Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured list director

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates


Discussion closed. The Rambling Man and Scorpion0422 clearly have a wide consensus to share the title of featured list director (good luck and god help the both of you). Raul654 (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Per this discussion, elections are being held for a featured list director. Two directors will likely be named. The elections will run for two weeks (until 15:43, May 8, 2008) and User:Raul654 has been asked to close the vote and appoint the directors at that time.

Candidates edit

Nominees, please accept or reject the nomination. Editors may Support or Oppose as few or as many as they like (similar to ArbCom voting); two directors chosen from those with the highest tallies.

Accepted nominations edit

Dweller edit

Nominated by User:SandyGeorgia
Nominee Accept or Reject? I'm happy to stand, but somehow doubt I'm electable because I'm fairly low profile. However, I understand FLC (and FAC) and its foibles and am both an innovator and someone who works happily with consensus, so I might be a decent choice. --Dweller (talk) 17:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Strong Support SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support a candidate who has absolutely nothing but the best interests in maintaining high standards. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Knows the process well. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Low profile? Then definite support. Mahalo. --Ali'i 18:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. I've seen you around enough, and I think you'd take care of the process. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Full confidence in his abilities to maintain high standards. Woody (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support If we need a second director that can stay neutral, then Dweller is the guy. Also, he already offered a couple of tips on how to make this process better.*thumbs up*--Crzycheetah 21:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support yes, erm, diplomaic, knowledgeable etc. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - a thorough understanding of the process, diplomatic but insistent on quality. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support—I see depth. Tony (talk) 17:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. Rudget (Help?) 18:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - seems good to me. —TreasuryTag—t—c 10:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - Marrio (talk) 13:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Matthewedwards edit

Self Nominated by User:Matthewedwards
  1. Support - Everywhere I review, usually Matthew's just been... a dedicated and excellent reviewer. Knows his stuff, particularly WP:MOS and would make a level-headed director. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support yep. Milk’s Favorite Cookie (Talk) 19:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support what TRM said. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 19:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support That's what she said... I mean, he's been consistently reviewing my lists. He never seems to miss a beat here at FLC! Gary King (talk) 19:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - Very dedicated reviewer, and certainly knows policy. -- Rai•me 20:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, although I understand Sandy's comments, I defer to those who say he knows the score around FLC, which to me is more important in this case. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  1. Oppose, reluctantly. I appreciate from the Support above that Matthewedwards has done great work at FLC, but I'm suporting candidates who also have broad and long experience at FAC. I consider it important that the director have an understanding of sticky issues that can occur for a director and the director's role in the process, and is also aware of sourcing and prose requirements on the level of featured articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scorpion0422 edit

Nominated by User:SandyGeorgia
Nominee Accept or Reject? What the heck, I've been doing it for a while anyway. -- Scorpion0422 22:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bit about myself for those unfamiliar with me. I've been at Wikipedia for two years and my specialties include The Simpsons, ice hockey, Olympics, and an even mix of sports, music & media. I have successfully nominated over 20 lists in a variety of topics and have assisted with many others. I've been closing FLCs since August and I've recently become involved with WP:FLRC. I haven't done as much reviewing as some of the others, but part of the reason is that I try to avoid such things because I do closures. -- Scorpion0422 22:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Strong Support SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support He already performs this job, anyways. I'd hate to see someone out of work :/ Gary King (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Support Definitely needs to be one of our directors. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Scorpion already does a fine job in closing. If the criteria and rules are changed, I think he'd follow them. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. Scorpion0422 has been the FLC closer for as long as I can remember, and I see no reason why he should not continue his great work. Simply excellent contributor, and perfect for the role. Qst (talk) 19:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong support He was basically our de facto director for the past 10 months or so and has done a great job. --Crzycheetah 20:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Already acts as the director, the least we can do is make it official! Drewcifer (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong support - Scorpion0422 closes most of the nominations already, and does a great job at that. -- Rai•me 20:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - without Scorpion, there probably would be no FLC. While he's prepared to wait and think, enough said. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, if he's prepared to reconsider. If not, I'm sure there's a lot he can and will continue to do. --Dweller (talk) 20:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support If we are going to have an official director (or two), I'd be happy for Scorpion to perform that task. Colin°Talk 21:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support per SandyGeorgia and Juliancolton. –thedemonhog talk • edits 04:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    For clarification, what would that be? They didn't appear to give a reason -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Hahaha, thats priceless. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 05:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - he's basically what makes FLC work, and he heads the list at WP:WBFLN for reason, with likely the most diverse set of list contributions. I was mulling about nominating myself (considering that I've successfully nominated twenty-six FLs), but I feel my focus is too narrowly restricted to anime episode lists, and stands in utter contrast to what Scorpion has done here. In all, the ideal person for the job. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support He is already the de facto director, make it official. Woody (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Strong support, definitely worthy of being the director, as he already basically does that. Then haven't been this streamlined with Scorpion handling things since rune.welsh (who is probably before some people's time). Wizardman 14:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - I've known Scorp for a long time on here and know his experiance at FLC, as many have said, he's practically the director anyway. Gran2 15:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support - He's done great work, and already runs the FLC. Give him the title. Mastrchf (t/c) 21:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support — While my first choice would be TheRamblingMan, Scorpion is definitely among the top 1% of editors (in my view) in terms of helpfulness, agreeability, and a desire to improve Wikipedia. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Strong support. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support already does a great job at closures so cannot see any problems if he does it in an elected role. Suicidalhamster (talk) 00:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support would be good at this job. SPeɴceʀT♦C 00:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support: Head is screwed on in all the right ways. IvoShandor (talk) 13:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. Rudget (Help?) 18:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Sceptre (talk) 23:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support—Both on the basis of longer acquaintance with his work and the obvious trust expressed here by others. Tony (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Without a second thought The Placebo Effect (talk) How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review. 19:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. bibliomaniac15 Do I have your trust? 05:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support - Marrio (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man edit

Nominated by User:SandyGeorgia
I'm happy to be nominated. It may reduce my more detailed input at individual FLCs but I hope the process will be improved overall with the appointment of directors and a more stringent set of criteria. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Strong Support SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support -- Scorpion0422 16:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong support Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Just as long as his duties as a bureaucrat don't get in his way :) Gary King (talk) 17:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support—Yup. Tony (talk) 17:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong support Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Thought he already was director Support :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support - How couldn't I? :P D.M.N. (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strongest possible support I'll say no more. --Dweller (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Diplomatic and always helpful. MeegsC | Talk 19:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support As one of the most active participants, he knows what needs to be done, and is also a stickler for the MOS, which I like -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support, best user for the job, IMO. His FA stats speak for themselves. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 20:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support - Clear choice IMO. Gran2 20:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - For sure. Drewcifer (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Strong support -- Rai•me 20:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - another ideal choice for a director, and probably the best one to ensure a stricter criteria is upheld. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - Great user, very experienced, and a terrific candidate for this position. Hello32020 (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Great user, excellent for th job. Woody (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support as long as TRM wants to do, and feel he has time. His contributions to FLC currently are nothing short of outstanding. Peanut4 (talk) 15:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support impressed with this candidates helpfulness, integrity and knowledge of the process. Skomorokh 11:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Strong Support — To me, he's the most visible editor on WP:FLC, and has been extraordinarily helpful to me when I was developing featured lists. He's also been an excellent help on a few of the featured articles I was attempting to get certified. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support I don't think this process needs a director. But, since it seems to be decided that there will be one or two, I support TRM. --maclean 22:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Strong Support I know his comments at FLC have always been very helpful, and I think having him as director would improve the process immensely. Noble Story (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support I think TRM would be fine for the same reasons as dweller. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Strong support. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Trust his judgment in the matter. MBisanz talk 09:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose I see this process getting worse when/if TRM becomes a director because as he said above his detailed reviews may be reduced. He's a much better reviewer and should stay as is. --Crzycheetah 21:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined nominations edit

Colin edit

Nominated by User:SandyGeorgia
Sorry folks. Simply don't have the time. I used to be very involved in FL and helped shape some of the criteria. I'm particularly fussy when it comes to WP:V. I would be happy to work with any director to offer additional opinion or guidance. I should really do some more FL reviewing again... Colin°Talk 20:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—I know Colin would be just excellent, and do hope he agrees to this nomination. Unfortunately, I don't know the work of the other nominees, but will take a look and return. Tony (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support Hopefully he's interested. -- Scorpion0422 16:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Has reviewed a few of my lists, but that's as far as I know about this candidate. Gary King (talk) 17:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Haven't seen him around a lot. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral as I have only seen you comment on a couple of FLC, and the Arsenal debate. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crzycheetah edit

Nominated by User:Scorpion0422
Nominee Accept or Reject, and statement?
  • Reject Thanks Scorpion for nominating me. I don't want to be a director, though I can always help out if needed.--Crzycheetah 20:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I don't know this candidate well enough, but I prefer to see someone with broad experience across other featured processes, so that the standards at FL can be moved in the direction of other processes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Is sometimes active in FLC discussions, but that's all I know about him. Gary King (talk) 17:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral per the others. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gonzo fan2007 edit

Nominated by User:Scorpion0422
Nominee Accept or Reject, and statement? - Decline Thanks for the nom Scorpion, but I probably cannot dedicate enough time to be a great director at this time. I'll still help out in anyway I can. Thanks again! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I don't know this candidate well enough, but I prefer to see someone with broad experience across other featured processes, so that the standards at FL can be moved in the direction of other processes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I think I know this candidate fairly well, but I think his participation in FLC has decreased as of late :| Gary King (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricanehink edit

Nominated by User:Juliancolton
Nominee Accept or Reject? - Reject
Thanks for the nomination, but I'll have to agree with the neutrals/opposes. I really don't review many lists, and when I do it's in a small area. I'd rather stick to writing ;) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral He indeed has listed a lot of candidates here, but I don't think I've seen him in other people's list nominations that much. And he mostly focuses on hurricane lists, so I think he might need more experience in other types of lists :) Gary King (talk) 17:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—sry, Hink, would like to see active participants with broad skills across topics, and although you've done good work, the base is too narrow. Tony (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Like Tony said. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sorry, but I feel you're only active in FLC when it comes to a narrow field of nominations, so slightly concerned about favouritism. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't think he ever reviewed any list.--Crzycheetah 20:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just to name one. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I hate to say it, but I have to: surprise, surprise, it's a hurricane list :/ Again, this backs up the 'not broad enough scope' criticism above. Gary King (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Almost everybody has one subject or another that they stick to when reviewing FC articles. I don't see why it's bad to focus on a certain group of articles. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well, I think most people are basing their decisions on this factor because different types of lists have different criteria, styles, etc. and you have more different points of views on how a list could appear if you edit different types of lists. For instance, I first edited country-related lists, then moved to business-related ones, and then to college-related, so I've got some understanding of the different guidelines and policies for different types of lists. No one is holding this against him, except for the fact that it wouldn't serve him well as an FLC director. Gary King (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • I review almost any FLC that catches my eye, and I edit a moderately large range of articles. This doesn't mean that I would be a good choice for the FLC director. Hurricanehink has numerous FLs, probably close to a dozen or more. And he has an extremely good understanding of FA, and as SandyGeorgia stated, that is a good indication that the nominee knows the ropes of featured content. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woody edit

Nominated by User:SandyGeorgia
Nominee Accept or Reject, and statement?
Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I would much prefer to divert my efforts into the coordinator role for WP:MILHIST and to be able to contribute here on an ad-hoc basis. My participation here has dwindled recently anyway and there are many competent candidates other than myself. Regards. Woody (talk) 16:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn edit

CloudNine edit

Nominated by User:CloudNine
  • Oppose I don't think I've ever cross paths with you at FLC. Gary King (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • A fair comment. I've not particularly focused on FLC, but I hope my knowledge and judgement from other featured areas (such as FA and FT) can be of help as a FLC director candidate. CloudNine (talk) 17:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Cloudnine has been around FA for a very long time (longer than I have), and knows the standards and the ropes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral for now Due to lack of involvement with the FL process. -- Scorpion0422 18:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Haven't seen the user at WP:FLC]. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because I haven't seen you at FLC as either a nominator or reviewer. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per GaryKing and Matthew. User just doesn't seem to be very involved with the FL process at this time. -- Rai•me 20:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milk's Favorite Cookie edit

Nominated by User:Milk's Favorite Cookie
Nominee Accept or Reject?
  • Oppose, would prefer to see broad experience across numerous FA featured processes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is FL. I have 5 Featured lists. Milk’s Favorite Cookie (Talk) 16:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I prefer to see broad experience across numerous featured content processes; for example, an understanding of reliable sources, compelling prose, respect for the seriousness of these pages, a history of credible supports and opposes on other featured content processes, understanding of the criteria and the direction in which FL needs to move, etc. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Sorry, but as SandyGeorgia said, I'd like if you had a better understanding of the process in general. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral Agree with Sandy. Also, I don't think I've seen you around FLC as much lately as you were probably were around here before... Gary King (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? I have a nom at the moment.... Milk’s Favorite Cookie (Talk) 17:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, it was pretty recently. I should clarify that I meant that I haven't seen you reviewing other lists that much :) Gary King (talk) 17:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—Milk, perhaps later when there's a demonstrated skill-base for this task. Tony (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Featured_list_director&oldid=1084312788"