This is an RfA talk page.
While
voting and most discussion should occur on the main RfA page, sometimes discussions stray off-topic or otherwise clutter that page. The RfA talk page serves to unclutter the main RfA page by hosting discussions that are not related to the candidacy.
|
It appears that as soon as someone posted (correctly) on the General comments section, it triggered a (1) Neutral vote/score. Does anyone know how to fix this, so its back to (0)? Cordially, History DMZ ( HQ) † ( wire) 21:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
– [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small>
posted in the GC section may have triggered it.@ Djm-leighpark: are you opposing over just one edit (rather than, say, asking the candidate about it and giving them a chance to address your concern and act differently in future)? Or are you saying that there's some pattern of bad behaviour here? — Bilorv ( talk) 16:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
So as it turned out I relisted that AfD. When I did so I was unaware that there had been a close and it had been reverted so a relist turned out to be (in my opinion) the right decision. However, perhaps there as a consensus but it was simply not clear cut enough to be a non-administrative close. In that case the person reverting their close shouldn't relist because that would just needlessly extend discussion. I think I've been as vocal as anyone about NAC at AfD and while I wasn't aware of what happened when I relisted, I was aware of this before my co-nomination and, with respect, don't see this to be a disqualifying action. Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 16:54, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Emphasis on the pet hate here! As far as I know there is no explicit procedure for undoing an AfD close and people (including current admins) do it without relisting all the time. Maybe you're right that it's confusing and there should be a process written down somewhere, but until that happens, expecting an RfA candidate to follow a practice that you personally find important but haven't told anyone about is a bit... arbitrary. – Joe ( talk) 17:07, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure how a single edit, especially one clearly done in good faith could ever be considered enough to oppose over. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 21:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
This is an RfA talk page.
While
voting and most discussion should occur on the main RfA page, sometimes discussions stray off-topic or otherwise clutter that page. The RfA talk page serves to unclutter the main RfA page by hosting discussions that are not related to the candidacy.
|
It appears that as soon as someone posted (correctly) on the General comments section, it triggered a (1) Neutral vote/score. Does anyone know how to fix this, so its back to (0)? Cordially, History DMZ ( HQ) † ( wire) 21:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
– [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small>
posted in the GC section may have triggered it.@ Djm-leighpark: are you opposing over just one edit (rather than, say, asking the candidate about it and giving them a chance to address your concern and act differently in future)? Or are you saying that there's some pattern of bad behaviour here? — Bilorv ( talk) 16:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
So as it turned out I relisted that AfD. When I did so I was unaware that there had been a close and it had been reverted so a relist turned out to be (in my opinion) the right decision. However, perhaps there as a consensus but it was simply not clear cut enough to be a non-administrative close. In that case the person reverting their close shouldn't relist because that would just needlessly extend discussion. I think I've been as vocal as anyone about NAC at AfD and while I wasn't aware of what happened when I relisted, I was aware of this before my co-nomination and, with respect, don't see this to be a disqualifying action. Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 16:54, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Emphasis on the pet hate here! As far as I know there is no explicit procedure for undoing an AfD close and people (including current admins) do it without relisting all the time. Maybe you're right that it's confusing and there should be a process written down somewhere, but until that happens, expecting an RfA candidate to follow a practice that you personally find important but haven't told anyone about is a bit... arbitrary. – Joe ( talk) 17:07, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure how a single edit, especially one clearly done in good faith could ever be considered enough to oppose over. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 21:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)