Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gadugi (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Keep. HappyCamper 20:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Gadugi
Previous AfD-discussion can be found here. The reason for the previous nomination seems to have been only the frustration experienced by user:Gadugi concerning his relations to other Wikipedia editors. That the article is about a term in Cherokee which seems to have no relevance in Engolish seems to have been completely overlooked in the last nomination and, well, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. If this is a central concept of Cherokee culture, then merge the relevant information. Other than that it's an obvious delete. Peter Isotalo 21:37, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. / Peter Isotalo 22:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Renomination moved to separate page. --cesarb 00:00, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep &mdash; Renomination made on the same day previous discussion was closed. --cesarb 00:00, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * First Gadugi bad-faith-nominates his own article and almost everyone votes to auto-keep. Now I'm trying to nominate it for a valid reason and you're trying to shut it down on account of a technicality. And on top of this you screw up my linking to the old nomination. What's wrong with you guys? Do you even care about the articles, or is the process the only thing that matters here? / Peter Isotalo 02:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * That's AFD for you. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 11:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot to fix the link to the previous nomination. New nominations should always be in a separate page to avoid confusion, because the previous nomination is still linked to from the previous log (and should be kept that way). Even if you think the voters' reasons were completely bogus, relisting before even 24 hours have passed is not appropriate. I could have simply reverted, but decided to give you the benefit of doubt; but please do not do that again. --cesarb 14:00, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * You're genereous because you engage in only mild rules lawyering? Well, I'll grant you your wish then and withdraw the nomination. Just please don't ever show this kind of generosity towards me again. / Peter Isotalo 22:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to be an important notable concept to Cherokee culture (and one that was intended to be central to Wikipedia Culture oh, did I say that out loud?) Merge with Cherokee ranks much higher than deletion for me. WCFrancis 04:03, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep' Afd already passed. Karmosin is suffering a hissy fit because he did not get his way in previous sections.  This type of action evidences disruption of my work since I have to waste yet more time dealing with immature and childish issues rather than writing articles.  Gadugi 07:07, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak delete It's still a dictdef. Could be merged to Cherokee probably.  Grue   05:54, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not a dictdef nor does it meet the views of a dictdef since it now contains encyclopedia content. I suppose to some people every problem looks like a nail when all you have is a hammer. Gadugi 05:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 *  Weak keep. This has a whiff of OR, but I don't know enough about the subject to even begin looking into it. Can anyone verify or source this? - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 11:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 * References added as requested. Current and Historical Definitions. 67.177.35.211 11:46, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Appreciated, and my vote is amended to reflect the update. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 02:10, 26 September 2005 (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 article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.