| Revision as of 14:51, 19 November 2013 editFlyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs)365,630 editsm Tweak and fixed typos in my post.← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:55, 19 November 2013 edit undoFlyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs)365,630 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| *<small>'''Note:''' Main contributors of the article including {{U|Flyer22}}, ], and {{U|DrNegative}} has been notified about this nomination, as the previous request was speedy declined because the nominator had zero edits on that article, and that none of the main editors were notified. <small><small><span style="border:1px solid black;background:#EFCA37;padding:4px;">] ]</span></small></small> 13:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)</small> | *<small>'''Note:''' Main contributors of the article including {{U|Flyer22}}, ], and {{U|DrNegative}} has been notified about this nomination, as the previous request was speedy declined because the nominator had zero edits on that article, and that none of the main editors were notified. <small><small><span style="border:1px solid black;background:#EFCA37;padding:4px;">] ]</span></small></small> 13:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *I request that this nomination be '''closed''', per similar reasoning given at ]. In part, ] explicitly states: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination." Blurred Lines did not do that; he simply notified us as if to state, "Yep, you're going through a FA review unless you decide to leave the work up to me." And that is why I reverted him and . This will come across as biting, but it's how I feel: I do not appreciate editors who are not significant contributors to an article swooping in and nominating that article for a higher status without attempting to consult with the main contributors about it, if the main contributors are still generally active on Misplaced Pages, especially nominators who won't be doing enough or most of the work...but will get that "I helped bring this article to FA" badge. It is frustrating to essentially be forced into a FA review. I am not ready for this FA review, and I know (from experience at this article) that I would very likely be doing most of the work (such as making sure that editors are not cutting important things or unnecessarily cutting things), especially since I am currently the editor who most actively edits the Avatar (2009 film) article. It should go without saying that FA reviews are stressing/frustrating because substantial changes are made to an article at the suggestion of other editors, often substantial changes that are not needed and are more so or solely personal opinion. Also, ], as currently the second highest-billed contributor to the Avatar (2009 film) article, who is still very active on Misplaced Pages and who actually contributed more material to this article despite the fact that I am currently billed as the top contributor, should have been contacted about this nomination as well. | *I request that this nomination be '''closed''', per similar reasoning given at ]. In part, ] explicitly states: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination." Blurred Lines did not do that; he simply notified us as if to state, "Yep, you're going through a FA review unless you decide to leave the work up to me." And that is why I reverted him and . This will come across as biting, but it's how I feel: I do not appreciate editors who are not significant contributors to an article swooping in and nominating that article for a higher status without attempting to consult with the main contributors about it, if the main contributors are still generally active on Misplaced Pages, especially nominators who won't be doing enough or most of the work...but will get that "I helped bring this article to FA" badge. It is frustrating to essentially be forced into a FA review. I am not ready for this FA review, and I know (from experience at this article) that I would very likely be doing most of the work (such as making sure that editors are not cutting important things or unnecessarily cutting things), especially since I am currently the editor who most actively edits the Avatar (2009 film) article. It should go without saying that FA reviews are stressing/frustrating because substantial changes are made to an article at the suggestion of other editors, often substantial changes that are not needed and are more so or solely personal opinion. Also, ], as currently the second highest-billed contributor to the Avatar (2009 film) article, who is still very active on Misplaced Pages and who actually contributed more material to this article despite the fact that I am currently billed as the top contributor, should have been contacted about this nomination as well. | ||
| *All that stated, if the other main contributors want to go through with this FA nomination, and it does go through, then I will help bring this article to FA status. ] (]) 14:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC) | *All that stated, if the other main contributors want to go through with this FA nomination, and it does go through, then I will help bring this article to FA status. ] (]) 14:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:55, 19 November 2013
Avatar (2009 film)
Avatar (2009 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Featured article candidates/Avatar (2009 film)/archive1
- Featured article candidates/Avatar (2009 film)/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Blurred Lines 13:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured article because it's content's meets the criteria of FA, and I am willing to fix any problems with the article. Blurred Lines 13:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Note: Main contributors of the article including Flyer22, Betty Logan, and DrNegative has been notified about this nomination, as the previous request was speedy declined because the nominator had zero edits on that article, and that none of the main editors were notified. Blurred Lines 13:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- I request that this nomination be closed, per similar reasoning given at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Avatar (2009 film)/archive1. In part, Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates explicitly states: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination." Blurred Lines did not do that; he simply notified us as if to state, "Yep, you're going through a FA review unless you decide to leave the work up to me." And that is why I reverted him here and here. This will come across as biting, but it's how I feel: I do not appreciate editors who are not significant contributors to an article swooping in and nominating that article for a higher status without attempting to consult with the main contributors about it, if the main contributors are still generally active on Misplaced Pages, especially nominators who won't be doing enough or most of the work...but will get that "I helped bring this article to FA" badge. It is frustrating to essentially be forced into a FA review. I am not ready for this FA review, and I know (from experience at this article) that I would very likely be doing most of the work (such as making sure that editors are not cutting important things or unnecessarily cutting things), especially since I am currently the editor who most actively edits the Avatar (2009 film) article. It should go without saying that FA reviews are stressing/frustrating because substantial changes are made to an article at the suggestion of other editors, often substantial changes that are not needed and are more so or solely personal opinion. Also, Bob K31416, as currently the second highest-billed contributor to the Avatar (2009 film) article, who is still very active on Misplaced Pages and who actually contributed more material to this article despite the fact that I am currently billed as the top contributor, should have been contacted about this nomination as well.
- All that stated, if the other main contributors want to go through with this FA nomination, and it does go through, then I will help bring this article to FA status. Flyer22 (talk) 14:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)