User talk:Mathmensch/Archives/2016/September

Deprodding of Impact of the privatisation of British Rail
I have removed the prod tag from Impact of the privatisation of British Rail, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Meters (talk) 18:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It's difficult to see how you could possibly thing that this would be an "uncontroversial deletion" when another editor was active on the article just minutes before you prodded it. Take it to AFD so other editors can weigh in on the issue. Meters (talk) 18:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You are right, on reconsidering the procedural rules. I will follow your suggestion.--Mathmensch (talk) 18:11, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't entirely clear. I should have said "Take it to AFD if you think this should be deleted so other..." I have not looked at the article and refs in enough detail yet to have made a decision about whether this is a suitable article. Meters (talk) 18:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Even in the case of limited clarity, I have a certain capacity to understand what was meant. Thank you.--Mathmensch (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI
In response to this post, I have posted this. -- Elektrik Fanne  15:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, Gravuritas has been unfriendly on several occasions. I hope that he will change his demeanor. --Mathmensch (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Rebuke regarding assuming good faith
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Talk:Impact of the privatisation of British Rail. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Muffled Pocketed  16:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you point to a difflink? --Mathmensch (talk) 16:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)