User talk:Yakme
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| 3 | This user page has been vandalized 3 times. |
| This is Yakme's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives (index): 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
Regarding ongoing proposal of the 2015 European migrant crisis and closing
WP: Split does not mention anywhere that someone cannot open and close the discussion. In addition it mentions that 7 days is the standard timing. Chefs-kiss (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Chefs-kiss: I have not found the point in WP:SPLIT where it's mentioned that the standard timing is 7 days. Anyway given that other editors intervened afterwards, it means that it was not enough and it was too soon to close. Yakme (talk) 14:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Given that the process relies on consensus, I sought out the page regarding determining consensus. From that the WP: WHENCLOSE policy recommends 7 days (albeit it is for RfC) however it adds that "if the discussion stopped, and editors have already assessed the consensus and moved on with their work". Given that I had not received any comments and given that it seemed like there was no disagreement (not contentious) I closed it. However in your estimation when do you think one should close the discussion? Chefs-kiss (talk) 14:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think a closure is actually needed, if more similar comments appear in the next days. It looks like the consensus is forming quite easily. (In general I take ~2 weeks as a typical time for a slow discussion to consider it done, unless of course the discussion is still active) Yakme (talk) 14:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ok. Awesome thanks for your advice. Tried looking briefly at Arbcom to see but I didn't find anything at first glance. To clarify though. 2 weeks since the last comment or 2 weeks total? Also should I do a draft before making the actual split? A draft with what would be new article? Does it have to go through the normal procedures of article creation as well? Sorry for all the questions Chefs-kiss (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think this issue is at the level of Arbcom. I think it's quite easily solved if we wait a few more days to see whether consensus is confirmed (I meant 2 weeks total). Once it's confirmed I think that you can just create a new article without passing through a draft. You can follow what it's written in WP:PROPERSPLIT. Yakme (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! Chefs-kiss (talk) 10:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think this issue is at the level of Arbcom. I think it's quite easily solved if we wait a few more days to see whether consensus is confirmed (I meant 2 weeks total). Once it's confirmed I think that you can just create a new article without passing through a draft. You can follow what it's written in WP:PROPERSPLIT. Yakme (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ok. Awesome thanks for your advice. Tried looking briefly at Arbcom to see but I didn't find anything at first glance. To clarify though. 2 weeks since the last comment or 2 weeks total? Also should I do a draft before making the actual split? A draft with what would be new article? Does it have to go through the normal procedures of article creation as well? Sorry for all the questions Chefs-kiss (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think a closure is actually needed, if more similar comments appear in the next days. It looks like the consensus is forming quite easily. (In general I take ~2 weeks as a typical time for a slow discussion to consider it done, unless of course the discussion is still active) Yakme (talk) 14:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Given that the process relies on consensus, I sought out the page regarding determining consensus. From that the WP: WHENCLOSE policy recommends 7 days (albeit it is for RfC) however it adds that "if the discussion stopped, and editors have already assessed the consensus and moved on with their work". Given that I had not received any comments and given that it seemed like there was no disagreement (not contentious) I closed it. However in your estimation when do you think one should close the discussion? Chefs-kiss (talk) 14:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
ITN recognition for Silvio Berlusconi
On 16 June 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Silvio Berlusconi, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Amakuru (talk) 09:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Nomination for discussion of Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Italy vaccinations chart
Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Italy vaccinations chart has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2026 (UTC)