Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|
Deletion review (DRV) is for reviewing speedy deletions and outcomes of deletion discussions. This includes appeals to delete pages kept after a prior...
Click to read more »BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC Contribute — Share this PDF download E-mail Mastodon LinkedIn Facebook X (Twitter) Bluesky Reddit By Michael Snow Ongoing...
Click to read more »Shortcut WP:DRV/LWP:DRV/L The following is the site map for Wikipedia:Deletion review Undeletion policy Discussions Content review Contested prod History...
Click to read more »21:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC) As of time of nomination, this page ONLY lists DRVs that I started and omits the many others the users participated in that I...
Click to read more »The default for RESULT is "Decision endorsed". Both {{DRV top}} (shortcut: {{drt}}) and {{DRV bottom}} (shortcut: {{drb}}) need to be substituted for...
Click to read more »of the DRV, if you read the decision. WarpstarRider 05:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC) Comment The single source didn't show up until the end of the DRV discussion...
Click to read more »Currently this covers DRVs between 16 August 2008 and 18 January 2009. There are also some articles listed here that never went to DRV, and were restored...
Click to read more »the primary purpose of Deletion Review, and they should be considered at DRV, but they are not what this essay is about. The second reason is requests...
Click to read more »WP:AN#Review of DRV supervotes by King of Hearts. Sandstein 17:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC) Note: The above closure is under review at WP:AN#Review of DRV supervotes...
Click to read more »ShareAlike 2.5 license for use on Wikipedia and elsewhere. Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »about getting the DRV going if you're serious about that. GetDumb 07:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC) I've spent more than enough time at DRV lately rescuing other...
Click to read more »should nonetheless have been deleted. This overlooks the real purpose of the DRV, which is to challenge what is believed to be a closing administrator's poor...
Click to read more »what an AfD contributor described as a "mercenary sockfarm". See the 2026 DRV. Promotional article about a company that has been repeatedly recreated....
Click to read more »February DRV [7] after receiving a complaint regarding the DRV close from JoshuaZ [8]. On 18 February 2008, administrator Kurykh closed the 13 February DRV as...
Click to read more »delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) This page was taken to DRV with a result of userfying. No discussion about bringing it to the mainspace...
Click to read more »WP:AN#Review of DRV supervotes by King of Hearts. Sandstein 17:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC) Note: The above closure is under review at WP:AN#Review of DRV supervotes...
Click to read more »was Speedy Close, at DRV already, pending DRV outcome. You can't have it both ways, if you want to relist now, withdraw the DRV and wait a decent time...
Click to read more »created the article discussed in this DRV, which is called State of Georgia v. Allison, a few days after the DRV was closed. In accordance with the consensus...
Click to read more »shop. The purpose of DRV is to decide whether we undelete it, or relist it, - and DRV was then clearly saying 'no' I re-opened the DRV [2], closed the AfD...
Click to read more »there are no references available to source it. In any case, a larger AfD/DRV/policy discussion about lists of destinations is currently ongoing, you know...
Click to read more »WP:DRV Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): WT:DRV#DRV bot request Edit period(s): Hourly Estimated number of pages affected: WP:DRV and...
Click to read more »Firstly, DRV is not the place to go to reverse merge or redirect closes at XfD. Raising such a DRV is simply going to waste your time as the DRV will be...
Click to read more »deleted at AfD, denied recreation at DRV, denied recreation at DRV again and denied recreation and salted at DRV a third time. This article was presented...
Click to read more »contentious Chinese Apartheid DRV cited below. (Xoloz did not mince words about the inappropriate rhetoric in that DRV either). Second, I believe the...
Click to read more »WP:DRV. The Mediation Cabal can try to help you work out your differences with the deleting admin, but the point may be moot: the result of that DRV will...
Click to read more »made to this page. The result was Keep per DRV. (aeropagitica) (talk) 11:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC) A DRV consensus overturned the previous deletion...
Click to read more »2018 (UTC) Following the XfD link at the DRV, this DRV was submitted after AfD #1. AfD #1 was followed by a DRV then by AfD #2 and AfD #3 and now we are...
Click to read more »Admins noticeboard May 31 Admins noticeboard June 1 Admins noticeboard June 2 DRV There has been a growing disregard by admins for each others' actions, leading...
Click to read more »August 2007 HisSpaceResearch opens a DRV [2] 18:26, 14 August 2007 HisSpaceResearch notifes Alkivar of the DRV [3] 18:40, 14 August 2007 Georgewilliamherbert (talk ·...
Click to read more »AfD in July. A DRV consensus overturned this deletion in light of new sources providing verifiability. For the sources, please see the DRV before commenting...
Click to read more »This was noticed by several Norwegian newspapers. Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »"bring in" the DRV, and now the DRV discussion has moved to the rule of law. It is a legitimate question as to why both the AfD and DRV processes continued...
Click to read more »2006 (UTC) A DRV consensus determined that the previous outcome of an AfD discussion on this article was improper. Although a majority at DRV favored outright...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result was delete. This should be at DRV. AFD cannot review a G4 Spartaz Humbug! 20:13, 21 December 2014 (UTC) AfDs...
Click to read more »MFD on DRV" (random example) 00:22, 30 May 2007 User talk:White Cat (Cool Cat MFD on DRV) 00:21, 30 May 2007 User talk:Neil (Cool Cat MFD on DRV) 00:19...
Click to read more »making a joke deletion review. This page accepts joke DRVs for joke or serious pages. Serious DRVs (for joke or serious pages) should instead go to Wikipedia:Deletion...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) – (View log) Previously speedy deleted as spam. While on DRV, where all opinions were to endorse the deletion, the article was recreated...
Click to read more »collateral article in this AfD. DRV overturned, in light of new evidence presented at the DRV. Please consult the DRV before commenting here. This is...
Click to read more »DELETE DRV may have reversed the previous A7 speedy. I believe the deleting admin indicated he didn't mind. However, a number of editors in the DRV debate...
Click to read more »ArkyBot (task request) and Byrialbot (task request). Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »being relisted, and DRV is for reviewing any AfD closure. If you thought the closure was incorrect, you should have taken it to DRV and that discussion...
Click to read more »(delete) – (View log) Procedural nomination from DRV. Originally speedily deleted as CSD A7, listed on DRV and then recreated. Article is somewhat promotional...
Click to read more »interpretation of the DRV. They and I disagree as to what the DRV concluded, and the DRV closer wasn't clear on that, but I thought the DRV meant to restore...
Click to read more »it is therefore very difficult to properly judge speedy deletions. This DRV is a great example of where it would have been useful, though I trust the...
Click to read more »undeleting the article was a suitable, considering there was an ongoing DRV. I wasn't wheel warring. I would also like to note that ignoring this incident...
Click to read more »at DRV; so it would be appropriate for you to make a decision explicitly pointing all deletions to DRV. You can do so with every confidence that DRV will...
Click to read more »result was speedy Inappropriate while DRV is underway. It is inappropriate to start an AfD discussion while the DRV is still underway. -- RoySmith (talk)...
Click to read more »as noted in both the DRV submission and closure. NHN vehemently defended his closure. The assertion was also made in the DRV by some users that there...
Click to read more »version be created so it could be considered. Several contributors to the DRV believe this is sufficient to establish notability (personally I am not persuaded...
Click to read more »^demon[omg plz] 17:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC) DRV overturns to delete. (NB: As a commenter below, I didn't close the DRV; I'm just noting it.) Xoloz 15:03, 28...
Click to read more »Machinima/Deletion|list of machinima deletions]]. ~~~~</span> Proposed deletion and speedy deletion: none currently Deletion debates (AfD, DRV, etc.): none currently...
Click to read more »bandit). Many of his deletions are upheld at DRV improperly, as detailed below, but many are not. Also see his DRV commentary, where he's often likely to endorse...
Click to read more »(UTC) A DRV consensus concluded that the previous AfD deletion of this article should be overturned in light of new evidence. Please consult the DRV to examine...
Click to read more »(UTC) Speedy Close, until the DRV has been closed. Naconkantari 00:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC) The DRV, as with all DRVs, is an absurd joke that should...
Click to read more »2011 (UTC) WP:STALEDRAFT. Article recreation has been repeatedly denied at DRV and a redirect is in place which appears unlikely to change. Stifle (talk)...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result was no consensus. Recommend DRV for the original discussion. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18...
Click to read more »isn't an attack piece, and her original name should have been salted at DRV. If there is a way forward here that's not deletion, it would be to create...
Click to read more »individual editors or shelve the case as necessary. Users 1-3 voted on WP:DRV/PGNx Media, which influenced the outcome, and the case is now relisted at...
Click to read more »of the DRV participants (11/19) argued for "overturn and delete/redirect" with another arguing to overturn and either redirect or relist. The DRV nom outlined...
Click to read more »underwent an AfD which was closed as delete by Drini, but overturned on DRV by Xoloz. The resulting AfD was then speedily closed by thebainer. Badlydrawnjeff...
Click to read more »Exercise 5 Exercise 6 Exercise 7 Exercise 8 Exercise 9 DRV DRV Exercise 1 DRV Exercise 2 DRV Exercise 3 DRV Exercise 4 Nishkid64's other blocking situations...
Click to read more »was originally speedy-deleted as a CSD A7. DRV restored the article in light of new sources, given at the DRV. Still, weak delete given continued notability...
Click to read more »or culture, but from the recent AFD on GNAA and its strong endorsement on DRV it should be clear that it's not in fact an important part of history anywhere...
Click to read more »as a G4 repost from this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned in light of new evidence of notability, for which see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting...
Click to read more »effort to promote the DRV - Doc reopened the DRV, closed the AfD, and deleted at the same time and MD deleted and recreated with the DRV notice. Geni made...
Click to read more »underwent an AfD which was closed as delete by Drini, but overturned on DRV by Xoloz. The resulting AfD was then speedily closed by thebainer. Badlydrawnjeff...
Click to read more »the first AfD, I see no point in keeping this open. Please take this to WP:DRV. — Nearly Headless Nick 16:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC) You must allow the...
Click to read more »19:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC) A DRV consensus overturned the previous "keep" closure of this article at this AfD. The DRV showed support for redirecting...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was speedy keep as this went through DRV only one month ago. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC) AfDs...
Click to read more »edit · rewrite) from [1] via fr:Voie des pionniers. See also the AFD and DRV. —Cryptic 00:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC) Issue resolved. -- Sandstein 11:31...
Click to read more »closer is sufficiently experienced at DRV to make that call. (Hint: if you are not sure that you have enough DRV experience then you don't.) An objection...
Click to read more »05:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC) The article was actually deleted [1] , went to DRV and the deletion was upheld [2]. Then usefied for JJB, who has stopped editing...
Click to read more »improving the encyclopedia as our ultimate goal. From our work together at DRV, I've come to admire his deep grasp of policy, and his dedication to fair...
Click to read more »Sandstein 11:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC) Delete - I looked at this when it was at DRV. To be honest, the narrow scope of CSD "saved" this but the argument put...
Click to read more »underwent an AfD which was closed as delete by Drini, but overturned on DRV by Xoloz. The resulting AfD was then speedily closed by thebainer. Badlydrawnjeff...
Click to read more »underwent an AfD which was closed as delete by Drini, but overturned on DRV by Xoloz. The resulting AfD was then speedily closed by Thebainer. Badlydrawnjeff...
Click to read more »four seem to be working in tandem to support the same DRV mostly out of nowhere; before the DRV, none of the accounts had edited since February or longer...
Click to read more »underwent an AfD which was closed as delete by Drini, but overturned on DRV by Xoloz. The resulting AfD was then speedily closed by thebainer. Badlydrawnjeff...
Click to read more »the validity of new sourcing being expressed.As the DRV was closed as relist. As the closer of the DRV, I am neutral. Spartaz Humbug! 01:57, 9 June 2013...
Click to read more »speedy-deleted per CSD A7. DRV overturned, finding an assertion of notability. At least one source was also provided at the DRV, in an attempt to satisfy...
Click to read more »want to DRV, go to an RfC or a centralized discussion, friends. Longstanding precedent says MfD is not for policy proposals, and killing DRV is a policy...
Click to read more »thus fails GNG. –Davey2010Talk 04:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC) Funny how most at DRV wanted to and I quote "re-nominate this straight away and reach the correct...
Click to read more »1,767 nominations in November... AN/Is... DRVs... The largest AfD in history, possibly ever! ← Back to Contents View Latest Issue 29 November 2021 Deletion...
Click to read more »the sourcing has not improved in GNG terms since the previous deletion and DRV consensus and, based on that, and the rough consensus here this is a clear...
Click to read more »previously deleted through AfD here. A DRV consensus overturned in light of new evidence, for which, see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting, so I...
Click to read more »This page is now solely an archive of previous events (primarily, AfDs, DRVs, blankings, and merges). All links to deleted articles should be left intact...
Click to read more »links | watch | logs | views) Speedy deletion for spam was overturned at WP:DRV [1] and is now here for full consideration. Procedural listing, so I have...
Click to read more »brings them to DRV when he disagrees with consensus and/or the admins' closures of them. MickMacNee has brought 5 AFDs to DRV. All of those DRVs were closed...
Click to read more »deleted as G10 (I believe incorrectly), and the deletion was overturned at WP:DRV, see Nov 16, 2020 section there. IMO, minus the plagiarism controversy, the...
Click to read more »by ensuring that all, and not some, of the pages were undeleted while the DRV was ongoing. After Georgewilliamherbert's restorations, a MFD nomination...
Click to read more »criteria so I am listing this for discussion per the DRV. As I a procedural listing connected to the DRV close I make no personal recommendation. Spartaz...
Click to read more »article. That's what WP:DRV is for. Jack Merridew 04:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC) Keep the last AfD, was in November 2007! Going to DRV would be needless and...
Click to read more »Close and moved over to WP:DRV. Being a little bold here. That User:2005 disagrees with the closure reason is, according to the DRV page, enough to warrant...
Click to read more »following a DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 December 27. Daniel (talk) 02:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC) Courtesy pings for all involved in the DRV: @.usarnamechoice...
Click to read more »listed on DRV. It was, in fact, recreated whilst on DRV by Johnson542. Stifle 15:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Regardless of when it was listed on DRV, it was...
Click to read more »notability Corpx 04:51, 19 August 2007 (UTC) Keep per sources posted in the DRV: [1] [2] [3] JulesH 13:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC) Keep I don't know how good...
Click to read more »taken into consideration when this is closed since the determination at DRV was that that closing was flawed, or do we have to start from scratch? Beeblebrox...
Click to read more »appropriate venue, as far as I am aware, for discussing deletion decisions is WP:DRV. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 17:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC) Delete You know,...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Was deleted A7 and then listed at DRV [1]. The DRV closed as list at AFD so here we are. As the DRV closer my nomination is an administrative...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. VFD Aug 2004 Delete AFD March 2005 Delete First DRV Overturn and Undelete 2nd AFD May 2006 closed early as the article was deleted...
Click to read more »the guideline talk page that this MFD was opened in direct response to a DRV and because of one person's frustration over this becoming a guideline despite...
Click to read more »I wouldn't be doing this, but the current close just doesn't work." The DRV itself attracted over 300 edits and over 150KB in discussion; by the numbers...
Click to read more »for DRV within the hour, and less than an hour after that, Szmenderowiecki undid his closure, albeit leaving the DRV signage in place and the DRV open...
Click to read more »WP:FORUMSHOPPING. Discuss this at the DRV where it belongs. Smartyllama (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Comment -- The current DRV Adria Airways destinations...
Click to read more »assume good faith rather than the presence of trolling. Please approach this DRV with a seriousness properly attendant to the nature of the issues presented...
Click to read more »of deletion at DRV, the page should be deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Keep Article was userfied after the DRV. See log [1] The...
Click to read more »nomination from DRV. This article was previously deleted at VFD and was recreated while the subject was being discussed at DRV. The DRV was inconclusive...
Click to read more »originally speedy-deleted as CSD A7. DRV restored, in part because of new information revealed at DRV. Please consult the DRV before commenting. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »page. The result was Speedy close, clerical error, deletion was endorsed at DRV. ~ trialsanderrors 06:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC) Steve.museum (edit | talk |...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log) Article was deleted as A7 but DRV overturned holding that nobility was asserted. However, notability is not...
Click to read more »Speedied three times as A7 and reposted every time, taken to DRV, reposted again during DRV process, WP:PRODded, and the re-creator removed the PROD tags...
Click to read more »(UTC) Procedural close Go to WP:DRV or see WP:RENOM. Jclemens (talk) 04:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC) I really did consider DRV, but that to me is really an...
Click to read more »3RR) • BL • Block (IPs • Log • OP • RFU) • Del ((A C I M R T) fD • CSD • DRV • List • Log • Proc • PRD) Dir • ER • HD • New (Us • Pgs)• Prot (Log • PER...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result of the discussion was Take to DRV. As per DGG and Ricky81682, if the close was improper, than it should be...
Click to read more »Delete as recreation of content previously deleted at AFD (and upheld at DRV). Michig (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2011 (UTC) AfDs for this article: Articles...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result was procedural doing-nothing. DRV deemed a better forum in below consensus, has been taken there. lifebaka++...
Click to read more »non-project-related edits (even if about WP:ORE pages) such as WP:AFD, WP:CFD, WP:DRV, etc. These editors are administrators on the English Wikipedia. User blocked...
Click to read more »some support for delete from something sent to AfD through DRV. However, even in that DRV it's much more "It should go there for full consideration, rather...
Click to read more »deleting this at the moment would derail the DRV. A decision on the page should be deferred until the DRV has been closed. BlueValour (talk) 20:46, 12...
Click to read more »BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC: Controversy over biographies compounded when leading participant blocked . Wikipedian death: Norwegian Wikipedian, journalist dies...
Click to read more »was closed as Delete in March 2013. It was apparently restored after a WP:DRV claim (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 October), but unfortunately, that...
Click to read more »this is a response to the deletion of SMFR (which I since placed on WP:DRV). I feel that SMFR and Turun Baletti are of equal importance, and the articles...
Click to read more »I !voted "overturn" at the DRV, because that wasn't a correct speedy; but we don't consider questions of notability at DRV, and at AfD, we should. By...
Click to read more »January 2015 (UTC) Keep. The DRV discussion contains sources in addition to the above-posted set of sources. As noted in the DRV by someone, the pre-2002...
Click to read more »see deleted pages for various reasons, including while participating at DRV, explaining why a page was deleted, or investigating a potential sockpuppet...
Click to read more »closer is sufficiently experienced at DRV to make that call. (Hint: if you are not sure that you have enough DRV experience then you don't.) An objection...
Click to read more »World, My Way (video game) that seems to have been restored as part of a DRV discussion. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:09, 9 February 2016 (UTC) Delete as inappropriate...
Click to read more »or keeping but rather a) strongly suggest that we wait until the Brandt DRV is complete and b) point out that the deletion of this would likely destroy...
Click to read more »this page. The result was no consensus. Between this discussion and the DRV it really does seem that this is currently the stance of the community at...
Click to read more »participants in the DRV, so here it is. -Splashtalk 23:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Keep - Sufficient information arose in the WP:DRV discussion to support...
Click to read more »Auto-generated every hour. Dusha100's first edit after a 7 year gap was to open a DRV about a AfD they were involved in at the time they stopped editing. DoctorNo108...
Click to read more »article. I was unaware of the DRV that was opened a week ago, over a deletion discussion that happened 2 years ago. FFS. The DRV was inappropriate for being...
Click to read more »Due to the heavy amount of transclusions, the template was placed in the holding cell and taken to DRV before many instances of it could be removed....
Click to read more »decline the speedy and allow two weeks for it to be improved and taken to DRV, failing which I would bring it here. Nothing has been done; userspace is...
Click to read more »at DRV and I moved the misnamed page to the correct place. In doing this I lost the old page logs so didn't pick up on the AFD when I closed the DRV as...
Click to read more »reviewed at deletion review. Although the DRV closed as a procedurally correct outcome I am using my discretion as the DRV closer to relist this for more in depth...
Click to read more »result was you should be using drv not renominating as soon as the prev discussion closed. but dont hold your breath for the drv to go your way. Spartaz Humbug...
Click to read more »more fire on the ongoing war between DRV and BLP. First, User:David Gerard deleted and protected an article that DRV closed as restore history and redirect...
Click to read more »to this page. The result was Keep. Paul Cyr 03:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC) A DRV consensus overturned the deletion result in this earlier AfD in light of...
Click to read more »views) – (View log) Originally speedied by me but I restored it after a DRV to send it here. Band does not appear to meet WP:NMG and definitely does...
Click to read more »you didn't like the result is just silly. And its exactly what we have WP:DRV for. The analysis of sources above is disingenuous; there's nothing wrong...
Click to read more »AFD and DRV here: AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cryptol DRV: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 January 1 The AFD was a Delete, the DRV was endorsed...
Click to read more » The result was Closed. This is premature, folks. The page is still at DRV. If you find a page restored -- not recreated -- in this manner, be sure...
Click to read more »it in a timely manner, then this is the simplest argument to refute at WP:DRV; after all, they claimed it couldn't be fixed, but you fixed it. Deleting...
Click to read more »problem with the first AfD or the first DRV. The first AfD was properly closed on process grounds, but the first DRV properly noted that there were issues...
Click to read more »(View log) Procedural renomination where a CSD A7 deletion was overturned at DRV; see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 February 8 for the whole debate....
Click to read more »appear constructive Makes vague or grandiose statements at talk pages or WP:DRV and WP:AFD debates, respectively. Edit summaries typically make grandiose...
Click to read more »is a synthesis and contains original research Whether the article should be merged with the article Development of religion (full history: AFD, DRV)....
Click to read more »protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) First AfD DRV Alexa rank of 366,181. Article fails WP:WEB. Lots of Google hits, but I could...
Click to read more »Notability issues are to be debated. There are a few sources pointed out in the DRV, so now AfD is a good venue to discuss the legitimacy of those references...
Click to read more »inaccessibility of DRV archives - Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Archives/2020/June#Mobile view, Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Archives/2021/January#DRV archives...
Click to read more »result was procedural keep. (non-admin closure) Too soon for nomination DRV has been opened Valoem talk contrib 15:47, 27 April 2014 (UTC) AfDs for this...
Click to read more »On some days DRV would agree that a relist at AfD is needed, and on some days DRV would effectively have the AfD debate there (at DRV) instead. What...
Click to read more »arbitrator has voted in support, and four have opposed. Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log) Procedural listing based on this DRV. Reliable sources were purported to be present in the first AfD, but the...
Click to read more »was Delete lack of independent sources indicating notability, despite a DRV and a two-week AfD to provide these. Fram 08:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)...
Click to read more »result is disruptive. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC) DRV would be for appropriate closures. Inappropriate actions can be heard as...
Click to read more »DavidStarIsrael7's request at this DRV. However, that user is now blocked for sockpuppetry (including at the DRV in question) and so it is unlikely that...
Click to read more »This article was previously kept after a "no consensus" closure at AfD. DRV overturned, holding that the AfD was under-attended, and failed to address...
Click to read more »This was originally deleted as CSD G11 spam. DRV overturned, in light of new sources (for which, see the DRV.) Still, weak delete, given notability and...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) This was speedy deleted as blatant promotion. Consensus at DRV was that a good article could potentially be written from the available sources...
Click to read more »Rick Mitry, which is now the subject of a DRV opened by Chbeaini, whose only edits were to create the DRV. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)...
Click to read more »speedily kept, >>>>>>> DRV is this way >>>>>>>. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC) Note - This discussion was taken to DRV and...
Click to read more »anonymous editor with one edit on WP:REFUND would like to take this to WP:DRV, he may. But this restoration and new AFD was out of line.— Preceding unsigned...
Click to read more »Swan meant to take it to DRV when he had found another source, but two years have passed without such a source (or the DRV). Fails WP:BIO (Google reveals...
Click to read more »be made to this page. The result was Close, article has been deleted, WP:DRV is more appropriate here. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter...
Click to read more »logs | views) – (View log) Procedural nomination of article previously at DRV, so I am neutral. Concern exists whether the article meets notability requirements...
Click to read more »explained the situation, the DRV continues. Sr13 11:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC) First speedy deleted, but overturned at DRV. Procedural nomination, so I am...
Click to read more »(View log) Per consensus at DRV [1] the previous AFD [2] is overturned and relisted. This is a procedural listing by the DRV closer and no opinion is expressed...
Click to read more »be trying to rectify that by checking policy before you post at AfD, RfA, DRV, noticeboards, and talk pages. We don't expect you to consistently know what...
Click to read more »weeks after the nomination was created. The initial close was contested at DRV, and this discussion was reopened on 29 October 2014, which has run for another...
Click to read more »to support nominator's claim that article was ever deleted or listed at DRV. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC) Didn't We Almost Have...
Click to read more »references. There are other issues as well, and previous WP:AFD is at WP:DRV. In short, this page should be deleted or merged with Card sharp. Thinboy00...
Click to read more »proper" by the drv closer.) These afds seem to have become decidedly pointy. Oculi (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC) Lest we forget, the DRV endorsed the...
Click to read more »been given time for expansion/merging, and I have personally notified the DRV nominator of this discussion. The lack of interest in actually doing the...
Click to read more »cases, if the AfD discussion is disagreed with, it may be reviewed at WP:DRV. Wikipedia:Redirect § Redirects that replace previous articles – the official...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was delete. This was endorsed at DRV only a day or two ago. Restoring it to mainspace is an abuse of our procedures...
Click to read more »page was restored by DRV after community consensus determined that it was prematurely deleted while revising was in progress. DRV recommended relisting...
Click to read more »where no clear consensus emerged. In accordance with a recent change in the DRV instructions, no-consensus in a WP:CSD discussion, no longer results in the...
Click to read more »This was originally deleted at AfD. DRV overturned in light of new evidence for notability. Please consult the DRV before commenting here. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »Date Koji - New DRV request is up for the correct title: Koji Date. 19:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC) Review Brett Chidester - Moved to history only undeletion...
Click to read more »resolution. Wikipedia:DR may also refer to: Wikipedia:Deletion review (WP:DRVWP:DRV) Wikipedia:Deletion requests Wikipedia:Deny recognition (WP:DNRWP:DNR) Wikipedia:Double...
Click to read more »views) (delete) – (View log) Article was previously deleted at Afd, but DRV determined that the new sources presented in the course of the AfD were not...
Click to read more »2008 (UTC) Delete. I already took a look at this article when it was up for DRV. This is a four sentence article about a team captain, when the team itself...
Click to read more »00:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Due to the controversy at DRV, I strongly recommend against SNOWing this -- the drama is not worth it....
Click to read more »A7-band. The speedy deletion was overturned at DRV and referred here in light of new evidence. Please see the DRV before expressing an opinion here. This is...
Click to read more »originally restored? The DRV was overturned based on the new draft. I've restored the article to the version discussed in the DRV.StonefieldBreeze (talk)...
Click to read more »anyone wants to contest this, take it to DRV. Do NOT recreate this article in the mainspace until this goes through DRV, as we have to guard the privacy of...
Click to read more »AB AFD AIV AN AN3 ANI BL CFD CSD DRV HD MFD OP PER PP PRD PT RFA RFD RFP RFR RFU RM SSP TFD UN UTM VP WL...
Click to read more »AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC) There was not a consensus in the DRV on whether G4 applied to the new article (i.e. is the new version different...
Click to read more »Wikipedia: AnomieBOT's sixty-sixth BRfA, performing clerking tasks at WP:DRV; Legobot's seventeenth, fifteenth and eighteenth BRfAs, creating un-punctuated...
Click to read more »2007 (UTC) Keep, appears to meet WP:CORP given the sources provided at the DRV. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Delete I nominated the...
Click to read more »listed at DRV before I relisted the discussion after Cypherquest contacted me on my talk page. I was not notified about or aware of the DRV. Sandstein...
Click to read more »deleted through AfD. A DRV consensus overturned, in light of new evidence of the program's notability, for which, see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting...
Click to read more »This was deleted at AFD1 but taken to DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2013_April_12. The outcome of the DRV is to relist the discussion to evaluate...
Click to read more »first AfD on this subject was overturned by DRV consensus in light of new information, for which, see the DRV. This matter is resubmitted to AfD for new...
Click to read more »deleted as CSD A7, regarding an entrant in the TV show America's Got Talent. DRV overturned these deletions, finding an appearance on the show constituted...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) First AFD closed as no consensus, an I closed the subsequent DRV discussion as insufficient consensus to overturn that decision but that the...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) – (View log) DRV overturned the previous AfD result, in light of the new evidence; for which, see the DRV. This is a procedural relisting...
Click to read more »procedural nominations removed from the AfD/DRV rules? SilverserenC 03:30, 17 May 2012 (UTC) In this case (i.e. DRVs on speedies), I think you may have a point...
Click to read more »DRV consensus overturned the previous deletion of this article through this combined AfD, determining the closure was improper. Please review the DRV...
Click to read more »directed the creator to DRV). The first admin to notice, however, simply G4ed it and moved it to draftspace. So we had a DRV, but not focused on whether...
Click to read more »been done without needed to go to WP:DRV, but since we're here, the merge proposal is now stamped with the official DRV seal of approval. -- RoySmith (talk)...
Click to read more »5 November 2006 (UTC) This article was previously deleted through AfD. A DRV consensus overturned in light of input from members of WikiProject Alaska...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) According to the discussion on WP:DRV, allowed to renominate. The previous AFD reason was vague; all the votes...
Click to read more »this article was overturned by DRV on the grounds that the content was clearly unencyclopedic. Please consult the DRV before commenting here. The matter...
Click to read more »-Splashtalk 21:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC) Relisting debate per DRV; I have no opinon on this matter. Archive DRV. - Mailer Diablo 17:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Delete non...
Click to read more »find) are: 2005 TFD 2006 TFD 2007 TFD July 2008 DRV September 2008 DRV December 2008 TFD January 2009 DRV -- Mr.Z-man 17:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC) Comment...
Click to read more »subsequently recreation as a disambiguation page User_talk:King_of_Hearts#DRV_closure User_talk:King_of_Hearts#Estonia-Luxembourg_relations LibStar (talk)...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result was Speedily deleted per G4. DRV opened at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 24. -- SatyrTN (talk /...
Click to read more »seem to be getting quite a few recursive MfDs recently; the MfD of DRv went to DRv, and the MfD of WP:SNOW was closed using WP:SNOW...) I've notified...
Click to read more »JSTOR · TWL) Nominating per DRV that was closed as relist at AfD. The original debate concerns the notability of the subject. At DRV, [1](translation), [2](translation)...
Click to read more »with consensus to keep... Obviously if the nom disagrees they should to go DRV, Also just wanted to point out the nom states "I'm not seeing anything that...
Click to read more »discuss it with the closing admin and, if still concerned, to take it to WP:DRV. TerriersFan (talk) 23:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC) AfDs for this article: Articles...
Click to read more »AfD. DRV restored, as sources were mentioned late in that AfD, and these may need further consideration. For further details, consult the AfD and DRV. Deletion...
Click to read more »article deletion processes, at first AfD and then the CSD and DRV. I've worked at DRV for nearly a year now, and am active in editing the CSD policy...
Click to read more »15 January 2013 (UTC) To be honest, I didn't see it at DRV. I was involved with the other DRV for that day so never paid any attention to the one for...
Click to read more »appropriate DRV. Stop with the WP:FORUMSHOPPING. This is quite enough. Smartyllama (talk) 19:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Comment -- The current DRV Adria Airways...
Click to read more »or any other SNG. The "Urban X" award, by repeated consensus in AFD and DRV discussions, does not demonstrate notability. Most GNews/GBooks hits are...
Click to read more »talk page with a hidden message. HAGGER??????????????????????? is listed at DRV.[2] White Shadows retired for ten minutes December21st2012Freak planned on...
Click to read more »administrator and appeals of arbitration enforcement actions. Deletion review (WP:DRV) For reviewing speedy deletions and outcomes of deletion discussions. This...
Click to read more »2008 (UTC) Keep Well, that was awful quick. I just had it restored at WP:DRV, noting that the group had charted on the Billboard 200. That's one way to...
Click to read more »deletion, but as a DRV and MfD regular, I can say that G11 deletions on pages like this never get criticised by consensus at DRV, and declines do lead...
Click to read more »the decision to close early is incorrect, you can list the article at WP:DRV to have that decision reviewed. JulesH (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »(View log) Page recreated as a contested PROD[1] in DRV. Moving to AfD as a combination of the DRV decision and that I do not feel that this page meets...
Click to read more »trialsanderrors 04:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC) I should add as finding from the DRV that he is the author "Introduction to Analysis", Prentice Hall (1998) ISBN...
Click to read more »Samir धर्म 04:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC) This close was overturned by DRV and relisted DRV log. Xoloz 15:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC) This fellow plays for Halifax...
Click to read more »proxy or sock of Omeomi. I will note this at the DRV. [1] Note also that these two accounts edited the DRV within 30 minutes of each other. [2]. Shalom (Hello...
Click to read more »statement, The article was at DRV when I nominated it for deletion. I did not intend to infer that it was still at DRV when it was added by Black Kite...
Click to read more »XFD(N), DRV, any admin that closed any of XFD1 to XFDN shouldn't close the DRV. If something is terribly out of whack, give one of the DRV regular closers...
Click to read more »would have been inappropriate, and should therefore be undone (through WP:DRV). m:WikipediAhimsa Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an experiment...
Click to read more »deleted, but relisted following petition at DRV. My vote is delete. -R. fiend 17:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC) WP:DRV discussion Delete. This is spam. The writer...
Click to read more »Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 April 3. The previous AfD was speedy closed, but per DRV this is being relisted. My listing here is purely administrative; I am neutral...
Click to read more »The Turkish Wiktionary has reached 150,000 entries. Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »already been deleted (note the redlink). Requests for UNdeletion go to WP:DRV. -R. fiend 18:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC) This page is relisted on Articles...
Click to read more »isn't an attack piece, and her original name should have been salted at DRV. If there is a way forward here that's not deletion, it would be to create...
Click to read more »debated on DRV. Please let that debate run. If we have two debates and potentially two different results all we will have is madness. If DRV overturns...
Click to read more »oft-speedy deleted page was restored by A DRV consensus citing evidence of notability, for which, see the DRV. The version here AfD'ed is the most recent...
Click to read more »result a DRV on another article has does not serve as an injunction on us coming to a decision on this one ... the more so in that the DRV was not proposed...
Click to read more »One of the existing articles was restored after DRV, and one of the deleted ones is currently before DRV. Personally, I did create one of those articles...
Click to read more »views) – (View log) This article was originally speedy-deleted as CSD A7. DRV overturned, finding that a claim of notability was asserted. However, as...
Click to read more »under A7-web was contested at DRV, where it was determined that the speedy deletion criteria did not apply. See the DRV discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion...
Click to read more »messages because he is simply closing a DRV within the DRV process. That being said, I made my opinions in DRV, and I simply don't care where Be bold or...
Click to read more »reopens [1] a WP:DRV to restore Betsy Baker, the same topic Kitia had been confirmed running two other sockpuppets in a previous DRV opened by Kitia.[2]...
Click to read more »first AfD, restored, deleted again as a copyvio, and brought to DRV. I closed the DRV with the recommendation (based on the comments at that point) that...
Click to read more »BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC: Controversy over biographies compounded when leading participant blocked . Wikipedian death: Norwegian Wikipedian, journalist dies...
Click to read more »their arguments, that AFD was taken to DRV, which again attracted nothing but fans. That DRV was the only DRV that has occurred. Just for fun, go try...
Click to read more »Idol-clone, had no released recordings; A DRV consensus overturned, given the recent release of her first. See the DRV for additional details. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »had A7'd it after it was tagged as such by SamHolt6. Someone took it to DRV and while I don't think any of the sourcing brings it out of A7 territory...
Click to read more »3RR) • BL • Block (IPs • Log • OP • RFU) • Del ((A C I M R T) fD • CSD • DRV • List • Log • Proc • PRD) Dir • ER • HD • New (Us • Pgs)• Prot (Log • PER...
Click to read more »listed at DRV where some sources were found. The deleting admin consents to restoration subject to an AFD. So here we are. As I closed the DRV I am neutral...
Click to read more »lurker 21:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC) The other could probably be brought to DRV...there was a "consensus" but no one actually gave any evidence as to why...
Click to read more »List of Punch-Out!! characters#Soda Popinski. The discussion since the post-DRV relisting hasn't really changed anything. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:12...
Click to read more »watchlist is not very active, on the weekends I spend most of my time at AfD, DRV, and RfA. I also am the proud owner of three four barnstars. I'd like a little...
Click to read more »and DRV participants - or indeed the author of the latest version of the article - I have done it. All participants of the previous AFDs and DRV who have...
Click to read more »to this page. The result of the discussion was: Withdraw as resolved at DRV. Legacypac (talk) 01:05, 8 March 2019 (UTC) Draft:Marianna Yarovskaya (edit...
Click to read more »(then a year later recreated and then subjected to CSD, then confirmed at DRV) at the end of March. This copy of the article has sat in userspace for months...
Click to read more »always matters more than process. 2) BLP policy concerns trump DRV votes and opinions. When DRV consensus determines that BLP "concerns were justified" - that's...
Click to read more »this page. The result was procedural close. I've decided to take this to DRV. (non-admin closure) ToThAc (talk) 15:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC) AfDs for...
Click to read more »Speedy delete per G4 Delete - this has been sent to AfD and declined at DRV so many times, a new creation really has to overwhelmingly show notability...
Click to read more »deleted as CSD G4 several days ago. A DRV consensus overturned, in light of new information, for which, see the DRV. I will break with form here -- this...
Click to read more »terms had been individually transwikied to Wictionary (under CSD G5). A DRV consensus overturned, reasoning that -- while dicdefs aren't permissible...
Click to read more »this page. The result was Still on DRV - no consensus to overturn and relist. -Docg 17:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC) DRV in case you desire to be heard: Wikipedia:Deletion...
Click to read more »article will clearly not survive AfD and would clearly not be recreated by DRV. We cloak ourselves in a set of criteria designed to show transparency in...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Recreated without going through DRV. Delete, salt, and add to title blacklist. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 18:14, 4 February...
Click to read more »WHEELS! is listed at DRV. User:Jimbo Wales is reported for indef blocking.{{deadlocked}} And blocked. Your face is listed at DRV. And is then redirected...
Click to read more »mall is any more notable than it was during the AFD, or the very recent DRV. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:39, 3 June 2014 (UTC) But you agree it meets...
Click to read more »further revisions and asked my advice (Spartaz, the DRV closer, being inactive). As envisaged by the DRV, I have restored it to the mainspace, but considering...
Click to read more »WP:WEB. It is now relisted based on new evidence of notability presented at DRV. IronGargoyle 05:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC) Delete. It may be that the prose...
Click to read more »history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) DRV concludes that there is significant dispute over whether, and how, BLP concerns...
Click to read more »history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) DRV overturned a G4 deletion of this article, finding new sources for notability...
Click to read more »consensus to delete it; as it has been Vfd'ed before (in olden times), try DRV, if anything. Xoloz 15:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC) A favor for the people who want...
Click to read more »21 October 2009 (UTC) Speedy close. This has been through an AFD and a DRV in less than a week. Not enough time has passed for us to be able to gauge...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) I'm relying on precedents in previous AfDs and DRVs. Most the sources on this page are from AVN. Lovia has little coverage in...
Click to read more »was therefore undone by the deleting Admin after a DRV so I'm relisting this properly. As the DRV closer I take no formal position on the article. Spartaz...
Click to read more »rejection on the grounds that it has been restored at DRV (even though many commenters at that DRV said that PROD was exactly what should have happened...
Click to read more »discussion about whether to delete an article. If you disagree, take it to WP:DRV but not here again. Regards SoWhy 19:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC) Keep' consensus...
Click to read more »- Mailer Diablo 16:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC) A consensus was reached at DRV to overturn the speedy deletion of this article [1]. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »December 2006 (UTC) Keep at least until the DRV is finished; otherwise we risk contradictory results. Assuming DRV results in the article staying deleted,...
Click to read more »– (View log) This was originally a CSD A7 speedy deletion, overturned by DRV as improper, since a claim of notability is asserted. The matter is referred...
Click to read more »to have created this talk page in an attempt to subvert the deletion and DRV process by pasting a version of the article that had been deleted at AfD...
Click to read more »REFUND (via their talk page editnoce). For me, it's either REFUND or DRV, and DRV would have been a bit of an overshoot, especially for a case that I had...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Having been deleted at AFD1 this was brought to DRV as new sources had been found. Additionally it was noted that the delete...
Click to read more »sockpuppet account, but it has been used for vote padding back in 9/05 at DRV: [1] More recently, the same pattern has reappeared at the same subject here...
Click to read more »Take it to WP:DRV, don't just repost. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC) Update:I see it has already been to DRV, where the prior...
Click to read more »concerned. –MuZemike 02:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC) Keep and add the sources found at DRV. This sports club contains a football team that has played at their second...
Click to read more »A7. DRV determined that an assertion of notability did exist, so the article is submitted for AfD. This version is currently unsourced, but the DRV uncovered...
Click to read more »was deleted at AFD but a DRV was raised querying whether the sources were sufficiently discussed. The consensus of the DRV Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013...
Click to read more »(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per this DRV discussion, the previous AFD has been put to one side and the article relisted...
Click to read more »grounds, brought to DRV, and relisted as not-so-lopsided-as-to-qualify for SNOW. So it stayed up for another week+ after the DRV (so ~2 weeks or so total...
Click to read more »December 2013 (while DRV open); originally deleted 10 May 2012, and several times susequently, deletion sustained twice at DRV; last edited by Erpert...
Click to read more »out, list at DRV. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 04:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC) I think the whole point of sending this to AFD was to skip the DRV altogether. -...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Deleted A7, which was overturned by DRV, but I can't find significant coverage in reliable sources for this band...
Click to read more »to Columbia, MO. Nom was asked at the DRV to explain the pattern of creating mall stubs, mall AfDs, mall DRVs, participation in mall AfDs, and attempts...
Click to read more »merged and redirected. 15:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC) Review Alpha Kappa Nu - DRV moot; article relisted at AfD by editorial option. 15:08, 29 September 2006...
Click to read more »incarnation of the same file. Puntd here from DRV. The current situation does not satisfy conditions of the original DRV: Attempts at compromise have been done...
Click to read more »No further edits should be made to this page. The result was Taken to DRV instead. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:43, 19 January...
Click to read more »placing of the tag three times. I have tried to inform the author to use WP:DRV and even opened a discussion myself, but they feel CSD doesn't apply and...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this page. The result was keep. Procedural outcome.DRV is the right way. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 17:47...
Click to read more »least for six months, or until something changes. DRV may be used if the AfD decision was wrong, or DRV may be skipped if is it clear that the AfD was wrong...
Click to read more »watch | logs | views) – (View log) Article was speedy deleted under CSD A7. DRV overturned finding an assertion of notability. The matter is brought to AfD...
Click to read more »specialized guideline. Has only one trivial award/nomination, by prior AFD/DRV consensus, neither the Nightmoves award nor the Urban X award makes a significant...
Click to read more »links | watch | logs | views) Prior decision to delete was overturned at DRV and is now back for reconsideration. An intermediate userficiation did not...
Click to read more »are just plain wrong in describing the primary function of DRV. The primary function of DRV is to correct deletion errors. Errors means that either 1)...
Click to read more »speedy-deleted under CSD A7. DRV overturned, finding an assertion of notability was present, and also finding more sources, for which see the DRV. Still, delete, given...
Click to read more »of potential sources were raised at the DRV and should be examined for reliability. In addition, at the DRV a concern was raised that the article was...
Click to read more »then putched up at DRV but the discussion really needs to be at AFD. So here we are. I'm procedurally listing as I closed the DRV, so am neutral. Spartaz...
Click to read more »ago and whose deletion had been endorsed at DRV would default towards delete at any new AfD. However, the DRV discussion explicitly made provisions for...
Click to read more »"privacy vio." A DRV consensus narrowly overturned deletion, believing the content was not under any use restriction. Please see the DRV discussion before...
Click to read more »Xoloz 14:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC) This was originally an A7 speedy. A DRV consensus overturned this as improper. The article is submitted to AfD for...
Click to read more »then endorsed at DRV once immediately after the close, then endorsed again only recently - I can't find the links because the DRV archiving system isn't...
Click to read more »content if DRV overturns the deletion. There has been plenty of media coverage of this organization - it's obviously notable. When I saw the DRV, I was scratching...
Click to read more »at FFD and listed at DRV Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2013_May_31. The outcome of the DRV was relist. The key argument at the DRV by Thincat was The WP:NFCI#4...
Click to read more »article's DRV was closed as "no consensus". Meanwhile, a "clear consensus" of users supported the undeletion of the firearms page at its DRV, but the closer...
Click to read more »TWL) Previously went through AFD and was deleted, was restored through a DRV in which arguments in favor of undeletion were paltry at best. Fails WP:WEB...
Click to read more »a CSD.) DRV overturned because the admittedly imaginary micro-nation has received press coverage for its humor value, for which, see the DRV. Deletion...
Click to read more »WP:DRV is a place to make a case that something was deleted in error and should be reinstated. Legacypac (talk) 00:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC) WP:DRV is...
Click to read more »(UTC) Deleted through the WP:PROD system and requested undeleted through WP:DRV. There were actually 5-6 "endorse deletion", but since any objection to a...
Click to read more »in no consensus, is being appealed on Wikipedia:Deletion review (DRV). Because DRV is not a consensus-based forum, I obviously decided that it would...
Click to read more »2014. When the account was deleted at AFD, they started a discussion at DRV to have it restored. So far so good, no problems there. At this point, Flinders12...
Click to read more »way to request to overturn the close of the template for discussion is DRV, but DRV will probably Endorse the TFD. An editor can request that a deleted page...
Click to read more »(UTC) Delete for the same reasons as last time – lack of notability. But WP:DRV probably would have been a better forum for this, as the previous AfD just...
Click to read more »this page. Procedural close as keep. Either accept Jclemens's close of the DRV where they say: When all the dust settles, cooler heads will determine whether...
Click to read more »protest when closing the DRV discussion this early? I sure hope so, especially from an experienced editor like Sam. After a closed DRV, are there suitable...
Click to read more »This article was speedily deleted over a week ago, then overturned at WP:DRV with a consensus to list at AFD for further determination of notability....
Click to read more »review/Log/2022 December 6. Note that the "per DRV" in the 28 November relist comment is a different DRV. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks...
Click to read more »reliability and verifiability surface later, feel free to bring this to DRV. Ƙɽɨɱρᶓȶ 04:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC) "Zeitgeist The Movie is a film exploring...
Click to read more »been done without needed to go to WP:DRV, but since we're here, the merge proposal is now stamped with the official DRV seal of approval. -- RoySmith (talk)...
Click to read more »article was previously the subject of an AfD which closed as "no consensus." A DRV consensus overturned this result, with commenters supporting outright deletion...
Click to read more »September 2006 (UTC) This article was previously deleted at this AfD. A DRV consensus overturned this closure as improper, citing (among other things)...
Click to read more »history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore|cache|AfD) (DRV) I found this article on the Wikipedia namespace today, about an independent...
Click to read more »review/Log/2009 November 20#AXAH DRV. Previously a redirect to AHAH, deleted out of process by the AfD nom, listed at DRV, restored, unredirected, and now...
Click to read more »opinion on the notability of this article. Please see the linked AfD and DRV to review the discussions there. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:28, 22 August 2022...
Click to read more »under A7 but this was contested at DRV and the consensus was to list at AFD to( discuss sources provided during the DRV discussion. The sources mentioned...
Click to read more »thought that sources added in Chinese weren't reliable. After discussion at DRV, he remembered that foreign language sources can be reliable and agreed to...
Click to read more »so called "rules" in certain cases -- Drini 07:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC) A DRV consensus overturned the previous AfD closure on this article. This matter...
Click to read more »review). No further edits should be made to this page. The result was delete DRV is that way. Jclemens (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC) AfDs for this article:...
Click to read more »reliable sources for your pet article, that's why it got deleted and why your DRV failed. Don't mix apples and oranges. Corvus cornixtalk 16:36, 18 June 2008...
Click to read more »has a reasonable dispute over the outcome of a DRV? Wikidemo 19:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC) See the DRV's here and here. --Kbdank71 19:19, 22 October 2007...
Click to read more »article was previously deleted at this AfD, which had minimal discussion. A DRV consensus overturned this result in light of new evidence, with even those...
Click to read more »(UTC) anyway, as it was already deleted, shouldn't a person discuss it at WP:DRV rather than here, preferably before restoring? Sticky Parkin 13:28, 21 June...
Click to read more »views) – (View log) This article was originally speedy-deleted under CSD A7. DRV overturned, finding an assertion of notability was present. Still, Delete...
Click to read more »improvements, and therefore a DRV was brought up. Per comments there, I am relisting this article. The reason for DRV is here: [1]. Soxred 93 19:45,...
Click to read more »result a DRV on another article has does not serve as an injunction on us coming to a decision on this one ... the more so in that the DRV was not proposed...
Click to read more »think the DRV is bound to be closed by now, it's at least a month old. FrozenPurpleCube 03:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC) I didn't even see it on the DRV page. I'll...
Click to read more »substantially the same as the version deleted in the past AfD and upheld at DRV. Salting as well. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC) AfDs for...
Click to read more »CharlotteWebb 21:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC) That is unfair: if you had read the DRV discussion you would have noticed that at the point when the original AFD...
Click to read more »views) – (View log) This article was originally speedy deleted as CSD A7. DRV overturned, finding the Wall Street Journal report on the company constituted...
Click to read more »February 2009 (UTC) The DRV indeed overturned the speedy deletion primarily on the misapplication of A7. I wished to alert people to the DRV review primarily...
Click to read more »was part of the mass AfD of "Esoteric Programming languages" overturned by DRV here. It is being relisted for individual consideration. All these languages...
Click to read more »am relisting it, because there was a consensus to do so at the DRV. If people at the DRV say "relist at AfD," there there clearly is a need for a discussion...
Click to read more »also linkspammed. A DRV consensus concluded that notability was asserted, and that COI issues were best left to AfD. Please see the DRV for additional details...
Click to read more »2019 (UTC) You are wrong to point people wanting to re-create portals to DRV. DRV is concerned with whether *this* deletion process was done properly. —SmokeyJoe...
Click to read more »logs | views) – (View log) This was originally speedy-deleted under CSD A7. DRV overturned as books are not within the CSD. Still, Delete as advertorial...
Click to read more »that even if deleted, you can request to have the article restored at WP:DRV once more sources are available. signed, Rosguill talk 04:24, 20 August 2020...
Click to read more »Warden (talk) 22:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Keep per apparent consensus at DRV; no point in singling out one episode for deletion. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz...
Click to read more »is a DRV, the other took place after a DRV discussion for that same article that resulted in consensus to refer it to AfD, attracting several DRV participants...
Click to read more »No prejudice towards relisting separately depending on outcome of ongoing DRV. (non-admin closure) Smartyllama (talk) 13:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC) Israel...
Click to read more »deletion/Trevor Henry (sports announcer)). Would it also be a good idea to use WP:DRV as well?--Prisencolin (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC) Welcome to the AfC...
Click to read more »discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:10, 4 August 2017 (UTC) Comment: The WP:DRV for this article was closed less than 10 hours ago as a near-unanimous endorsement...
Click to read more »made to this page. The result of the debate was Speedy Close WP:MFD is NOT DRV, if you want your subpage DELETED, please tag it for CSD, if someone ELSE...
Click to read more »any other DRV on the same page (see the DRV Nov 7 revision history). SparsityProblem has still not commented at all on the Erdos numbers DRV, and SparsityProblem's...
Click to read more »52 (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC) Comment -- We just concluded in a DRV that Airline destinations, as a group, are notable. That's fine. Of the 455...
Click to read more »the discussion in DRV so that you can ignore that you had no consensus to delete and can't get one, but when we discussed it in DRV, there was a fairly...
Click to read more »Aecis Mr. Mojo risin' 20:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC) Redir. undeleted via WP:DRV. IMO the original reasons for deletion are still prfectly valid, and this...
Click to read more »13 September 2007 (UTC) The deletion of that list was already taken to DRV, and had its deletion endorsed by another admin, but that's neither here...
Click to read more »point. Spanneraol (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2012 (UTC) It was overturned in DRV because of sockpuppetry being involved in the original AFD. Secret account...
Click to read more »recourse is a DRV to restore the deleted content, or simply to create new articles using those sources. If I see any such sources, I will file the DRV myself...
Click to read more »nominated at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 May 28#Template:Blank DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 8 Discussion referenced above...
Click to read more »was sent to DRV by an IP, whose comments are reproduced below. However, the last discussion was almost two years ago, and I believe the DRV was started...
Click to read more »believes this is "harassment" after AfD / DRV "endorsed" his position. AfD deleted the article he undeleted, DRV endorsed its remaining deleted. It is currently...
Click to read more »now a mere shell with a product/feature listing. If it weren't for the AfD/DRV history, I'd probably speedy delete it as a non-notable website. As it is...
Click to read more »review/Log/2019 April 8. The Keep !votes at the AFD, this draft, and the DRV all appear to be sockpuppetry. Need ECP in both draft space and article space...
Click to read more »extensively-rewritten draft of the same subject deleted at the earlier AfD. A DRV discussion, while permitting the rewrite, raised questions about the correctness...
Click to read more »seen it. You began reverting the deletions after the DRV was opened, but before noticing the DRV was already opened by someone else. I think that's right...
Click to read more »February 2006 (UTC) Originally speedy-deleted as a neologism, undeleted at DRV for further scrutiny under the full deletion process. No vote at present...
Click to read more »contribs • logs) 01:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC) Note that this has been taken to DRV for the NAC. I have reviewed the close and given the sources provided by...
Click to read more »(through AfD), it was recreated and redeleted again, then brought up at DRV where there was overwhelming consensus to keep it deleted. The information...
Click to read more »to deletion review. The /Log subpage in the title is needed to test the DRV closing script. Test page 1 (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (revisions|restore)...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was delete. Per discussion at WP:DRV (here), the original close was overturned to delete. As noted by some editors...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was Delete. Since the relist after DRV consensus has clearly moved towards deletion. Michig (talk) 07:06, 28 March...
Click to read more »Editorofthewiki started a DRV for an article started by Kitia, commenting that Kitia's block might be wrong. A 2 day old account starting a DRV isn't the actions...
Click to read more »September 2007 (UTC) Speedy delete and salt. Re-create in userspace and send to DRV at this point. - Chardish 18:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Delete and salt...
Click to read more »should deserve an apology. I have not seen that the deletion was disputed WP:DRV. If you truly want to revive the list, then I recommend that you raise it...
Click to read more ») Listed for Deletion Review = Dark red + small superscript "DRV" linking to current DRV (Maybe better purple? Something else?) Deleted = Dark red + small...
Click to read more »(View log) This article was speedy deleted during its first AfD as a hoax. DRV overturned as "hoax" is not a CSD criterion, especially for articles with...
Click to read more »made to this page. The result was Speedy Keep per recent discussion. Use WP:DRV. Naconkantari 20:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Third holiest site in Islam...
Click to read more »December 2011 (UTC) Note from DRV closer. This was endorsed because the previous discussion was defective through poor arguments. DRV specifically gave leave...
Click to read more »deletion/Tim Tam. Uncle G 16:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC) A consensus was reached at DRV to overturn the speedy deletion of this article [1]. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »admin, he wouldn't restore them so I went to DRV and informed the admin of this. So I followed the DRV process exactly as it should be done. RMHED (talk)...
Click to read more »first AfD, recreated, and then deleted again by WP:CSD#G4. However, the DRV suggests that G4 had been inappropriately applied. I abstain. King of ♥ ♦...
Click to read more »with an intervening DRV (First AfD, intervening DRV, and second AfD). Present draft is now being considered for deletion per recent DRV. Justification for...
Click to read more »2014 (UTC) You can use WP:DRV when he's notable. JMHamo (talk) 03:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC) And yet the last time I went to WP:DRV after a player whose article...
Click to read more »when referring to the closer of a discussion. Review discussions, including DRV, MR, and AN, are challenging for the editor who performed the close being...
Click to read more »doesn't understand Wikipedia policy, and has ignored my request to go to DRV; I figured I could just ignore it and not recreate the article, but maybe...
Click to read more »not satisfactorily demonstrate its notability. See also recent DRV discussion and DRV in 2007 (where I see DGG saying the equivalent of "keep". But this...
Click to read more »that it should be the subject of a full deletion discussion instead. The DRV discussion contains links that may be of relevance. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »this DRV to push Brandt's POV, not to judge the propriety of the deletion, and they have all been around long enough to know what DRV is for. DRV is not...
Click to read more »discussion on the first AfD, and another 5 days, 11 hours and 21 minutes at the DRV debate. That's a total of 13 days, 10 hours and 17 minutes of discussion...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was withdrawn by nominator since DRV for previous AfD is still open. Owen× ☎ 16:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC) AfDs for...
Click to read more »debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 07:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC) Undeleted after a DRV dicussion did not produce a majority to endorse. And I am relisting on AFD...
Click to read more »changed sufficiently since the last afd, which was subsequently endorsed by DRV. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC) Protest. First AfD was for...
Click to read more »this notice. Don't forget to add {{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/DRV}} to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) After the last AFD, a DRV was opened and resulted in no consensus as a service. I have used my discretion...
Click to read more »from recreation. This new version was supported at WP:DRV and so I have moved it into place. DRV also wanted it relisted here. -Splashtalk 23:40, 15 March...
Click to read more »Angry Aryans (band) Jcuk 19:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Delete per discussion on DRV, simply being used as one of a number of examples in articles about white...
Click to read more »was only closed last week and which is still under further discussion at DRV. WP:DELAFD states that "It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page...
Click to read more »was deleted following this 2008 discussion, supported again somewhat at DRV and then moved here. Article hasn't been edited since then. I note that the...
Click to read more »criterion G11, but that was overturned here, with a "no consensus" result. At DRV, speedy deletions are typically undone on no consensus, but under the circumstances...
Click to read more »of policy to overturn the deletion of something, the place to do it is WP:DRV. While I would strongly encourage you to drop the WP:STICK, if you absolutely...
Click to read more »going through WP:DRV. For shame. -- Plutor talk 14:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC) Contested speedy deletions should go to AFD, not DRV in my opinion. Either...
Click to read more »suggestions you might have on mw:Special page names. Also this week: BLP, DRV, ARB, IRC — Wikipedian death — WikiWorld — News and notes — Features and...
Click to read more »go to DRV if the result is contested. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC) Speedy keep- If you disagreed with the close yetsrday, DRV is thataway...
Click to read more »make deletion less painful for goodfaith newbie contributors? Should the DRV processes be amended? Is AfD broken? That's a start. --Dweller (talk) 12:44...
Click to read more »accounts created, a few hours apart, to support user:Hentheden in a flimsy DRV case. Special:Diff/1245965226/1245982770 (user:Philthebanker)...
Click to read more »rejected at DRV. Rebbing 21:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC) Rubbish. None of my above assertions above about the last AfD were rejected at DRV. duffbeerforme...
Click to read more »mean that it is discriminate. And this is what I'll say at the inevitable DRV, too.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC) Overturned to no consensus...
Click to read more »the log page which has only the closed DRV discussion. Here's a link to the revision before that where the DRV discussion can be read. Note: This debate...
Click to read more »consideration. (It was also recreated and speedied between the 2nd AFD and the DRV, but that has no bearing on this discussion.) I have no opinion. Chaser -...
Click to read more »to my comments on the talk page was, "Well, I'd rather have a backlog at DRV than a backlog in 10 other places like we do now. That would be a sign of...
Click to read more »deleted whilst on AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gfxvoid, but WP:DRV decided to reverse that as an out-of-process speedy and send it back here...
Click to read more »basis and I didn't feel that it was warranted. I couldn't bring it to WP:DRV because it had been recreated so at that point it wasn't deleted (although...
Click to read more »opposer citing a DRV discussion. The article was originally deleted after AfD in February 2010, but was restored after DRV. The nominator at DRV expressed concerns...
Click to read more »last AfD closed four days ago. May I ask why this is not a matter for WP:DRV? The keep votes after the relist don't appear to be blocked accounts, aside...
Click to read more »with the DRV here and the two DRVs from 2021. I know perfectly well how to assess consensus, as evidenced by my thousands of successful XfD/DRV closures...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Speedy deletion under BLP1E reversed by DRV as BLP1E is not a speedy criteria. Relisting to resume discussion. Spartaz...
Click to read more »If the nominator is unhappy with the recent AfD close he should use WP:DRV not this unprocedural nomination. TerriersFan 01:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)...
Click to read more »it is not appropriate to have an AFD and DRV running simultaneously. Based on the current state of that DRV (consensus to relist appears to be forming)...
Click to read more »BLabberiNg 08:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC) This page was speedy deleted. A DRV consensus found the speedy improper as outside of the CSDs. Deletion supporters...
Click to read more »endorse an admin's closure at DRV if it was in line with consensus. However, you've also said in this DRV, linked above, that DRV should serve as 'AFD round...
Click to read more »view in the discussion is the strongest or correct one. A common refrain in situations like this is, "this would've been brought to DRV no matter what"....
Click to read more »8 August 2008 (UTC) Note: DRV reopened I've reverted the early close of Wikijob DRV, due to consensus here and at the DRV itself. This thread can be...
Click to read more »Recognition by the Urban Spice (Urban X) Awards/Hall of Fame, by previous AFD and DRV consensus, is insufficient to establish notability; the awards fail the...
Click to read more »- Mailer Diablo 16:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC) A consensus was reached at DRV to overturn the speedy deletion of this article [1]. This is a procedural...
Click to read more »way to appeal a deletion decision. Contact the deleting admin, and see WP:DRV if that doesn't work out. This is a Non-admin closure --Fyre2387 (talk •...
Click to read more »forces yet another DRV would have little practical effect but to prove our point.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 17:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC) DRV is to decide whether...
Click to read more »been recreated after the first DRV (especially under a different name to end-run around the salting), and the second DRV should not have been closed as...
Click to read more »on point. Monicasdude 14:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC) WP:DRV doesn't cover notability issues, though; DRV is for whether the procedures were invalid or not,...
Click to read more »article was originally speedy-deleted under CSD G10/BLP concerns. However, DRV overturned, finding BLP-compliant, non-controversial revisions in the history...
Click to read more »the DRV decision would be to overturn or to relist, not endorse. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 03:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC) No, that's not how DRV works. DRV only...
Click to read more »undeleted the article despite the fact it had been through two AfDs and a DRV, and the community consensus at all three was to delete. Problem 2 As the...
Click to read more »exists that needs to be respected. I would personally have put this on WP:DRV as an improper close (consensus existed, that consensus was to delete, admin...
Click to read more »the revision deletion --DannyS712 (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2019 (UTC) The DRV closed as permit recreation - so anyone can replace the redirect with a sourced...
Click to read more »WP:DRV is mostly for overturning deletions to restore a deleted version. A recreation of a different article under the same name doesn't mandate DRV. MLauba...
Click to read more »"shadowy userspace police." What do you mean by DRV, though? Doug Mehus T·C 03:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC) WP:DRV is the standard shortcut to deletion review...
Click to read more »This was deleted at AfD just a month ago, userfied after a trip through DRV, immediately moved to draft space, and the resubmitted with only the addition...
Click to read more »speedy close DRV is how you contest AfD results, not via immediately doing another AfD. AfDs done soon after eachother without being because of DRV are strongly...
Click to read more »Templates used for voting - out of scope to DRV really, and no majority for anything, but unclear that DRV has a mandate to reverse/endorse debates/deletion...
Click to read more »consensus - original close vacated, and AfD re-closed as "no consensus" per DRV. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 01:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC) Note: nominator/creator...
Click to read more »page. The result was speedy keep. The last AfD closed as keep, and the DRV endorsed that close. Bringing the same arguments back here after being rebuffed...
Click to read more »2009 (UTC) Speedy close and take to DRV. Burning Ring of Fire (talk) 07:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC) It was at DRV, then restored. The speedy-tagger will...
Click to read more »page. The result was delete. And salt. Further discussion can occur at DRV and other appropriate venues. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:18, 22 April 2020 (UTC)...
Click to read more »this to WP:DRV, not by immediately opening a new AFD. I'm going to open a DRV and copy your nomination statement from here to there. DRV sometimes returns...
Click to read more »links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log) Procedural nomination from DRV here. Article was deleted in a previous AfD and recreated multiple times...
Click to read more »be made to this page. The result was delete. As if expired prod, see WP:DRV if needed. ST47 (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC) AfDs for this article: Articles...
Click to read more »and deletion review). User, while managing 2,000+ words of invective at DRV alone about how everyone wanting this deleted are evil, has someone not managed...
Click to read more »deleted following an AFD which I initiated. It was restored as the result of a DRV (of which I was not notified) and the deletion overturned as "no consensus"...
Click to read more »deleted as CSD A7, regarding an entrant in the TV show America's Got Talent. DRV overturned these deletions, finding an appearance on the show constituted...
Click to read more »January 2016 (UTC) Speedy Keep. I try to stay out of commenting in both DRV and AfDs on the same article, but this article was literally cleared for...
Click to read more »RAJU(T) 12:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC) Delete per the comments I made at the DRV. No need to rehash them. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:56...
Click to read more »that have already been deleted? If the latter, arguably this belongs on DRV or TfD rather than here. I raise this not to be formal and bureaucratic,...
Click to read more »to this page. The result was keep all . This AfD, as well as the AfD and DRV cited by the nominator, give the impression that the community wants to cover...
Click to read more »made to this page. The result was Procedural close. This needs to go to WP:DRV. — Caknuck (talk) 05:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC) AfDs for this article: Articles...
Click to read more »Page deleted via prod, restored automatically after request at DRV. Initial feedback at DRV was that there may be no reliable sources for this. Is it real...
Click to read more »January 2008 (UTC) Your rationale for renomination should be taken to WP:DRV, not here. What makes you think a no consensus decision can be tipped one...
Click to read more »is. Other debates can be found in the archives at CSD talk, and in the WP:DRV/U archives. For hard-core backlog readers, there's also material at User...
Click to read more »establishes the product's notability, he can seek a consensus for recreation at DRV per the usual procedure. (And let's try to avoid here the festival of sockpuppetry...
Click to read more »be made to this page. The result was delete. As if expired prod, see WP:DRV if needed. ST47 (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC) [Hide this box] New to Articles...
Click to read more »clearly not a serious request for deletion. Possibly could have gone to DRV but we have a consensus now Spartaz Humbug! 21:21, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Nitto...
Click to read more »Mailer Diablo 00:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Tagged as speedy, taken to WP:DRV. Restored out-of-process by Tony Sidaway who then failed to notify User:NSLE...
Click to read more »left these alone for a while, to give the original nominator time to AFD or DRV the situation. Today I found them again, and AFDed them myself. Given that...
Click to read more »being created. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Take the original to DRV. A new discussion is only going to cause an uproar due to the injunction...
Click to read more »DELETE. -Splashtalk 00:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC) Following discussion at WP:DRV these are being returned for re-examination. Currently no opinion. There...
Click to read more »3 June 2011 (UTC) I'm speedying these. WP:IAR. Feel free to bring to WP:DRV if you disagree -- Samir 05:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC) For the record I'm against...
Click to read more »recommended a new discussion that considers new sources presented during the DRV and the DRV instructions allow a new AFD when there isn't a consensus, so here...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This has been at AFD twice and then DRV. The first AFD I closed as keep but during AFD2 it was revealed that the...
Click to read more »made to this page. The result was keep. Neıl ☎ 00:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC) DRV for this article: * Result of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 3:...
Click to read more »(discussion) 🔔🔔 (discussion 1, discussion 2) 👾 (discussion, DRV) 🔞 (RfD1, RfD2, RfD3, DRV, RfD4) 🎈 release (discussion) As the above essay states, "Redirects...
Click to read more »Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AirLex Animations. If anyone disagees, take this to WP:DRV, please. DES (talk) 02:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC) NN, vanity, only google...
Click to read more »you want the topic in article space, you need to make such a request at WP:DRV to establish that significant new information has come to light to overcome...
Click to read more »tags were removed. If the consensus of the AFD is disputed, it should go to DRV. —teb728 t c 12:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC) Neutral comment from creator I...
Click to read more »article. Here is the ten day long conversation that went nowhere, take it to DRV if you wish. On another note, if there are no objections, if somebody wants...
Click to read more »(talk) 17:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC) Delete as followup to my comment at DRV that the CSD rationale was valid to start with. I'm unprejudiced to new material...
Click to read more »this page. The result was delete. As if it was an expired prod, see WP:DRV if needed. ST47 (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2019 (UTC) [Hide this box] New to Articles...
Click to read more »solve a problem identified at DRV and the last AfD. We could achieve the same discussion if we took the last AfD to DRV and had it relisted for lack of...
Click to read more »vanity. Madchester 01:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC) This was speedied, but WP:DRV concluded that this was out-of-process and sent it here instead. -Splashtalk...
Click to read more »just filed a DRV request at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 November 6 to re-create the Vugar Ismailov article in mainspace. In this DRV request User:Writer278...
Click to read more »of the 1,000,000th edit was. I came across this argument at the previous DRV, looked into the sources involved, and find it compelling. --j⚛e deckertalk...
Click to read more »dismissive "no" [33]. DRV is not a suggestion, these should be undeleted right now.--God of War 04:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC) DRV is not a straight vote...
Click to read more »deletion, and therefore it should not have come back into existence without a DRV debate. This could be speedily deleted as G4, but, since we're here, we can...
Click to read more »Lenahan - Starblind 00:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC) Speedy close and move to WP:DRV, contested speedy deletions go on deletion review, not AFD. --Coredesat (talk)...
Click to read more »free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:NWEB. Previously at DRV so sending to AFD. StraussInTheHouse (talk) 12:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC) Note:...
Click to read more »only two votes, both to delete. The closer made it a redirect. Then on WP:DRV it was argued that it should be kept. The result was to put it back here...
Click to read more »Delete The restoration was a mistake in any case, it should have gone to DRV as Neon White points out. Dougweller (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC) Keep;...
Click to read more »should be made to this page. The result was keep. Commentary since the DRV is strongly for keeping and is supported with solid sources. RL0919 (talk)...
Click to read more »(t - c; 28) to w:ru:Шабу, Эжен (diff !top) - Link: www.grandprix.com/gpe/drv-chaeug.html (R/Xmeta/L) 2012-01-25 15:54:40 (UTC): w:no:User:Geanixx (t -...
Click to read more »review/Log/2008 October 7 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Chey. Note left at DRV. No opinion from me. Carcharoth (talk) 14:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC) Note:...
Click to read more »debate was Speedy deletion by User:Jdavidb. Closing because A. This is under DRV now, B. Unless I'm misreading, *community* (vs. new anon) consensus supports...
Click to read more »because the deletion arguments presented in the first AFD are no longer valid. DRV explicitly asks you to talk to the deleting admin first, but pot shots like...
Click to read more »was previously deleted in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Llamacon, but WP:DRV overturned this for a mixture of concerns over lack of involvement. See here...
Click to read more »