On [1]. No one swapped the article's contents mid-AfD. When the swap happened, the afd was closed as keep. After the swap it was DRV:d, re-opened, and closed again. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to point out the same thing. At Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 January 19, you wrote There is no consensus as to the criticism directed by the closer at the person who swapped the article's contents mid-AfD, Sandstein. While on the face of it, this is true, it also ignores that each and every time someone agreed with the closer directing criticism at the swapper, it was pointed out that this is due to misunderstood circumstances. Over and over again, people were asked to reconsider their agreement. Over and over again, it was pointed out that the criticism was based on the assumption the swapper took action on a still-open AfD, something that is just not true. Can I ask you to reconsider, and perhaps place much less weight on those agreeing with the criticism than on those asking for the criticism to be overturned? Best Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reconsider how? Sandstein 18:34, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A few years ago, there appears to have been a fairly contentious deletion request about the above article that led to a redirect. I was not editing Wikipedia at that time, but I learned about this while making a page in my sandbox, when I was confused as to why someone with a decent-sized playing career and a pretty long umpiring career was a redirect. Something seemed suspicious when I read the AFD thread, namely the nominator being banned shortly after making the AFD request.

I'm not used to this avenue of communication, so bear with me if I say something wrong. Anyway, what could I do to get this article's status reconsidered? -- JustJamie820 (talk) 06:13, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find sources that meet WP:GNG, i.e. better ones than those discussed in the AfD, you can recreate the article and cite them. Sandstein 09:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do my best. Since I was recommended not to boldly restore, I'll make a draft first. Would I need to let you know when I finish it or someone else? -- JustJamie820 (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend submitting it to WP:AFC, they specialize in this. Sandstein 20:11, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You've been very helpful so far. Now, I have an article to revamp... -- JustJamie820 (talk) 23:11, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this needs to be mentioned to you or not, but Draft:John West (cricketer, born 1861) has been made. I did find two vintage newspaper articles on him (maybe more if I wanted to pay for access to the British Newspapers site...hey, I'm willing to do it if I know I'll find things about him or others of his vintage!), and I really do hope that it's enough to get this over. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 05:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein Can you please provide me the draft of the article Uday Narkar you deleted after AfD discussion? XYZ 250706 (talk) 16:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, please ask somebody else at WP:RFU. Sandstein 16:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your considered close of the DRV. The fact remains though - after sources were found, more people !voted keep than delete, and the DRV even acknowledged GNG was met, so I'm asking what you think the correct path is at this point to get this back into mainspace? SportingFlyer T·C 03:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the general rules for AfD deletions apply: if you can create a version of the article that convincingly addresses the reasons for which the article was deleted (or, in this case, redirected), you can restore the article to mainspace. In my view, this would require finding and citing GNG-relevant sources that were not already cited in the AfD or in the article at the time of the AfD's closure, and preferably asking the view of the AfD nominator and closer whether the concerns raised in the AfD are now addressed. Sandstein 07:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. In order to do that comprehensively, I'd need access to the British historical archives, which I just can't access at the moment. But thank you, I'll see what I can do. SportingFlyer T·C 23:50, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandstein Can you please provide me the draft of the article Uday Narkar that you deleted recently? XYZ 250706 (talk) 14:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply above. Sandstein 14:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]