Talk:Mark Rober

Alright, I boldly performed the merger since the discussion was closed as stale, but was reverted. My reasoning was that the majority of participants !voted for a merger. So I guess we'll continue to discuss this? Pinging CNMall41 per WP:BRD. FaviFake (talk) 18:39, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I am not sure if you read the close closely enough. You did the merge to support your !vote despite the nominator withdrawing and saying ("discussion has become dormant, and I think the CrunchLabs article could plausibly be expanded far enough to become standalone. No need for merging anymore.". (my emphasis) You want to re-open because you disagree?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

the nominator withdrawing
The nominator is an editor just like us. They don't have WP:SUPERVOTE powers in consensus-based discussions. Also, per WP:DA, involved editors are not permitted to close non-unanimous discussions: (emphasis in original)

During discussion, a rough consensus may emerge to proceed with the merge. Any user, including the user who first proposed the merge, may close the discussion and move forward with the merge if enough time (normally one week or more) has elapsed and there has been no discussion or if there is almost unanimous consensus to merge. Closing of merge discussions differs from closing of requested move discussions in that closings of uncontroversial merge discussions by involved users are allowed.

Their comment doesn't strike me as an oppose, but also not as a support. A discussion shouldn't be closed without a clear assessment of consensus, which however i'm not seeing here.

Yes, of course I performed the merger for the reason explained in my !vote. Any reason why you reverted it? FaviFake (talk) 18:52, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

From WP:SUPERVOTE (essay):

; Withdrawal supervote: The original proposer may feel like the winds of the discussion have blown one way or the other, and feel like they should withdraw their ideas to let another action run its course. But it is not acceptable for proposers to withdraw for the purpose of getting a non-status-quo result or if somebody still dissents to the status quo, as it denies the result of a basis in the consensus of other involved editors.

FaviFake (talk) 18:54, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

By the way, I'm the nominator, as you all know, and I go by he/him, not they/them. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 18:54, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I always use they/them when referring to people whose preferred pronouns I don't know. I will attempt to remember yours in the future. FaviFake (talk) 18:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Did you know you can use the {{pronoun}} template? Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 18:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes. FaviFake (talk) 19:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, of course I performed the merger for the reason explained in my !vote. Any reason why you reverted it? Yes, per WP:BRD. If you have an issue with the withdraw, you can always discuss as opposed to imposing your vote. Feel free to re-open and request closure should you choose. I still feel he had the right to withdraw.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

He may have had the right to withdraw, but not to close the discussion.

@1isall, would you reopen the discussion since you were involved and the consensus wasn't unanimous?

If you have an issue with the withdraw, you can always discuss
The discussion was closed. FaviFake (talk) 19:02, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, am I required to? Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 19:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

You are clearly involved, and the consensus was clearly unanimous. Please see Wikipedia:Merging § Step 4: Determine consensus and close the merge discussion: (emphasis in original)

During discussion, a rough consensus may emerge to proceed with the merge. Any user, including the user who first proposed the merge, may close the discussion and move forward with the merge if enough time (normally one week or more) has elapsed and there has been no discussion or if there is almost unanimous consensus to merge. Closing of merge discussions differs from closing of requested move discussions in that closings of uncontroversial merge discussions by involved users are allowed. Admin tools are not needed unless page protection prohibits editing.

In more unclear, controversial cases, the determination that a consensus to merge has or has not been achieved should be made by an editor who is neutral and not directly involved in the merge proposal or the discussion. The discussion can be posted at WP:Proposed mergers to get some help. If necessary, a request that an administrator, who is not involved, close the discussion can be made at the Requests for Closure noticeboard. If a consensus is formed against the merge shortly after it was performed, it can easily be reversed.

I intend to take this to WP:AN if the discussion is not reopened. FaviFake (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Reopened. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 19:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. FaviFake (talk) 19:11, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

He may have had the right to withdraw, but not to close the discussion. We will need to agree to disagree about that one as well. Per WP:MERGECLOSE, I do not see this as being unclear since you were the only dissenting vote (note that you even originally opposed). One dissent vote does not make it unclear or controversial. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not see this as being unclear
I never said it was unclear. I said it was not unanimous. See § c-FaviFake-20251029190800-1isall-20251029190300 FaviFake (talk) 19:10, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I intend to take this to WP:AN if the discussion is not reopened. May I suggest stepping back for a moment? No need to threaten AN because you disagree with the nom closing the discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

I am not threatening anyone. The standard procedure for closure reviews of mergers is to go to AN. I was stating my intention to follow the closure review process. FaviFake (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Says "almost unanimous" which it was. Regardless, I will make the request for closure. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

More than half the partceipants support a merger and the discussion was closed as "maintain status quo". How is that almost unanimous? FaviFake (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)