- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Speedy keep per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. Which only closed three days ago. Garion96 (talk) 22:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron
IMO, this "group" is a sly way of vote stacking. For example, under examples on the main page the group list articles it has saved, such as Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_July_14#Russophobia. This group does nothing to help the project. If it an article needs "rescued", then an individual could source it. An organized group is not needed. CO 2 21:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to see some reasoning, backing up your claim that the group "does nothing to help the project". Sebi [talk] 22:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. This article was previously nominated not three days ago!! Seriously though, did you read the previous nomination, which ended in keep, withdrawn? Maybe it provides answers to your concerns. - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 22:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep — per the reasons pointed out in the previous nom. Seriously, CO, why delete a group that helps improve articles? Preposterous, really. -- Ag ü eybaná 22:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Speedy keep per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. Which only closed three days ago. Garion96 (talk) 22:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron
IMO, this "group" is a sly way of vote stacking. For example, under examples on the main page the group list articles it has saved, such as Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_July_14#Russophobia. This group does nothing to help the project. If it an article needs "rescued", then an individual could source it. An organized group is not needed. CO 2 21:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to see some reasoning, backing up your claim that the group "does nothing to help the project". Sebi [talk] 22:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. This article was previously nominated not three days ago!! Seriously though, did you read the previous nomination, which ended in keep, withdrawn? Maybe it provides answers to your concerns. - Mtmelendez ( Talk| UB| Home) 22:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep — per the reasons pointed out in the previous nom. Seriously, CO, why delete a group that helps improve articles? Preposterous, really. -- Ag ü eybaná 22:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.