Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Congregational Churches in Leicester

{{ping|Djflem}} I agree that the discussions in the collapsibles ({{diff2|935728854|reverted here}}) were very relevant. For the sake of readability, I added the collapsibles due to the length and lack of visual separation across topics. If anything, I think that the bright green headers make it easier for another editor (and for us) to find those relevant discussions (as well as the ones not in the collapsibles) and their context than right now in the current sea of text. Would you consider keeping them in?

By all means, you have a right to say no. — MarkH₂₁^talk 10:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

:{{ping|Djflem}} Particularly with all of the outdents, the discussion is quite difficult to visually navigate without some kind of sectioning. — MarkH₂₁^talk 10:49, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

NOTE:This [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Congregational_Churches_in_Leicester&diff=936960349&oldid=936694563AfD was closed as Keep] on 22 January 2020, but was reverted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:John_M_Wolfson&diff=next&oldid=937061944 following a request by the nominator].Djflem (talk) 10:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

::NOTE: related AFDs have been opened:

::*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methodist Churches in Leicester, opened 8 January by User:Jerodlycett and closed as delete 18 January by User:Sandstein, a decision overturned by deletion review, but with statement that a new AFD would be fine on 29 January, with page restored by :User:Jo-Jo Eumerus

::::It was followed by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methodist churches in Leicester, opened 30 January, which is ongoing as of 12 February closed as draftify/move to draft as of February 22, 2020 (see below note).

:::::It's worth making a note to the closing administrator that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methodist churches in Leicester, which bears almost identical similarities to this article, closed as draftify/move to draft for the reason(s) similarly noted below.

::*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Baptist churches in Leicester, opened 12 January by User:MarkH21

::*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Congregational Churches in Leicester, opened 12 January by User:MarkH21

::--Doncram (talk) 05:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC) (updated 07:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC))

If indeed this AfD is going to include the results of other AfD, the history of closure and reversion are clearly relevant.Djflem (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

:The article now has two of the same notice thanks to your {{diff2|942551112|anachronistic and redundant bludgeoning of your note at the top of the AfD}}. It is also perfectly acceptable to revert or move talk page comments when they are inappropriately placed against common procedure, as others (including admins) have already done to multiple of your other comments.{{pb}} Also, really? {{tq|Do not... nor instruct editors what they can & cannot do}} Are you just going to blatantly not hear anything?— MarkH₂₁^talk 10:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

:::Why did you choose to edit another's work, and move it, and tuck it away in off-topic section as you attempted, if you didn't want it twice?Djflem (talk) 19:27, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

::I concurr with {{u|MarkH21}}; that statement that previous AfD closed as "keep" is not relevant at all; the AfD did not close as "keep." It closed as whatever it closed as, or not. Your statement is misleading, {{u|Djflem}}, and I would kindly request that you self-revert it. Doug Mehus T·C 12:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

:::The note is a simple statement of fact of the history of THIS AfD placed in the appropriately place since it is certainly relevant to this AfD, certainly much more-so than this unsigned, un-date-stamped [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Congregational_Churches_in_Leicester&diff=942092737&oldid=942067724 edit about the history of ANOTHER AfD], in section where it appears such notes are kept Djflem (talk) 19:27, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

::::And there are now two of your same note here Djflem. One at the top signed by you and one a few lines below it (with a slightly more accurate description of what happened) that I timestamped but did not sign for you. — MarkH₂₁^talk 19:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

:::::I added one note, which I signed & timestamped, in the appropriate section about the status history of this and two other AfDs. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Congregational_Churches_in_Leicester&diff=942548695&oldid=942547444 Do as you see fit with your additions]. It very wise of you not to sign my name to your edits. Djflem (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

::::::It's a modification of your initially non-neutral unsigned untimestamped note. You're being disruptive in putting your comments wherever you want, refusing to listen to discussion from other editors, and continuing to not hear anything. — MarkH₂₁^talk 22:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)