Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 5.

Welcome!

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cryptofilida is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be merged into Granofilosea.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cryptofilida until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

Jako96 (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Leucodictyida is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be merged into Granofilosea.

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leucodictyida until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.

Jako96 (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Snoteleks,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:03, 11 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is WP:OR.

Jako96 (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Heya, I noticed you manually closed a few discussions. In case you weren't already aware of it, the WP:XFDcloser tool can help you avoid making all these repetitive edits, such as removing the templates and adding a talk page banner. If you're interested, WP:XFDcloser explains how to use it :) FaviFake (talk) 21:23, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@FaviFake Ohh that would have been great to know earlier lol. Thanks a ton! — Snoteleks (talk) 21:25, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

No worries! To help others avoid your same mistake, could you kindly tell me every page and paragraph you read where you would've expected to see this script mentioned? FaviFake (talk) 21:27, 16 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@FaviFake I pretty much just went to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Step_6._Implement_the_decision directly and skimmed through the instructions. I now see that the XFDcloser tool is shown in an earlier section — Snoteleks (talk) 00:38, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I added it to WP:AFD6 as well, please let me know if you think it should be mentioned elsewhere! FaviFake (talk) 07:03, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Snoteleks. I'm not sure if you should have been the one to close some of those AFDs (specifically Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heliomonadida and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cryptofilida. You participated in them, which makes you involved in the dispute, and only uninvolved editors should close AFDs. I don't know if undoing your closes and letting someone else handle them would meaningfully change anything in this case (@FaviFake, do you still support a merge for those articles?), but please keep this in mind in the future. Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Chess enjoyer Hi, I understand your point, but the AFD proposal author explicitly stated several times that he "withdrew" the merge requests, so I thought it was within reason. I apologize if this is still the wrong procedure. — Snoteleks (talk) 00:36, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I know, but another editor still supported a merge, so that alone doesn't warrant closing the discussions. Regardless, no one should act on as a closer in formal discussions they have participated in (unless the page has already been deleted, but at that point it's just a formality). Chess enjoyer (talk) 00:47, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Chess enjoyer Understood, I will keep that in mind for next occasions. Thanks for letting me know — Snoteleks (talk) 00:50, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Snoteleks Indeed, you should not have closed these. Next time, read the WP:AfD and WP:DELPRO pages in full.

These closures are called WP:BADNAC and can be reverted, but I'm not gonna reopen those discussions because they were likely not going to reach consensus to keep anyway.

However, note that if the AFD proposal author explicitly stated several times that he "withdrew" the merge requests, you would still not be able to close the discussion as "Withdrawn by nominator." because that's not allowed per the first criterion of WP:SPEEDYKEEP. The nominator does not have a monopoly-like power over the discussions they create. I mentioned this in this comment but I guess you missed it? FaviFake (talk) 06:54, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@FaviFake Indeed I missed it, I noticed right after I left that last comment here. — Snoteleks (talk) 09:38, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply