AVID:Requests for Comment/Add a time limit to featured image proposals: Difference between revisions
From the Audiovisual Identity Database, the motion graphics museum
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 4:
# {{Support}} I think 1 week is definitely reasonable [[User:Luke2505|Luke2505]] ([[User talk:Luke2505|talk]]) 18:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
# {{Support}} Cool idea! [[File:Sickminecraft45 Signature Icon.jpg|link=User:Sickminecraft45]] [[User_talk:Sickminecraft45| ('''''Talk to Me!''''')]] 18:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
#{{Support}} Absolutely! [[File:EGP Signature.svg|120px|link=User:EsaïeGregoryPrickett]] ([[User talk:EsaïeGregoryPrickett|talk]]) 21:27, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
===Abstain===
|
Revision as of 21:27, 9 February 2023
I have noticed that AVID:Featured Image Nominations is getting quite cluttered with nominations, so I propose a 1 week voting period similar to the RfC. That way, the addition of images will flow better. Dominicmgm (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Support
- Support That is fair. I don't see why some nominations in that page last up to a month when by that time, everyone has forgotten about it. Camenati (talk) 18:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support I think 1 week is definitely reasonable Luke2505 (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support Cool idea! (Talk to Me!) 18:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support Absolutely! (talk) 21:27, 7 February 2023 (UTC)