Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of deaths by computer or video game


 * I've more clearly explained my reasoning for the deletion on my talkpage. -ZeroTalk 23:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It would be more useful if you explained it properly on the page where you request it's deletion. Still, it seems too much to ask for a real reason why you want it deleted. For great justice. 01:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * That's a little bit naughty. Why presume others are acting in bad faith merely because you precieve thier reasoning to be insufficient..? ZeroTalk 07:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not assuming bad faith, simply insufficient reasoning. There is no reason for deletion listed by the deleter on this page, and I have had no good reason given after repeated requests. Do you really think that it's too much to ask that someone list the reason for deletion on the afd page?! For great justice. 07:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I have explained my reasoning in full on my talkpage and here. Please assume good faith; I dislike constructing explanations more than once. -ZeroTalk 07:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm assuming good faith, but that doesn't make your 'explanations' make sense. Even when pieced together into complete, gramatical sentences with recognizable words, they don't make logical sense. I presume that's why you removed the rationale for deletion from the actual page? For great justice. 07:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've had enough.


 * Various people have explained thier reasoning as well I making a consise and sensical explanation per my talkpage. You have vehemently inquired others why thier viewpoints have made any sense, depicting others as if thier thought process is to be so bizzare as to be outrageous.


 * Second, I don't normally repost my explanations or messages on other pages. If you want me to do clarify something for you, please check for my response on my talkpage.


 * Finally, I still have absolutely no idea why you are intent on the disbarage of other people who merely disagree with you and the articles inclusion. You have not made yourself understood. And now when I construct a clear and concise description of what I believe sutible for deletion, you descend to personal insults and nonsensical semantics.


 * That's enough. Go and find someone else to attack about whatever it is you feel the need to become so aggressive about. -ZeroTalk 07:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have not attacked you personally. I have requested, in various ways, a rational, coherent explanation of why you think this should be deleted. You have not given one. You have not even posted ANYTHING on the afd page that makes any sense. Whenever you are asked, you insist angrily that you already have. I'm not being agressive, simply trying to understand what is motivating you. A fruitless task, it seems. For great justice. 08:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You know, I have no idea why you think I have not. If you don't know, then take a look at my talkpage. I have read all of my prior comments and I haven't been angry at all. There was an early implementation I spied amiss when I first nominated the article. Now you've amended some things, and that's lovely, but I still think this to be an canidate worthy for deletion. -ZeroTalk 08:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Most people think it's reasonable to put a consise, legible summary of why you want to delete something on the afd page, as required by deletion policy. I don't understand why you don't. Oh, wait! Yes I do! For great justice. 08:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)