Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Nomination cabal/Potential nominee list

Historical
Moved from User talk:Centrx

Not sure why you added the historical tag to Requests for adminship/Nomination cabal/Potential nominee list. Considering there have been several additions in the past month it's hardly inactive. I've reverted your edit. Also, it seems like that tag would be something that would need a consensus decision to inactivate. There was no talk page discussion. If you want to inactivate the page you're welcome to talk about it on the talk page, but since currently several people are using it I hardly think it's inactive. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  01:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * People add entries because it was linked on the RfA instructions, thinking that someone would review their nomination statement and assist them. No one does; it is inactive. If you don't have any reason to believe that people are reviewing these requests and commenting on them, then you should keep the historical tag there. No discussion is needed to make the plain statement that no one is doing anything with these nomination statements. If anyone were doing something with them, they can easily remove the tag and update the page, but don't remove it just because you don't know what's going on. I am not inactivating the page, the page is already inactive and I am tagging it properly as such. —Centrx→talk &bull; 01:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Requests for adminship/Nomination cabal/Potential nominee list is the page that was linked from RfA. Merely, a few potential nominees have added to it, without response. The actual pages where anyone would be doing anything with regard to a nomination cabal are Requests for adminship/Nomination cabal and Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Nomination cabal, neither of which have any edits whatsoever since March, except for one edit in August suggesting that it be made clear that it is inactive, . —Centrx→talk &bull; 01:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I just added my name to the list. I didn't know nobody was reviewing it. Someone else just recently added THEIR name to the list. They don't know nobody's reviewing it. Now that there are active names on the list, people may actually review it. Just because it's a backlogged and under-represented section of wikipedia, doesn't mean that it's technically "inactive". It's per se active because of the fact that a) we're arguing about it here, and b) there are recent additions to it. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  14:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Plus, I think you have the wrong page: Nobody "reviews" anything here. They just read the statements and decide if they want to nominate you. Anyway you said anyone can revert your edit an actively work on it: Fine. I'll revert your edit, so the next person to come see the page can actively review MY nomination request. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  14:39, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It says right at the top of the page "If you'd like to have assistance in creating your (or someone else's) nomination statement, insert the nominee's name in the form". This is not for soliciting someone to nominate you. No one has reviewed a nomination request since July, and having this page open deceiving users into think someone will will be here to look at them is not good. It is not merely under-represented, it is totally inactive. Even when it had a small level of activity before July, I suggest you look below. Not one of the users who listed themselves was ever made an administrator and the only user who regularly reviewed these requests is indefinitely blocked for some behavior problem. This is currently totally inactive and it was only ever nominally active. —Centrx→talk &bull; 16:08, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * And that means that nobody in the future will ever look at this? Just because nobody is doing something NOW doesn't mean that it will be worked on in the future. Further, even if you WERE to add the "historical" tag onto it, why blank the page? &rArr;    SWAT Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  18:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Anyone who wants to start it up is able to. The fact remains that this has never been active and is currently totally dead. —Centrx→talk &bull; 17:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Centrx. This was a good idea that never gained traction, and giving people false hope by not discouraging them from putting their name on an abandoned page. Anyone is of course welcome to try again. -- nae'blis 22:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Myes, I agree too. &mdash; Werdna talk criticism 23:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)