Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugo Austin
Oh, it would have been easier to say keep a, b, c, d, and delete, e, f, g, h, i, j, k.... but a huge mass nomination does not really allow editors the luxury of time to go through them one by one by one by one by one (etc) to make an individual determination for each to see which might be salvagable per  and  and , and which might not... or even if one or two actually do have the required sourcing and should not have been nominated.  By placing all the eggs in one basket, the nom allows either a keep all or delete all.  With such a practice, whether perceived as disruptive or not, even even one gets deleted that should not have been, all of Wikipedia is diminished
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 06:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ATD||WP:PRESERVE||WP:POTENTIAL (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)