Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Sons of Norway Building (Minneapolis, Minnesota)

removal of an editor's comment
I just removed an editor's comment and vote in this AFD. The comment and vote happen to disagree with my opinon and vote in the AFD, but I don't particularly care about the AFD or its outcome. I doubt my comment or this other editor's comment will change the ultimate outcome, but the other editor's comment does have the appearance of disrupting wikipedia in violation of an explicit agreement by that editor to refrain from such. Specifically, the editor made a public agreement in an ANI proceeding to refrain from following my edits and contesting them for a 30 day period, not yet expired. It has been a great vacation from a horrible history of about 5 years of hateful wiki-harassment. The edit here appears to violate that agreement. I don't care if the editor wants now to claim that they followed Elkman's edit rather than my edit, or found their way here some other way. I won't battle to keep the stupid comment out, if the editor refuses to have the decency to admit their error. -- do ncr  am  20:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The "editor" that Doncram refers to is me. My deleted comment said:
 * Delete. Article neither asserts notability nor establishes it. The two sources cited, a "contact addresses" page on the Sons of Norway website and a Foursquare page, are a far cry from the kind of coverage needed for the general notability guideline. --Orlady (talk) 19:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The agreement that Doncram refers to is at Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive761 ("evil" being a word that Doncram had used to describe me). The arrangement that Cbl62 proposed, and that Doncram, SarekOfVulcan, and I agreed to on 20 July, is as follows:
 * I hate to see Wikipedia lose doncram, who is an incredibly hard-working editor, with yet another block. I don't see him reacting with similar venom except toward Orlady and Sarek. Given the past history, any criticism he receives from Sarek and Orlady is received with extreme sensitivity. I'd like to see a solution where the involved parties dis-engage for a time. If doncram, Sarek, and Orlady would be willing to agree to this, I would be willing to commit that I will personally review all of doncram's work over the next 30 days (doing so at least twice a week) if they will step away during that time. If there are problems, I will either fix them or discuss them with doncram or bring them to a larger group at the NRHP project. If I miss something that Orlady or Sarek find troubling, they can discuss it with me.
 * I fail to see that my commenting on an AfD that another user started for an article that Doncram created violated this agreement. However, since the deletion of my AfD comment is something that I find troubling, I will go tell Cbl62 about it. --Orlady (talk) 01:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. -- do ncr  am  11:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)