Template talk:Notnow

Rationale
I can understand that some may have a concern about this template as it may appear to give a strict guideline on time or edits to qualify for an RfA. Clearly there are no such strict rules. However, in practice, there are thresholds beyond which a user may have a very low probability of succeeding in an RfA. The idea behind this wording (which I found from User:Dlohcierekim) is that it would be a relatively standardized/gentle way of providing guidance. If the 3 month / 3k edit commentary is not appropriate then feel free to edit it out, or to modify the user's talk page after you post it. you can enter a second optional parameter to specify a number to replace the 3 (e.g. will result in comments about 6 months and 6,000 edits). 7 02:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Bold text
I would not have bolded that single sentence -- all advice in this template is important; the ability to communicate does not (in my view) stand out. --Pgallert (talk) 21:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * At the time that I put it in the original (User:Dlohcierekim/not now), there had been a flurry of not now's in which the emphasis was needed. De-emphasize at will. Dloh  cierekim  14:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)