Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/2003 Pacific hurricane season/archive1

2003 Pacific hurricane season[edit]

This was a Good Topic candidate - rst20xx (talk) 00:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main page	Articles
2003 Pacific hurricane season	Ignacio · Jimena · Marty

This user did not create any of these articles.

--Elena85 | Talk to Me | Almost 2000 edits' 19:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support as GT Per criteria and precedent. Z gin der 2008-09-20T21:12Z (UTC)
Oppose per two reasons: (1) it has only one FA; (2) the nominator does not seem to have contributed at all and did not provide any proof of contacting any of the main contributors to the topic. Nergaal (talk) 21:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't meet the "minimum of two FAs" criteria. Gary King (talk) 21:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks two FAs, and the nominator hasn't worked on any of the articles, or the main article for that matter. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 22:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Nergaal, Gark King and Juliancolton - rst20xx (talk) 22:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, how do I withdraw the nominations?

--Elena85 | Talk to Me | Almost 2000 edits' 23:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)True this only has one FA/FL and should be a Good topic and not a Featured topic, but that is not a reason to oppose. Second, An oppose must be actionable and saying that the nominator has not edited these artilces is non-actionable. Z gin der 2008-09-20T23:03Z (UTC)
Not meeting the featured topic criteria was a reason to oppose, the last time I checked. :) –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We can promote it as a GT even though it was nominated as a FT. Why are people afraid to set president? Z gin der 2008-09-20T23:07Z (UTC)
If you mean precedent, then it is because we're just trying to follow the one which is already set. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If people would use more common sense then a new precedent would be set. Precedent does not override common sense. Z gin der 2008-09-20T23:12Z (UTC)

If he is withdrawing I will nominate as a GT. Z gin der 2008-09-20T23:04Z (UTC)

I believe the issue here should be to contact the main contributors. Say the FAC nominator? Or simply HurricaneLink (he definitely worked on at least one article). Nergaal (talk) 23:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricanehink worked on all but one, I believe. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The prove of a cabal is when two people suggest the same thing, but only the cabal member is listened to. Z gin der 2008-09-20T23:32Z (UTC)

Man, since I'm nice, I have notified the main contributers:[1][2][3] here:[4][5][6]. This history is rather ambiguous and I'll leave it up to someone else. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 00:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Regardless of the above, I feel the nomination must wait, as I don't think it will remain stable. The WPTC is in the midst of a reformatting for its season articles and sub-articles, and there is a very likely chance several new storm articles will be added. Elena should have asked in the first place. FWIW, I only worked on one. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have moved this to the Good Topics nominations, as this is where it should be. I have also placed the appropriate Good Topic candidacy templates on the talk pages of the articles involved - rst20xx (talk) 00:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, I now see the request to withdraw. In that case, Nomination withdrawn - rst20xx (talk) 00:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]