| Revision as of 16:40, 24 September 2022 edit45.136.197.235 (talk) →Cyber Anakin restore← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:42, 24 September 2022 edit undoSideswipe9th (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers11,284 edits →Cyber Anakin restore: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| :There is really no indication that the section he had removed is problematic at all. For instance, ] is a pretty reliable source as established in https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_329#RfC%3A_Taiwan_News. In other words, he was whacking up the molehill and you should be smart not to do that. Regardless, I will temporarily self-revert, and put up an short ad hoc discussion with an administrator, which is essentially a "third opinion" route since according to the original deleter's edit contributions, he was verging on being a tendentious editor and arguing with him may become a net disruptive instead. ] (]) 16:40, 24 September 2022 (UTC) | :There is really no indication that the section he had removed is problematic at all. For instance, ] is a pretty reliable source as established in https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_329#RfC%3A_Taiwan_News. In other words, he was whacking up the molehill and you should be smart not to do that. Regardless, I will temporarily self-revert, and put up an short ad hoc discussion with an administrator, which is essentially a "third opinion" route since according to the original deleter's edit contributions, he was verging on being a tendentious editor and arguing with him may become a net disruptive instead. ] (]) 16:40, 24 September 2022 (UTC) | ||
| ::Thanks. If you could ping me (you can use the {{t|re}} template for that) to that discussion or stick a notice on my talk page with a link to where you've raised it, I'd appreciate it. ] (]) 16:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:42, 24 September 2022
Cyber Anakin restore
Please self revert this edit. This is a completely improper restoration per WP:BLPRESTORE, which quite clearly states When material about living persons has been deleted on good-faith BLP objections, any editor wishing to add, restore, or undelete it must ensure it complies with Misplaced Pages's content policies. If it is to be restored without significant change, consensus must be obtained first.
Emphasis mine. Sideswipe9th (talk) 16:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
- There is really no indication that the section he had removed is problematic at all. For instance, Taiwan News is a pretty reliable source as established in https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_329#RfC%3A_Taiwan_News. In other words, he was whacking up the molehill and you should be smart not to do that. Regardless, I will temporarily self-revert, and put up an short ad hoc discussion with an administrator, which is essentially a "third opinion" route since according to the original deleter's edit contributions, he was verging on being a tendentious editor and arguing with him may become a net disruptive instead. 45.136.197.235 (talk) 16:40, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. If you could ping me (you can use the {{re}} template for that) to that discussion or stick a notice on my talk page with a link to where you've raised it, I'd appreciate it. Sideswipe9th (talk) 16:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)