User talk:Scepia/sum of pi

User:Scepia/sum of pi is part of WikiProject Userboxes. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as part of the userboxes system. WikiProject Userboxes itself is an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles and templates related to the userbox system, used on many users' pages. We need all your help, so join in today!UserboxesWikipedia:WikiProject UserboxesTemplate:WikiProject UserboxesUserboxes articles

TfD nomination of Template:User sumofpi

Template:User sumofpi has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Michael Slone (talk) 21:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination is over. The template will be subst'd onto user's pages, so that all content is preserved, and then removed from template namespace. Mackensen (talk) 19:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above was not the outcome of the TFD discussion. There was a clear consensus to keep this template. Admins are not allowed to over-ride both policy and community consensus to get their way. Consequently I have restored this template. --CBDunkerson 11:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but it isn't an argument I'm going to win. Incidentally, I welcome your comments at Wikipedia:Mackensen's Proposal. I remind you that policy also says you should have asked me to undelete first, or at the very least closed the WP:DRVU debate and then come here. Best, Mackensen (talk) 11:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mackensen, you shouldn't close a deletion discussion by deleting unless there is a consensus to delete. Please respect Wikipedia policies in the future. Jimpartame 12:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the WP:DRVU. I was out of date - I checked WP:DRV for this and didn't realize there was now a separate DRVU. Not finding it on DRV I undeleted this one template (of several) by way of a 'challenge' to the procedure you were following. Call it an 'exclamation mark' to drive the point home without getting into full-scale unilateral reversal of all your actions here. As to asking you to undelete first, I had assumed you had seen the discussion on the TFD talk page... Cyde was also involved in the deletion/protection of the page and had there rejected restoration. --CBDunkerson 12:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's chalk it up as a series of misunderstandings, then. Mackensen (talk) 13:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]