MisterGoodTime

Nomination of ISO_259-3 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ISO_259-3 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ISO_259-3 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ISO 259-3

Sorry, but you can't just reopen an AfD by yourself. Not even admins can do that. If you have any complaints about the decision, you should ask Black Kite on their talk page, and if that fails to give a conclusion you are happy with you can always take it to deletion review. Be aware, though, that you can still merge content to the Uzzi Ornan article as well as the ISO 259 article - all the decision does is specify where the redirect will point to. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the clarification on both the rules for deletion review and the scope of the decision. You saved me from initiating a misguided review process. Cheers!

MisterGoodTime (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

This is fine with me. There's a part of me that wants to maximize the number of leaves on the Wikipedia tree, for better search performance, rather than having to dig into the text of the foliage. Perhaps I'm a "redirectionist". htom (talk) 17:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)