This occured to me recently - wouldn't it make a lot of sense to lower
the threshold to 50% for a successful undeletion of speedies? I'm all
for keeping the 75% threshold for stuff deleted via *fd, since *fd
deletions require consensus to achieve, it makes sense to require a high
standard to overturn that decision, however if an article has been
speedied (ie the deletion judgment was made by one admin, rather than a
discussion on *fd), and 60% of people think that it shouldn't have been,
surely there is something wrong there.
Sure, I know that voting is evil, Wikipedia is not a democracy and so
on, but shouldn't speedies (or, to be more precise, an individual
admin's interpretation of whether a page meets the speedy deletion
criteria) which are not subject to any community scrutiny be easier to
overturn than *fd votes, which are?
Cynical