| Revision as of 21:44, 7 December 2006 editTawker (talk | contribs)Administrators18,670 edits make things clear← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:58, 8 December 2006 edit undoMbelisle (talk | contribs)168 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| ==Note== | ==Note== | ||
| If anyone has any ] to bring to light on this issue, please do so, this page is now sprotected. Open discussion is not a bad thing (it's a good thing), just try to avoid making this into a revert war page (that doesn't work) -- ] 21:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC) | If anyone has any ] to bring to light on this issue, please do so, this page is now sprotected. Open discussion is not a bad thing (it's a good thing), just try to avoid making this into a revert war page (that doesn't work) -- ] 21:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :I don't agree that the article should be censored from existence as a way to address the sources issue. Although I just walked in here and saw the bullet holes in the wall and shells dusting the floor, the group is mentioned on the ] and they are well-known (but generally despised) on Slashdot, so I would think the existence of an article (even though sourcing may be a challenge) is more fair than saying, ”No, Misplaced Pages does not like the GNAA you will not get info about them here.” | |||
| :Furthermore, in tallying the votes on the 1-day-long deletion review, I count 20 for keep, 14 delete, 1 Merge, and 2 Neutral. The speedy deletion (of an an article that wasn't nominated for speedy deletion) without consensus and subsequent protection looks like a unilateral effort of someone with an ax to grind. ] 11:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:58, 8 December 2006
Note
If anyone has any reliable sources to bring to light on this issue, please do so, this page is now sprotected. Open discussion is not a bad thing (it's a good thing), just try to avoid making this into a revert war page (that doesn't work) -- Tawker 21:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- I don't agree that the article should be censored from existence as a way to address the sources issue. Although I just walked in here and saw the bullet holes in the wall and shells dusting the floor, the group is mentioned on the list of notable troll organizations and they are well-known (but generally despised) on Slashdot, so I would think the existence of an article (even though sourcing may be a challenge) is more fair than saying, ”No, Misplaced Pages does not like the GNAA you will not get info about them here.”
- Furthermore, in tallying the votes on the 1-day-long deletion review, I count 20 for keep, 14 delete, 1 Merge, and 2 Neutral. The speedy deletion (of an an article that wasn't nominated for speedy deletion) without consensus and subsequent protection looks like a unilateral effort of someone with an ax to grind. Mbelisle 11:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)