Bharat(India) ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

I think J947 brought up a valid point, especially given that the the acronym being thrown around as if it were policy is really just an essay. Rosguill relisted the discussion, but it was closed as delete the next day by Ivanvector, without any participation since the relist. As deletion discussions are WP:NOTAVOTE, I think the relist was perfectly valid, to stimulate more discussion, and the closure should be repealed. Numbers don't mean everything, especially all the "delete" !votes are basically just "per nom" or "per that essay". Edward-Woodrow ( talk) 01:25, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

• Endorse Neutral. (RFD nominator) Honestly, I thought it was a bit odd that this discussion was relisted at all, making me believe that undue, almost WP:SUPERVOTE weight was placed on that "keep" vote, considering the numerous delete votes after it. (By the way Edward-Woodrow, I didn't see an attempt to contact the closer to get their take on their close, but eh, it is technically just an option per the DRV instructions.) Steel1943 ( talk) 01:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  ...But yeah, that was kind of a quick turnaround. No time for the relist to even breathe. I'll "neutral". Steel1943 ( talk) 01:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  For full transparency, the timestamps landed on different days because of my time zone, but the total time between relist and close was a little over four hours. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 17:19, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

• I suspect Rosguill did not see CycloneYoris' late delete vote, otherwise it would have been closed as delete (6–1 with four deletes after my one keep being relisted would be a new extreme). In that light both Rosguill's relist and Ivanvector's close make a lot more sense. J 947 ‡ ^edits 02:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
• Endorse There was a clear consensus to delete and this should never have been relisted in the first place. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. The decision to relist was clearly wrong and Ivanvector acted correctly in closing as delete. Stifle ( talk) 09:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
• Deleting admin comment - J947 might be right about CycloneYoris' late comment (it came three minutes before the relist) but I don't see how the result would have changed had that vote not been considered. J947's lone keep vote might have made a good point about the deviation in Indian English leading to increased utility, but it was left on the first day of the discussion; participants had seven days to consider the argument and of the four who commented subsequently, none were swayed by it. This was a clear delete result, approaching WP:SNOW. No reason was given for relisting the discussion and there was no reasonable justification I could come up with, nor was there any reason to expect that the result would change given seven more days of discussion, so I closed it. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 14:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. There was plenty of time to engage with the lone keep !vote, and there were several delete !votes after it signifying that subsequent commenters were not swayed by it. There's clear consensus to delete. That it was relisted makes no difference. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 17:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. This is a disagreement between the relister and the closer. An outcome shouldn't be overturned just because there was this disagreement. Instead, a review process can determine what the right action was, or, if neither was simply wrong--which was the better action. Closing was at the very least the better action. I understand the reason for the relist, but closing was more reasonable. One participant recommended that the relevant guideline be ignored. Editors could have agreed but they didn't. There was a consensus to delete.— Alalch E. 17:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Alalch E.: But it's not a guideline, as I stated multiple times. It's an essay ( WP:COSTLY) Edward-Woodrow ( talk) 21:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

  Sorry, I missed that honestly, I was on the move when reading and writing that comment and wasn't careful. I'll strike that part. There was still a consensus to delete. — Alalch E. 22:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply

• Endorse. Clear consensus to delete, shouldn't've (yes I know that's not a real word) been relisted, WP:ONLYESSAY. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (no relation) 22:14, 2 December 2023 (UTC) reply
• I'm not sure there's anything to do here, but I do think J947's argument, which I might agree with, was largely ignored by the other participants. On one hand, that's a consensus - on the other hand, it's not clear anyone actually interacted with the counter-argument to deletion. SportingFlyer T· C 18:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. Consensus to delete was clear. Relisting would have been, like this DRV, a poor use of time and thought. Move on to other things. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 21:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC) reply