| Revision as of 15:06, 10 August 2013 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Robot: Archiving 1 thread (older than 5d) to User talk:GrahamColm/Archives/2013.← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:30, 11 August 2013 edit undoGraham Beards (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators35,514 edits 48 OKNext edit → | ||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
| 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, ] (]) 01:33, 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, ] (]) 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. ] (]) 05:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC) | :Hi Ian, I still have a few concerns, which I have raised at the FAC a few moments ago. ] (]) 05:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| == Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1 == | |||
| I sort of understand your reasoning behind closing ]. 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 ] 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 ] 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.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/])</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. ] (]) 16:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:30, 11 August 2013
 Archives |
|
|
|
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)
Perseus (constellation)
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)
Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1
I sort of understand your reasoning behind closing Misplaced Pages: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)