. The main article is already > 100k, so policy suggests that merger is right out. With an exceptionally compelling case and strong support perhaps that could be overlooked, but neither exists here. That this list is "indiscriminate" or "loosely associated" is asserted several times, but never explained or argued, so it can't be given much weight. Which leaves "Meets WP:N" as the main policy driven argument (some of both ILIKEIT and IDONTLIKEIT, but there's no policy weight there). Headcount sort of favours keep (merge is really a keep vote, but merge to an article that's already 100k is not a viable vote - it's unclear to me whether it's a poorly informed merge vote (that should then be discounted) or a poorly phrased redirect vote)) That said, policy favours keep, headcount marginally favours keep. Wily D 11:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Ugh, another one of these "international reactions" articles? These violate WP:NOTDIR and WP:N. NOTDIR#1 says "lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as (but not limited to) quotations", and that's what this is. While this is all on one subject, it's still quotations from various heads of state, saying more or less the same exact thing. It also violates N because the international reactions as a subject are not notable; the shooting they're referring to is what's notable. – Muboshgu ( talk) 21:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC) reply
— 198.228.228.153 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. WWGB ( talk) 10:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC) reply