Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Mikie Da Poet

Disputed use of templates
The problem with these Delrevafd templates is that they make false statements. The templates say "This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Deletion review on..." That statement is false. This discussion was not listed at deletion review; rather, it was a speedy deletion decision that was being reviewed in each review, not this 2006 AfD. The purpose of Delrevafd is to notify users that the discussion on which the template is posted ("this discussion") is being reviewed. I don't have a problem with subsequent deletion reviews for articles of the same title being listed here in some way, but it must be done in a way that does not produce a misleading statement, and not with a template that it designed for a different, important purpose. --Bsherr (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * In reviewing the history, it is conceivable in this case that the deletion reviews could be construed as appeals of the 2006 discussion, so I've reverted my reversion for this instance. --Bsherr (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * (ec) The first one at least seems reasonable to link as is. People explicitly endorsed this XfD.  I have no problem creating the distinction Bsherr wants, it is quite reasonable.  Additionally, I think these templates need to be at the bottom; they are not more important than the close or the discussion.  Probably, only a DRV that results in "overturn" belongs at the top.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2011 (UTC)