Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Karen O'Neil Ganci (2nd nomination)

Let's see here. There was a nomination. It passed as keep for everyone but the nom. Keeps were based on actually guidelines (namely WP:BIO). Now, we have a second nom, and three puppet delete "votes", with no real rationale, and an admin goes and deletes the article. Nothing in the second AFD, addressed the arguments of the first. No discussion of her reputation as an artist, which has been written about independently, and was established before participation in the show. The statement she is known for a single event is a flat out falsehood. In the first AFD, it was argued, she wasn't known sufficiently as an artist (but the nom, didn't explain this). In the second AFD, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON read the article to see she was an artist. Not one single person, mentioned this critical fact. What happened here, is the nom saw this article in the BB category, and nominated it without reading, and the "voters" saw this in the AFD list, and "voted" without reading it. This is very bad behavior. I care less about this article, than the fact we have people deleting articles they have not read. Now, people can make honest argument why this article should be deleted. But my point is that this article was deleted without anybody doing that. That's a true failure.

p.s. The admin, after deleting the article, put a redirect to a disambig page, not the relevant article. So, we know the admin was in such a rush, they didn't have 2 seconds to test a redirect. --Rob 06:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)