Looking nearly exclusively at references and reference formatting. Withdrawn comments from Squeamish OssifrageĬomments from Squeamish Ossifrage
#The bluebook 20th edition politics and prose archive
I won't archive this as our discussion has just been a procedural one. Yeah, I don't think this really meets the guideline for an exception so will remove from the list but you can bring it back (or nominate another article) in two weeks, starting from when the last one was archived.Leave it here or pull it? Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 05:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC) Sorry, I don't understand what I should do with this one.The coords can and do give exceptions when an article has had little or no feedback but in your case three people stopped by (though admittedly none conducted a comprehensive review), and the fact that you weren't renominating the same article suggested to me an acknowledgement that it did need work. The intent of this instruction was to ensure nominators took the time to resolve any issues with archived articles before nominating the same article again, or any other (that might have similar issues). Can I get leave for this one to stay or do I need to withdraw it? GregJackP Boomer! 04:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC) I had misread it as not re-nominating the article that failed.Procedural note: Greg, have you read the instruction at the top of the FAC page about not nominating or co-nominating any article for two weeks after your previous nom has been archived? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 04:45, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Procedural note: nominated too early, withdrawn, renominated on 9 August 2015 22.8 Review and support by Squeamish Ossifrage.22.3 Comments and support from Mirokado.22.2 Support from Jimfbleak, Brianboulton, and Jaguar.21.1 Support and comments from Squeamish Ossifrage.17.4 Support with comments (most are preferences) by Victoria.
8 The Combat: Woman Pleading for the Vanquished.6.2 Comments from Squeamish Ossifrage (and source review).1.4 Comments Support from Notecardforfree.
0 kommentar(er)
