Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Administrator abuse on Wikipedia


 * moved from afd page...

Conflict of interest
The peculiar nature of this AfD means that an unusually large number of participants in the discussion have a strong conflict of interest, which many have been honest enough to disclose. The closing admin should take note of this when tallying the votes. Those wishing to disclose their COI who have not done so already may do so below. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.111.116.162 (talk) 08:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The above comment posted by User:Mr. IP – Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)'

Way too many section breaks
Can we chill a bit on this? This is done for when the discussions reach truly epic proportions, and while this is getting somewhat lengthy, similar AfDs of this size would have perhaps 4, not 10. I may lop one or two out in a moment. Tarc (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that this has been fragmented a little bit too much.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  15:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Can some of the dialog be moved here?
It's becoming real difficult to look at the page with all the dialog that is there. Above the editor says there's too many section breaks which there is because of the long chatting going on. Some conversations there is useful but some isn't. I think if we moved them here it would make the page a lot easier to see what everyone is saying. Thoughts? -- Crohnie Gal Talk  10:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with moving some of the longer discussions here, go right ahead. Just be careful not to move anything directly relevant to the AfD, make sure it's kept in-context, and leave notes to indicate they have been moved.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  10:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I oppose moving any comments from the AfD page to here.  GregJackP    Boomer!  11:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It is common practice to either hat off-topic side discussions or move them to the AfD's talk page. Do you have a valid reason to oppose this, or i this just being obstinate for the sake of it? Tarc (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Since some comments have been deleted and an admin had to go back and restore them, since other editors comment have been edited where they had to go back and restore the original comments, I am concerned over what comments would be removed from an AfD. There are too many competing factions here - admins, some of whom may offended by the article, global warming/Connolley types (and to be honest, had I heard about Connolley before, he never would have been included - just to avoid side controversies), editors, etc.  I think that in this case the comments should remain where they were originally posted, not because of any bad faith on the part of any of those groups, but merely because there are so many competing interests - and moving them could cause further arguments / controversy from those whose comments are moved.  It is strictly to limit any further controversy and possible grounds for disputes since it seems like we already have plenty of both in this AfD.  And no, this is not being obsinate (please AGF) for the sake of argument.  Regards,   GregJackP    Boomer!  14:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Its deleted anyway it doesn't matter does it. Off2riorob (talk) 15:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL, no, at this point it seems to be moot, doesn't it?   GregJackP    Boomer!  16:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)