Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/LJ Drama

message: AfD withdrawn. A settlement has been reached. - nathanrdotcom 04:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what you're talking about, and I've re-added the AfD template. The discussion is not any of ours to close prematurely. Melchoir 07:21, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me explain it for you then. Read the top of the AfD very slowly. I was the one who initiated the AfD in the first place. I just withdrew it. Since I was the one who initiated it in the first place, I do think I have every right to withdraw it if I do choose. Any further attempt to re-add the AfD to the LJ Drama page will result in its deletion and if I have to break 3RR to make a point, I'll do it. - nathanrdotcom 07:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Let me make this crystal clear for you. Read the first paragraph of this page, then read this, then when you're finished that, read the top (where my original text was struck out) and the bottom of this (pay close attention to this paragraph "I started an AfD on LJ Drama for the reasons above. Most of the recommendations were to Delete, but I decided to retract the AfD because I reached a settlement. I think there's an understanding now not to post anything related to me unless sources can be cited."). Do you know what I'm talking about now? The AfD has been withdrawn. I was the one who initiated it, I'm the one withdrawing it. If you have a problem with this, you can speak to the Wikipedia admins. - nathanrdotcom 07:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Speedy keep; you will find no basis for a "withdrawl" of an active discussion. You do not own your contributions to Wikipedia, including AfD pages. But if you really insist on an ownership model, comfort yourself with this: the first AfD was yours. This one is mine. Melchoir 07:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, there was a failed AfD long before I initiated this AfD. This makes two. If you want to continue the AfD, fine. I refuse to have anything to do with it. - nathanrdotcom 08:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: You want to have it deleted? Fine. As long as people know that I have nothing to do with this. - nathanrdotcom 07:52, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: So you disagree that it was a blatant violation of WP:POINT, given that the article was AfD'd specifically due to a content dispute? --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 14:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't care about that. If you read the delete votes, none of them support the nominator. Melchoir 20:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: There's no way for an AfD nominator to withdraw a nomination partly because then it could be used as leverage for an unscrupulous editor: "change what I don't like about the article and I'll withdraw my nomination" is a kind of extortion, and not really in good faith. I, and several other editors, think this article should be deleted for reasons that are nothing to do with your original nomination - the reasoning behind deletions can and does change over the course of a nomination. As I stated on the AfD page, I do think it should be deleted, but not for the reasons you suggest. Therefore, the removal of the reasons you suggest (because you have reached a settlement) do not affect my reasons. Ziggurat 21:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)