User talk:Sandstein

I fully understand your decision given the scope of the debate, I came across it while doing some closes and ended up participating. Would you be willing to restore a copy of this to my userspace? I'd be happy to work on it with the editors who wished to keep it and conform it with NLIST, there's a lot of genuine good faith work there and the subject is unquestionably notable. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Goldsztajn, no objections on my part, but I generally don't undelete content - please see WP:REFUND or ask another admin. Sandstein 13:22, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jmabel has asked for a deletion review of Jason King (journalist). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 14:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is about the RfC you closed in 2017 (Talk:Turkey/Archive_27#RfC_Genocides).

There was a newer RfC that just concluded (Talk:Turkey#RfC_on_massacres_and_genocides_in_the_lead). It was previously closed as rough consensus by Voorts [1], reopened [2], and closed again by FOARP [3]. The newer RfC has multiple sources, including WP:Tertiary sources to assess WP:DUE.

The RfC you closed in 2017 was very problematic and I have several concerns:

• There were no sources whatsoever in the RfC
• The RfC was not worded neutrally. There was no "None" option
• It includes multiple blocked editors, including long-term abuse ones

Per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE: Closures will often be changed by the closing editor without a closure review: ... if significant additional information or context was left out of the discussion and the closer was not aware of it.

The reason I'm bringing this up is that I'm concerned about the WP:GAME implications of such a problematic RfC establishing consensus, while the newer RfC with reliable sources and lengthy debate based on sources was closed with no consensus. Per WP:ONUS, consensus is required for inclusion of new content.

I think the 2017 RfC not having any sources was a "significant additional information or context ... left out of the discussion". Can you please revise your 2017 RfC closure? Or can you advise in terms of WP:ONUS? Does the newer RfC invalidate the consensus of previous RfC? Bogazicili (talk) 14:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I have no recollection whatsoever of that 2017 RFC that I closed, nor am I familiar with the newer RFC or for that matter with the topic itself or its developments. But at any rate, a review of the 2017 RFC is in my view pointless when we have a newer RFC that establishes current consensus (or, as the case may be, lack thereof) about the question at issue. I therefore decline to review my 2017 closure or to provide further advice. Sandstein 15:26, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks I followed up in WP:AN Bogazicili (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Bogazicili (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I know I'm three years late, but I just noticed that you deleted List of international goals scored by Vivian Woodward even though its discussion had only three deletes (mellohi!, Presidentman, and Otr500) against four keeps (Das osmnezz, Frank Anchor, GiantSnowman, and ChrisTheDude), plus one redirect (Sjakkalle)... Perhaps you just didn't notice the keeps from Snowman and Anchor due to their awkward position.

Is it too late to request an undeletion or perhaps have another discussion? Barr Theo (talk) 00:30, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Barr Theo, AfDs are not votes and are closed taking into account the strength of the arguments submitted, in light of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I therefore decline to alter the closure or to undelete the article. Sandstein 14:49, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am contacting you because I placed an undeletion request WP:REFUND for Liberty Justice Center, which you closed as delete in 2018. At that time, I think your close was the right thing to do. The AfD had several delete !votes, and one Keep !vote. I regularly participate in AfDs and am very familiar with the process.

In this case, the article in question has had many new reliable sources published in a variety of media and news publications since, and so I would like for the article to be undeleted, or at least moved to the draft space, and I can work on it from there and resubmit for review and publishing. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:39, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn, as now noted at REFUND, I do not object to a restoration to draftspace or userspace, but I do not perform such undeletions myself. Iljhgtn, you should seek to improve the article in draftspace and to submit it to WP:AFC. Sandstein 14:47, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you and me both responded at all three locations. Sorry about that. I guess it is silly for me to ask again here, but whom should I ask about the undeletion then so that I can work on it in the draft space once there? Please feel free to ping and respond to me in only one location, whichever of the three you choose, and I will do the same going forward. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:01, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn, you can ask any other admin, or at REFUND. Sandstein 17:14, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]