But I haven't deleted any pages, I merely put their deletion up for discussion. You acted rightly in telling that admin about his erroneous speedy deletion. However, I was not wrong in nominating those articles for deletion.
He's right, kids. It's not like he stepped up and went "I NO LIKE THIS. DELETED!" He saw some articles that may or may not constitute content that isn't typically acceptable on Wikipedia, and said "Well, we'll see what people think. Maybe it can go." just like ANY admin/mod would. And you're all entitled to disagree! That's why Wikipedia works as a democracy, where users and administrators alike are able to determine the content that remains on the website. But since few (if any) of you actually made a legitimate argument in all of this, I'm amazed that ANY of the articles in question remained intact. None of you really made much point here. You just started blasting this guy's nuts into a pulp for doing his job on that website.
Maybe it's just me, but this mostly seems to be a whole lot of sycophantic bleating about Yahtzee's work, rather than an actual effort to preserve some essentially useless Wikipedia pages that should've been compiled into a single article to begin with.