Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristi Yamaoka (fourth nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristi Yamaoka (second nomination)|AfD2 ended with 21 editors specifying keep, 6 deletes and 1 merge; the result was '''keep'''. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristi Yamaoka (third nomination)|AfD3 ended with 12 keeps and 4 deletes; the result was '''keep'''.  requires you to obey precedent, stating that '''...editors should not continuously nominate an article to WP:AFD until it reaches their preferred outcome.''' You've tried twice and failed twice, by overwhelming majority votes, your preferred definition. All you are doing now is spitting in the face of consensus and overwhelming precedent. By your logic, if some future AfD should finally end with your "preferred outcome", why should anyone respect the delete and not simply recreate this article, exactly as is? I'm not sure why you have developed this |ignore all rules obsession with deleting this article, but your  is disruptive of one of the most fundamental of Wikipedia's official policies. If consensus means nothing, why bother trying to reach it or change it
— User:Alansohn, 14:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:CONSENSUS||WP:IAR||WP:POINT (Wikipedia:Consensus)