The result of the discussion was: keep. ‑Scottywong | babble _ 07:22, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Short reason: This happens more often than not. A successful RFA or RFB is rare NOT to gain the support of over 100 people as it looks today. Perhaps it was rarer in the previous days of WP, but as far as I see it this article is nothing but a
bragging ground of
redundant information and
statistics without substantial meaning, which can anyway be easily be accessed on
this page.
I am also aware of
Category:Times that large groups of Wikipedians supported something which contains a lot of similar articles. I have only briefly looked through them and some display the same redundancy while others are legitimate mentions of unique events, and I think they should be considered individually. This article, however, got to go since it serves no purpose but to document common and regular events.
Gaioa (
T
C
L) 09:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was: keep. ‑Scottywong | babble _ 07:22, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Short reason: This happens more often than not. A successful RFA or RFB is rare NOT to gain the support of over 100 people as it looks today. Perhaps it was rarer in the previous days of WP, but as far as I see it this article is nothing but a
bragging ground of
redundant information and
statistics without substantial meaning, which can anyway be easily be accessed on
this page.
I am also aware of
Category:Times that large groups of Wikipedians supported something which contains a lot of similar articles. I have only briefly looked through them and some display the same redundancy while others are legitimate mentions of unique events, and I think they should be considered individually. This article, however, got to go since it serves no purpose but to document common and regular events.
Gaioa (
T
C
L) 09:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)