Hello, HappyMcSlappy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete theWikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit theTeahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try theTask Center.
Its not nonsense rational. A tag notability tag is added. That means someone is questioning the notability of the article. It is taken to AFD so that's the discussion. No consensus defaults to keep. Therefor there is no consensus that the article is not notable and so it should no longer be tagged. Imagine another tag is added (for example{{POV}} or any other neutrality template) and there is a discussion with no consensus reached. The tag would be removed in this case. You might disagree, but it is very clearly not nonsense.Aircorn(talk)17:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First off, you're just making up the justification for removing the tags. There is no policy, or even a precedent for that. You're also presenting your argument about the tags as if it's settled fact, when it's very clearly not. It's not a fact at all, just an argument.
Do you want the tags gone? So do I. So go discuss it on the talk page, where we can figure out a way to address the issues that they're calling out, instead of pretending that there's some procedural reason why we can't have them. Even if there was such a procedural reason enshrined in policy somewhere, it wouldn't matter, because the issues remain and the five pillars (includingWP:IAR) trump policies.Happy(Slap me)17:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. The following paragraph is not a threat in any way, but a fact for you to consider.
An editor was just indefinitely page-blocked from that page yesterday for removing those tags while three or more other editors were trying to get them to discuss it at talk.
Coming along and reinstating one of the reverts that just got a disruptive editor blocked from the page isn't helpful, especially when you haven't posted to the talk page at all about it. If you have an argument as to why there's no notability issues with the article and the editors who feel there is are wrong, I'm all ears. Really. The same is true if you have some additional sources or something else that might help establish his notability more clearly.
I'm not interested in arguments about procedural matters at all, but I'm really quite happy to discuss the issue of his actual notability, from whatever angle you'd like.Happy(Slap me)18:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
