User talk:Graham Beards: Difference between revisions
Graham Beards (talk | contribs) 48 OK |
→Rockstar 101: new section |
||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
I sort of understand your reasoning behind closing [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1]]. However, once upon a time {{user|Raul654}} and {{user|SandyGeorgia}}, would at times immediately restart a nomination that was getting muddled. In this case, we have a very special potential 50th anniversary [[WP:TFA]] on September 28th. I understand you have granted special exception for a one-week relisting. However, that still cuts things very close in terms of trying to achieve [[WP:FA]] in time. Is it possible to request immediate relisting or a much shorter window such as 48 hours. After over 350kb of discourse during the FAC, expecting a resolution on the talk page with no process to encourage people to come to a decision is a little much to ask. This article needs a FAC to force people to crystallize their opinions and this candidate needs to be relisted ASAP in hopes of achieving a 50th anniversary. This 350kb+ FAC is a very special case and should be given special consideration.--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|C]]/[[WP:FOUR]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:WAWARD]])</small> 16:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
I sort of understand your reasoning behind closing [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1]]. However, once upon a time {{user|Raul654}} and {{user|SandyGeorgia}}, would at times immediately restart a nomination that was getting muddled. In this case, we have a very special potential 50th anniversary [[WP:TFA]] on September 28th. I understand you have granted special exception for a one-week relisting. However, that still cuts things very close in terms of trying to achieve [[WP:FA]] in time. Is it possible to request immediate relisting or a much shorter window such as 48 hours. After over 350kb of discourse during the FAC, expecting a resolution on the talk page with no process to encourage people to come to a decision is a little much to ask. This article needs a FAC to force people to crystallize their opinions and this candidate needs to be relisted ASAP in hopes of achieving a 50th anniversary. This 350kb+ FAC is a very special case and should be given special consideration.--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|C]]/[[WP:FOUR]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:WAWARD]])</small> 16:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
:(EC) I considered a restart, but decided that a cooling-off period was needed. I will allow 48hours rather than a week. Please link to this discussion when you renominate so folk know. [[User:GrahamColm|Graham Colm]] ([[User talk:GrahamColm#top|talk]]) 16:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
:(EC) I considered a restart, but decided that a cooling-off period was needed. I will allow 48hours rather than a week. Please link to this discussion when you renominate so folk know. [[User:GrahamColm|Graham Colm]] ([[User talk:GrahamColm#top|talk]]) 16:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Rockstar 101 == |
|||
Hi Graham, Following your comments on [[Rockstar 101]], I've done some copy editing on the article. Could you have a check to see whether you still consider this to be in "oppose" territory, or whether there is a chance that this could go through (albeit with further edits)? Many thanks - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 20:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:45, 12 August 2013
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
FL Nomination for List of AFC Wimbledon seasons
Dear Graham, thank you for your help regarding my featured list nomination. This is my first time submitting one and I appreciate your help. with kind regards, Jodie25 (talk) 22:26, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- You are very welcome. Transclusions can be confusing. Graham Colm (talk) 05:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate, have you had a chance to revisit this one lately? I gather it's been copyedited since you raised your prose concerns... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Ian, I still have a few concerns, which I have raised at the FAC a few moments ago. Graham Colm (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1
I sort of understand your reasoning behind closing Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1. However, once upon a time Raul654 (talk · contribs) and SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs), would at times immediately restart a nomination that was getting muddled. In this case, we have a very special potential 50th anniversary WP:TFA on September 28th. I understand you have granted special exception for a one-week relisting. However, that still cuts things very close in terms of trying to achieve WP:FA in time. Is it possible to request immediate relisting or a much shorter window such as 48 hours. After over 350kb of discourse during the FAC, expecting a resolution on the talk page with no process to encourage people to come to a decision is a little much to ask. This article needs a FAC to force people to crystallize their opinions and this candidate needs to be relisted ASAP in hopes of achieving a 50th anniversary. This 350kb+ FAC is a very special case and should be given special consideration.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 16:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- (EC) I considered a restart, but decided that a cooling-off period was needed. I will allow 48hours rather than a week. Please link to this discussion when you renominate so folk know. Graham Colm (talk) 16:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Rockstar 101
Hi Graham, Following your comments on Rockstar 101, I've done some copy editing on the article. Could you have a check to see whether you still consider this to be in "oppose" territory, or whether there is a chance that this could go through (albeit with further edits)? Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)