Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Christofascism

Wikiquestion

This is not really related to the VfD since it is a wiki markup question. But, since the answer applies here I am going ot go ahead and ask. Is there a way to make the numbering not start over every time someone inserts a non-numberd comment between two votes? In html ol and ul tags this is possible. Dalf | Talk 07:20, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing not. Or, at least, if there was a way to do that it would probably be the default. Master Thief Garrett 07:28, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tony Sidaway fixed it. Don't forget to thank him(?). Tomer ^TALK 13:33, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Question about format of this VfD page

(I'm placing this here on the talk page, where I should have put it to begin with)

Meta-comment: Is this division of votes into "keep", "delete", or "redirect" really helpful in building consensus? It very clearly makes it easier to count votes, but as far as I can tell, the VfD process is not a poll. Furthermore, separating comments in favor of deletion from comments in favor of retention makes it very difficult for people who disagree to respond directly to one another. This give-and-take often helps build consensus more quickly. Also, the usual chronological format makes it possible to track the flow of the discussion, and especially how users' opinions change in response to changes within the article. NatusRoma 18:19, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who put the "poll format" in place. I didn't mean for it to disrupt commentary, but this is a VfD not an RfC, which is, as it happens, a poll. Nonetheless, I think if anyone has particularly strong feelings on the matter, that they will make sure to make them known here in the comments section, which I purposely put at the top. If you really feel I have committed an eggregious error, feel free to undo it. Tomer ^TALK 23:13, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

My comment was based on my interpretation of Wikipedia is not a democracy, which says of the VfD process, "the discussion is more important than the actual voting." I am willing to thread the existing votes into a standard chronological list, but I'll wait until you reply. NatusRoma 03:33, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to what, exactly? Ask an admin (of which several have voted here already, I believe), and follow their recommendation. Tomer ^TALK 22:32, May 3, 2005 (UTC)