User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2023/July

Mathematics and statistics deletion dependencies
At WP:Articles for deletion/Mathematics and statistics had a Note to closer which said that the redirects to the deleted page should be kept (except for Mathematics and statistics (disambiguation)) and renommed at RfD. Checking with you if you will be doing that. Jay 💬 09:00, 4 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'll not be following up on that, but feel free to do so.  Sandstein   09:09, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The reason the Mathematics and statistics dab was created was because of the redirects and the RfD, and they are tightly connected. If you are not up to the follow ups, I would suggest you undo the close and have another admin do the needful. Jay  💬 09:13, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, no. Consensus in the AfD was to delete, and that's what I did. I did not find consensus in this AfD to do anything more involved in my function as closer. If there is editorial follow-up needed, that's outside the scope of AfD, and up to interested editors.  Sandstein   10:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Not here to comment on the scope of closing responsibilities, but I just wanted to say that I wish your close had discussed (and dismissed) redirecting as an WP:ATD, since it was a significant percentage of the discussion. Suriname0 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Suriname0, yes, it was discussed, but not to an extent I thought it warranted mention. In my view, there was consensus to delete the "dab" page, but either no consensus as to the usefulness of a redirect, or consensus against it.  Sandstein   06:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure, I agree with your conclusion and thanks for closing the AFD. Certainly there's nothing in WP:DGFA that says you have to mention any discussed alternatives to deletion. I just think it's nice when the closer explicitly affirms that discussed ATDs are not applicable. Suriname0 (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that a deleter is not accountable for any changes that happen directly as a result of the delete? You not only deleted the page under discussion, but also dependent pages Mathematics and statistics (disambiguation), Mathematics and Statistics, and MathematicsAndStatistics. The latter two did not have consensus for deletion at the discussion immediately prior to this AfD. G8 is expected to be uncontroversial, and excludes cases like Plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets. Do you know as the deleter, if there is a plausible target? Is it for you to figure this out through a RfD? Also see the discussion related to the RfD's close on why you may have G8-deleted some controversial redirects. Jay  💬 07:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * To reiterate, my job as closer is to determine and implement the consensus resulting from the AfD. Because I determined that the consensus was to delete the page, I did that, and I also deleted the redirects to the deleted page per WP:G8 as is standard. These actions can be contested at WP:DRV if you disagree with them. Any further actions are outside the scope of the AfD's outcome as I determined it.  Sandstein   09:23, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I haven't deleted pages at AfD yet, so I wouldn't know what is the standard for redirects to the deleted page. Can you point me to the guideline? If it is WP:Deletion guidelines for administrators point #7. Redirects to deleted pages should be deleted or redirected elsewhere to avoid broken redirects., how do you make the decision to delete vs redirect elsewhere? Unless you are saying that there is a standard to delete always. Jay  💬 06:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I normally delete all redirects because there is generally no suitable alternative target, or if there is, it would take more familiarity with the topic than a closer normally has to determine. This does not prevent interested editors from recreating any suitable redirects.  Sandstein   07:22, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It would be nice if someone, anyone, would undelete those redirects. We don't need yet another bureaucratic standoff. It seems that often the reluctance of admins to undo largely unimportant actions ends up wasting even more time.  J947  † edits 09:07, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I was involved in both the RfD and the AfD, hence it won't be me. Jay  💬 12:02, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Al Mashhad News
Hi, Sandstein. Thank you for closing Deletion review/Log/2023 July 4 as "Delete closure endorsed". I note that the page still exists, and I wonder whether that's intentional?—S Marshall T/C 18:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @S Marshall, thanks, now re-deleted.  Sandstein   19:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Unblocked
I have unblocked Tony1. See this. Bishonen &#124; tålk 18:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC).


 * As I said at AN, this is, in my view, an irresponsible course of action.  Sandstein   18:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks,

Additionally, I cannot emphasise enough that this is not personal - I don't personally have any strong views on your conduct generally. I simply want correct procedure to be clarified. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Most effective tactics available
I don't want to waste your time with DRV, and anyway, I know you can't click on all the links etc. But take a look at what I wrote there and GScholar results, and perhaps you could reconsider in so far as to make this a SOFTDELETE (history preserving) redirect instead? You know I am often a deletionist these days, so there's that too - I think this has some potential. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:54, 19 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @Piotrus, I have no objection to userfying the content if you think it could be useful somewhere, but please ask at WP:REFUND - I do not generally undelete deleted article content.  Sandstein   12:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Relevant essay: WP:SUPERVOTE. Let me remind you how the discussion went:
 * Initial pile up of delete votes.
 * Two people bring 8+ new sources to the table.
 * Technicalities on a few sources brought up by a single delete voter. Keep voter replies.
 * Closed with a "consensus" to delete. Kate the mochii (talk) 05:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Kate the mochii If you file a WP:DRV, please ping me. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Arbitration request declined
Hello Sandstein, I'm informing you that the Arbitration Committee has declined the above Sandstein request. Let me know if you have any questions. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 02:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Refund
Can you refund Kerala State Television Awards to Draft:Kerala State Television Awards? The Doom Patrol (talk) 12:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't undelete articles, but go ahead and ask at WP:REFUND.  Sandstein   13:56, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Unity engine category
Hi Sandstein. Today I was planning to create a category for games created with the Unity engine, to mirror the existing categories for Unreal Engine, Source Engine, PhyreEngine, GameMaker Studio, etc. However I noted that there was previously a category, which you nominated for deletion in 2021, which was successful. In that discussion, you said that if the request had been successful, you would be raising similar requests for the parent category and all the other subcategories. Have you done that, and what was the outcome? Personally I find it's wrong for all the other major engines to be able to have a category, but not Unity. It's like Wikipedia is discriminating against Unity, for some reason that's not clear to me. Kidburla (talk) 18:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @Kidburla, I haven't gotten around to it yet. Feel free to go ahead with it.  Sandstein   13:57, 26 July 2023 (UTC)