2009/9/9 Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com>om>: Nope. Again, no blame, no drama (but be prepared to fix the article). - d.

2009/9/9 Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com>om>: I believe the "no need to nag" came from speedy patrollers complaining that thinking about their hasty decisions would mean they couldn't think about them fast enough - i.e., that speedies generally *are not* considered actions. Treating them as such would lead to over-defending them, i.e. drama. - d.

2009/9/9 Emily Monroe <bluecaliocean(a)me.com>om>: Go more slowly, is all I can suggest ;-p Do take heart that anyone who's read large chunks of Special:Newpages will fully concur on the absolute necessity of knifing lots and lots of babies. - d.

Good thing you clarified. I actually interpreted what you said previously literally for a second. Well, actually, for more than a second. :-) Emily On Sep 9, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Carcharoth wrote:

Carcharoth wrote: Someone else probably caught this, but anything which has been deleted out of process can be restored by any other admin. Sure, you can ask the other admin, probably best if you want to avoid wheel wars, but there's no harm in restoring first and then asking. Anything which is deleted due to Office actions or whatever we're calling it now should say so quite clearly with something like "Beware: Tigers", so if there are no warnings about Tigers, and you can't for the life of it work out how that was deleted as such, if it bothers you and you think it belongs on Wikipedia , just restore it or tap an admin up to. There's a category of admins willing to restore stuff.

geni wrote: I seem to have been snipped of the context where I mention that one should contact the deleting admin. But it is not inadvisable to make the wrong decision, we have a whole swathe of guidelines that make that very point. It would be inadvisable to escalate the situation if you do make the wrong decision, but nothing bad is going to happen if you restore article X, drop admin Y a note saying I restored this because you deleted as such and I don't agree to the point that I restored it, and admin Y says, but did you consider this? At this point, most level headed admins, (and do we want any other sort), are going to consider and then either say, well, why didn't you say so in the first place, and delete the article all over again, or they're going to say, well that still doesn't justify deletion, so what do you want to do now? I find it very hard to imagine a situation where it would be inadvisable to make the wrong decision. I have even seen the main page deleted and nothing come of it but good laughs all around. That's because no-one escalated the situation and everyone adopted a tone of mea culpa. Compare and contrast the attempt to delete votes for deletion. What's that old song... "It ain't what you do it's the way that you do it."

On 9/10/09, Surreptitiousness <surreptitious.wikipedian(a)googlemail.com> wrote: "Out of process deletion" isn't a valid reason to restore. "Good for the encyclopedia" is.