- )
The no consensus interpretation of the outcome was a misguided decision by non-admin refused to discuss the issue. -- damiens.rf 13:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC) [reply- Relist so an admin can correctly close it. Per
WP:NACD, non-admins should not be making close calls. This issue has been an all-too-common problem with SSTflyer. It's been brought up several times and she never engages in conversation every time it's brought up. -- Tavix (talk) 14:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
WP:BADNAC doesn't mention close calls, which is of course perfectly correct; there are non-admins I'd happily trust with a close call, and admins who aren't fit to make them. "No consensus" was the correct outcome. But a failure to discuss or explain the close on request is simply inexcusable. Overturn for someone who's willing to talk to re-close in exactly the same way.— S Marshall T/C 17:03, 22 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
- My apologies, I used the wrong shortcut.
WP:NACD says Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins. -- Tavix (talk) 17:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
- That could have been either a delete or a NC--both would be reasonable. I've no problems with a NAC here (and have reasonable faith in this closer in particular), but not responding after 3 days while continuing to edit is a problem. If the closer doesn't respond shortly, I'd recommend a "reopen". Also, as always, an uninvolved admin could reclose also. Hobit (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Vacate close. I probably would have closed this as delete. NC really seems like a stretch. I have no problem with the NAC aspect, but I have a lot of problem with the refusal to discuss it on her talk page. You don't have to agree to every request, but at least acknowledge that you saw the request and considered it. To say nothing is just wrong. I'm not sure the NC closure by itself is enough to make me argue to vacate (it's pretty close, though), but that combined with the refusal to discuss it certainly is. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Relist/reclose - Aside from no quorum scenarios, non-admins should almost never be closing deletion discussions they judge it to be no consensus which
close call". Not discussing it makes it worse, but it would be a reasonable objection either way. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
- Admin note: I've undone SSTflyer's own closure, as "relisted", of this DRV request. Obviously, editors whose decisions are being reviewed here are not supposed to close the review discussion. I think we need to consider community sanctions to prevent SSTflyer from making more AfD closures, as I've now seen several of their closures, here and elsewhere, that looked very problematic. I'm leaving it to others to (re-)close the AfD, which SSTflyer reopened and relisted for a third time. Sandstein 08:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- While this is still open, I'll add that I would wholeheartedly support a topic ban on
SSTflyer from closing discussions. This has gone on way too long. -- Tavix (talk) 20:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
- Start a discussion somewhere then, I don't think this is the right place, though I'm not sure where would be the right place.
WP:ANI I guess? For the record, I've seen almost entirely good closes from this user, but I've not reviewed everything. So I'd strongly recommend coming with some idea of what closes you see as problematic and an idea what % of closes that is. Hobit ( talk) 22:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC) [reply
- Oh, I'm aware. I just don't have time for that right now. Just trying to gauge it while we're all here. -- Tavix (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Bureaucracy is bureaucracy. For some reason I missed the message on my talk page. Following a request for one of my closures to be reverted is entirely appropriate. My closure was inaccurate, I acknowledged it and reversed it, case closed. I have closed 600+ AfD discussions, naturally some are going to be contested by other users.
flyer 05:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC) [reply ]
|
