Support as nominator --
Tomer T (
talk) 17:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support as last time--
Tomcat(
7) 17:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support That we can't handle this sensibly, and have to renominate, is a total waste of everyone's time, as this should have been promoted already. When there isn't a single oppose, and 5 supports, it should be promoted, end of sentence. Adam Cuerden(
talk) 18:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support on principle, and would support speedy promotion, in agreement with Adam above. The only reason to be draconian about the end-date is if someone seems to be deliberately trying to game it somehow, which is hardly the case with a unanimous nomination like that one.
Chick Bowen 23:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support As above. This should have just gone through. Voting count nonsense aside, it's also clearly a worthwhile entry. -- Cooper 42(
Talk)(
Contr) 01:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator --
Tomer T (
talk) 17:36, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support as last time--
Tomcat(
7) 17:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support That we can't handle this sensibly, and have to renominate, is a total waste of everyone's time, as this should have been promoted already. When there isn't a single oppose, and 5 supports, it should be promoted, end of sentence. Adam Cuerden(
talk) 18:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support on principle, and would support speedy promotion, in agreement with Adam above. The only reason to be draconian about the end-date is if someone seems to be deliberately trying to game it somehow, which is hardly the case with a unanimous nomination like that one.
Chick Bowen 23:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Support As above. This should have just gone through. Voting count nonsense aside, it's also clearly a worthwhile entry. -- Cooper 42(
Talk)(
Contr) 01:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)reply