Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/USS Princess Matoika/archive1

USS Princess Matoika

 * Major contributor: Bellhalla

First ship topic! Nergaal (talk) 02:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I withdraw support for this nomination. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - if the major contributor is against this, then so am I. -MBK004 23:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Is there some reason that the major contributor opposes these nominations? If you go up the page you will see that in order for there to be a valid objection "each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to "fix" the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored." Also, I will remind everyone that major contributors do not own articles nor do they have a veto in the nomination process. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have two articles at FAC plus a lot of real-world commitments. I have no prior experience with FTC/GTC, but if the exchange above (over a consensus-style of navigation box template) is any indication, I am choosing not to add wikidrama into my life. If y'all want to continue the GTC for any or all of these, be my guest; I will not be an active participant in it and, as stated above, withdraw my support for any and all. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "Withdrawing support" generally implies to me "opposing", not "staying neutral"... are you opposing these noms, or staying neutral? rst20xx (talk) 15:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose - I need some convincing as to why Los Angeles Steamship Company and Hamburg America Line aren't included. I know this ship was the only one owned by American Palestine Line, whereas the other companies had many ships, but this ship was with the other companies for much longer than with American Palestine Line, and hence while this ship may have had a more important role in the history of American Palestine Line than in the histories of the other companies, I'm not sure that the converse is true, i.e. that American Palestine Line had a significantly enough more important role in the history of this ship than the other companies, and as this topic is about the ship, that's what matters - rst20xx (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Close with no consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 21:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)