- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a comprehensive article nomination that was unsuccessful. Please do not modify it.
Sanctuary III
- Nominated by: GethralkinHyperwave 19:57, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Nomination comments: SWPM TCW:SOM miniature
(0 ECs/0 Users/0 Total)
Support
Object
- At 227 words, this can be easily brought up to 250 words by expanding the intro. And even if doing so won't bring the article over the GAN limit, the intro still needs expansion. QuiGonJinn
(Talk) 16:18, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
- How's that? GethralkinHyperwave 06:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
- Good, but now it qualifies as a good article nomination. :P—Axinal Convocation Chamber 22:24, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
- How's that? GethralkinHyperwave 06:09, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
Comments
This article is currently pending GA status on the GAN, so please take any and all objections to the article there. If the article fails the GAN process, then this CA review will resume. If it passes, this review nomination will be archived.GethralkinHyperwave 02:25, May 16, 2011 (UTC)- That isn't how it works. The nomination should be archived before you move it to the GAN. Be sure to do so next time. I'll also leave this message on the GAN page. NaruHina Talk
02:40, May 16, 2011 (UTC) This is exactly how it works. I followed the instructions for this process precisely, making the proper notation required of me as is stipulated by the CAnom Instructions by copying and pasting the note above that you have objected to. Please check the instructions in the section marked CAN status review in the instruction page, and you will find that I have followed procedure. As is stated above, this CAN entry must stay pending the outcome of the GAN.GethralkinHyperwave 04:37, May 16, 2011 (UTC)- Gethralkin, Naru is correct. That section is about already comprehensive articles that are up for review, not for current CANs. The system works exactly the same was as on the GAN / FAN — if the article is nominated for another status, the current nomination is deemed a failure. 1358 (Talk) 15:39, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, got confused on what "nomination" referred to. I see now that it refers to CA removal nominations and not CA nominations. Still, the rules state that a member of the EduCorps should do any removing/archiving of CAnoms that fail. That is why I didn't touch it. GethralkinHyperwave 16:04, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
- Gethralkin, Naru is correct. That section is about already comprehensive articles that are up for review, not for current CANs. The system works exactly the same was as on the GAN / FAN — if the article is nominated for another status, the current nomination is deemed a failure. 1358 (Talk) 15:39, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
- That isn't how it works. The nomination should be archived before you move it to the GAN. Be sure to do so next time. I'll also leave this message on the GAN page. NaruHina Talk
