Keep schools. Verifiable and NPOV. First, preserve knowledge, then expand knowledge. Thanks to Neutrality, I've had no time for adding content today. --Unfocused05:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Snide comments are unwelcome, and especially unbefitting an administrator and an arbitrator. My observation was simple fact; your VfD disruption has taken me well in excess of an hour to get through. This is time I would normally otherwise spend adding valuable content. --Unfocused06:01, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel like showing the least bit respect for someone who—of his own free will—votes "keep" on dozens of schools that have not the least bit of significant, importance, or notability ascribed to them, including elementary schools. You chose not to spend your time "adding valuable content"; instead you chose to cut-and-paste a (very snide) message saying that thanks to me you couldn't possibly have done anything useful. Neutralitytalk 13:54, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Now, now, play nicely, and take this up on your Talk pages, not on the Vfd. Goodness me, it's like a parliament session... the fact that Neutrality has chosen to studiously crawl through the entire alphabet(!) and Vfd anything he doesn't see as fitting is fine, it's every user's right to, whether the rest of WP agrees with the nominations or not. Just because you are on a "all schools MUST BE SAVED!" crusade doesn't mean it's his "fault" for nominating things. I see more than enough Keep votes here to qualify for a no-consensus without you using your precious time on it. If you feel too strongly about an issue, just stop watching Vfd and go write said articles. If you go through the alphabet and beat Neutrality to them, maybe some schools will reach the Vfd in a less laughably useless state than most of these are in. Master Thief Garrett14:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Again, a snide and disrespectful comment unbefitting an administrator and an arbitrator. Please cease with the personal attacks. I have the right to vote what I believe should be included. I also have the right to point out in my comments that my time could have been spent more productively. Your comment about not showing the least bit of respect suggests that this is a deliberate disruptive crusade you're on. Intentionally or not, you're creating discord where there was once only disagreement. Please see the message I posted earlier on your talk page. I look forward to seeking a solution. --Unfocused15:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I examine each VfD individually, examining them, and checking sources for myself on each and every one. Because I research them, I don't have time to research and add other content due to an apparent VfD spamming by a single user. This user has been here long enough to witness lack of consensus on school articles, yet seems to want to force a point, or at least force a policy where consensus has been against his opinion and trending further against him. This Wikipedia administrator and arbitrator then tells me he doesn't feel like showing me respect, and you support him? Is this really what you want Wikipedia to become? --Unfocused14:22, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Participating in VfD was your choice. Neutrality did not force you to do it with his perfectly valid nominations. If you choose to spend your time here, it is not his fault. You disagree, and that's fine, but if you want respect from him, don't post a snarky remark directed towards him to multiple vfds. I don't understand why you're outraged when this is just common sense. Gamaliel15:48, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What is common sense would be to observe that there has been no "delete schools" consensus, and make nominations at a pace that allows for improvement of the marginal articles instead of crapflooding VfD with articles nearly certain not to get deleted. --Unfocused15:56, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
