FANDOM

 
33,419 Pages

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Darth henry

Request comments: I just want to see how I would do, I mean I really am not that bad at ratings. Please don't just support or oppose. Please give reasons. :) If you want to test me, just give me sample articles and I could tell you what I would rate them. Darth henry The Dojo Turtles! 04:34, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights Many of the articles you nominate are for c3, which - while not bad - is also not enough to sway me. It is true that you have successfully gotten some articles to c2, but not as many as I'd like to see. (And the four turtles' articles were pretty much copied from each other, so I only count them as one. :P) And while more c2 articles would definitely be a plus point, I'd also like to see you get a couple articles to c1; I don't think I've seen any of those from you. -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 05:24, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights ^ klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 12:02, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Per Jeyo. --Berrybrick (Talk) 18:45, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

  • Ok, thanks I'll deifnately work on those. And the turtle articles weren't pretty much copied, they were copied :P Darth henry The Dojo Turtles! 19:34, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
    • Well yes, they were copied, but the facial expressions and the colours of their bandanas were changed to suit the article. Therefore, "pretty much copied". :P -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 19:46, April 11, 2013 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Hunterkiller1440, Requested 02:30, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

Request comments: Uh, I know I might fail but yeah. I know how Im not really seen much and stuff so yeah :S.

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights No work at all to improve articles rating-wise. Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 02:38, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
    Per Jeyo. --LEGO2013Helper (talk) 02:42, March 14, 2013 (UTC) (Only members of the QCG are permitted to vote.)
    (Sorry. :P I am a CQM, though.--LEGO2013Helper (talk) 02:44, March 14, 2013 (UTC))
    :P -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 02:46, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights ^ NightblazeSaber 05:27, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights ^ --Berrybrick (Talk) 10:36, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
  4. Imperial guards No work in the QCG areas. Ajraddatz (Talk) 11:52, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights ^ klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 12:14, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

Comments


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

SuperSpyX, Requested 21:31, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I have been creating a lot of pages lately and they don't seem to be getting rated very fast. I believe I have a good grasp of how the rating guidelines work and I think I could be a good QCG member.

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights I haven't seen a lot of requests from you. I'm sorry that it took almost twenty minutes for me to come on chat and rate your article, but I don't think that is a very valid reason. --Berrybrick (Talk) 21:35, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you've ever gotten an article to Class 1 or even Class 2 status. (If you want articles rated quicker we do have a nominations page.) Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 21:37, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
    • I HAVE used the nominations page. I would put my nom at the bottom, but then others would put more and while theirs would be rated, mine sometimes weren't. This happened about three times and I got tired of it. SuperSpyX Knowledge isPower
      • I can understand how that would be irksome. (Although most of that happened before I was a QCG member, so I don't know what else to say.) Do you have any that need rating now? Because there don't seem to be any on the nomination pages and there haven't been for some time. Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 23:13, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
  1. Crown Knights Per the others. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 21:39, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Imperial guards Sorry, per above. Ajraddatz (Talk) 18:21, December 21, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

  • He could help convert articles to c3 or c4. It was either NBS or another admin who told me they had trouble converting the lower class articles but could easily do c2s, c1s, and featured articles. He could be helpful. The other voting reasons have to be taken into account. -LazerzSoH --- Destroy, Destroy, Exterminate!
  • I feel like I'm the opposite. We aren't the perfect team, but there is usually somebody with a strength to make up for another's weakness already. I'm not saying that more members would be a bad thing, but I do not think that SSX is qualified for the reasons expressed above. --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:48, November 28, 2012 (UTC)
  • I have set myself a personal goal to get all the LEGOLAND theme sets from c4 to c3. It would be a lot easier to be able to rate these myself instead of adding a huge load to you guys, especially since Jeyo is about the only one doing it right now. SuperSpyX Knowledge isPower
  • Heh. Though I would agree that Jeyo is probably the most active, he being the only one rating articles is not true at all and I find that very rude and contradicts something you told me a couple weeks ago. There is no way I am changing my mind on your nomination anytime soon now. --Berrybrick (Talk) 18:18, December 21, 2012 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Agent Fuse, Requested 07:14, September 20, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I seriously think the QCG needs some more members. About five of my Complete Article requests have been waiting around for around two weeks now.
I know I'm not a Class One or Featured Article maker or voter, but something needs to be done. I'm willing to stay on C2 and C3 only, as well as make Unrated articles to C4, C5 (or whatever).

Support

  1. Just becuase you don't to too many C1/FA articles doesn't mean you don't know how to do C2/3/4s. I've never done too much around the top, but that doesn't mean I don't know how to tell a C4 from a C3. - nxt

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights While you have several successful Class 2 nominations, and seem to be right almost every time, I think that part of the job of a QCG member is to vote on C1 and Featured articles. If you are not willing to do that, then you can't be a QCG (at least in my opinion). Agent Charge Please vote 20:48, October 1, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights If memory serves, he has never had a successful C1 or FA nom before. Also, a lot of his nominated C2 articles have very short backgrounds that often need expanding. Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge
  3. Crown Knights Per Jeyo and Charge. Also, if he isn't interested in voting for C1/FA, which takes probably nearly as much time as finding an article/fixing it up, to me that we seem like intentional negligence of a whole duty all the time. (So kind of what Charge said. :P) --Berrybrick (Talk) 23:12, October 12, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

  • As muchas I wt to leen to support I want to say I would like you to at least vote on C1's and FA's nominations. If you do that before your request is closed I will gladly support.  :D klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 00:11, September 23, 2012 (UTC)
    • Charge, I am not unwilling to vote on C1 and Featured articles. It's just that what I do takes up a lot of my time, and usually I spend my Brickipedia time in fixing up articles. Agent Fuse Talk 9,330 Edits! Grammatic Fanatic 06:51, October 2, 2012 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

CzechMate, Requested 00:51, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I have a good amount of article experience, and know when it's c1, c2 or c3, and I do honestly believe I could help out the team, and possibly get some articles rated quicker. Thanks --Czech 00:51, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights I've severely disagreed with every one of his Monster Fighters set nominations.. So, per my oppose to Jeyo, I'm not really sure if he has suitable judgment skills about the level an article should be at (that doesn't sound right, but I'm not sure how to correct it. :S). (also, from what I've seen, he has very few successful nominations) -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  2. Crown Knights Sorry, but I'm still seeing way too many "Not done"s next to nominations made by this user. NightblazeSaber 08:23, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Way to many "x"'s on the nomintaion's page by this user. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 11:49, September 4, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

On the F12 army, you have 8 listed c2's, and no c1/FA. Have you done any more that haven't been reported? Jag 03:04, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
few, yeah, I'll need to look through my contribs, if Lord V passes, I'll have a c1 under my belt. --Czech 04:15, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
And also, if you're going to oppose due to c1s or FAs see SKP's support to Jeyo. --Czech 04:21, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
I do agree wtih SKP but also it isn't just your FA's and C1's I'm worried about, it is C2's, and other stuff. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 11:51, September 4, 2012 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Jeyo, Requested 21:56, August 23, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: Well, I know I'm a bit new, but I have over 60 Class 2 articles and two Class 1 articles under my belt and I'm extremely active. I think I could help out the wiki a lot through the QCG.

Support

  1. Crown Knights I think he can handle the rights, and would be able to clearly judge the appropriateness (is that a word?) of ratings for articles. Jag 23:26, August 24, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Per Jag, just because he hasn't had success with C1's or FA's shouldn't be reason to oppose. After all, that requires a community vote. SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Welcome to Click a Brick! 17:00, August 29, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Has had some noms fail in the past, but does appear to be on the lookout for sub-standard articles which shouldn't be rated as high as they should be. Appears to be more thorough in checking articles against the MoS than most other users when voting or nominating articles. If Jeyo does make a mistake, in most cases this user also seems to fix the article up instead of just leaving it NightblazeSaber 03:56, August 30, 2012 (UTC)
  4. Honestly, we really need more raters, and looking over this user's history I think that he'll be able to it well. ajr 02:53, September 2, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights He seems to be right (almost) every time. Agent Charge 00:47, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
  6. Crown Knights Has definitely improved. -Cligra Join the redlink war!

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights I would like to see a bit more expierence in the C1 and Fa. Wait a few months, due some more work, make yourself really comfortable, and I will definatly support.  :) klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 22:22, August 24, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Seems to be fairly confident with C2's, but I don't really think he understands the level a C1 or FA should be at. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  3. Crown Knights Per Klagoer's first sentence and Cligra. --Berrybrick (Talk) 17:34, August 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

If my class one nominations were being looked at, I may be able to get more done and through that, more experience. <s>Jeyo</s> Lord VladekTalk The Forge

Currently, this is at fail, because although it passes the 60%, it is at +2, rather than +3. However, this rule was made to stop votes like 1/0 from passing simply from non-voting, so I think I may pass this. Any other comments? Jag 03:13, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
After thinking about this, I'm going to make it a pass. The reason is that he has passed the 60% requirement, and although he has not got a +3, the reason that was made was to prevent 1/0 or 2/0 nominations, i.e. nominations where a few people vote but nobody else votes, so an insufficient number of opinions are put forward in the discussion. This is a closing as per the 'new' system, and as such, may be contested, with a further discussion, if anyone is upset. Jag 04:39, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, this seems wrong to me, I don't know about anyone else. Firstly, if a change to the criteria was to happen, I would say that it should happen to any subsequent requests- a request was entered in to on certain terms, I just think it should end like that. Secondly, the change hasn't been approved, so I don't get how action can be taken based on a suggestion that hasn't gone through, while the system which was voted through should be ignored. May just be me :P NightblazeSaber 08:23, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, the system wasn't voted through; you suggested it, nobody commented, and then I added it :P So I guess you could say that requirement shouldn't really even be there :D Jag 08:43, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
  • I've been asked to comment here, but have no clue what pass requirements are, but, I've noticed a lot of moaning about how long requests take, so I don't see what harm a new member would do, even if he doesn't meet one requirement. (Personally, the QCG seems over-regulated to me, but then again, not paying attention to this stuff, you may need all these requirements and what not for... whatever reason.) ~ CJC 19:35, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

In answer to Berry and Cligra, I believe I understand the level of C1 and FA much better now than I did before, as shown by this. If someone were to nominate Lord Vladek for C1 right now (which was an article I nominated some months ago), I would oppose it. I learn from my mistakes and tend to not make them again. Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge

If I see one more nomination of that quality from you, I will change to support. (besides, I'm tired of having to rate all your stuff. :P) -Cligra Join the redlink war!
Such as this? Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was successful

Agent Charge, Requested 20:55, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I feel like I could handle these rights, and I know how the system works.

Support

  1. Has done some more since my previous vote, and consistently seems to be getting things right Crown Knights NightblazeSaber 03:34, July 24, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights --Jag 03:38, July 24, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Per opening spiel. :P -Cligra Join the redlink war!
    # I see a lot of Requests in the C2, C3 etc. from him, all of which have been done. I would trust him with the rights. Ninja Head StealthNinja Contact 6,767 Edits (Sorry, you must be a member of the QCG to vote here)
  4. Crown Knights Sure, we could use more. ajr 04:06, July 24, 2012 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights Seems like he could use it. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 15:11, July 24, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

# Crown Knights Has been very good with juding the ratings, but has only made 4 noms that I can see, and also only one vote in FAC/GAN. I guess I'd just like to see a bit more activity and therefore more data before I support. NightblazeSaber 22:47, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Comments

  • So.... this should have been closed about two weeks ago, but there wasn't any response until about 24 hours ago. Should we either close it now, or let it run for a week from July 24 (when actual voting started)? NightblazeSaber 12:00, July 25, 2012 (UTC)
  • Close, since you probably don't have any more active members to vote in it :P ~ CJC 15:17, July 25, 2012 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was successful

Mr. Minifigure, Requested 14:27, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I have nominated articles for every type of Class and only one has not passed but for something very minor that I will fix.

Support

  1. Honestly, you do very good content work and we could really use some more active QCG members. ajr 15:19, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
  2. Sure. NightblazeSaber 21:45, April 7, 2012 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights- nxt

Oppose

Comments

So at this point in time it just needs one more vote. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 12:41, April 13, 2012 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was request pulled

Zaersk, Requested 00:33, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Request comments: I am Zaersk, and requesting to be a member of the Quality Check Group. I am familiar with Brickipedia's Manual of Style very well, and nominated three articles for Class 2, which in the end was approved. I also successfully nominated articles for Class 3 and 4 status' which were also approved. Although, I also nominated three for Class 2 which didn't make it. One I can understand why, the other two- not so much. You see, when I nominated those two part articles, (Part 3308px1 and Part 6053c01) the MOS stated that it just needs a description. (Doesn't say how much of a description length the article requires). source I saw that, and decided to nominate both articles. Although, Ultrasonic NXT said it needed a longer description. I don't blame him. Although, I see many, many Part articles I pass by with Class 2 ratings, but have one sentence descriptions. So, that's the reason for Part 3308px1 and Part 6053c01's unsuccessful ratings. Since I was informed on this information, I feel now I am ready to become a QCG member. (Also, if you think I am a bit inexperienced with article maintenance, give me a test on a article, and I'll give you the rating it should be.) Thanks for your time!  Zaersk  Talk  Contribs  (MOC) (Blog) 00:33, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Support

Neutral

  • Crown Knights I think that you'd do well, but I recall Mr. Minifigure's request for QCG failing because the only Class 2 articles he nominated were part articles. I'll stay neutral though, for now. --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:49, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
    • Crown KnightsI just remembered your requests for a couple of Super Heroes and Hero Factory. I'll think about it more. --Berrybrick (Talk) 00:52, January 6, 2012 (UTC)
  • Crown Knights Off to a good start, but I'd just like to see more experience with nominating Class 2 and higher. I don't really pay attention to Part articles since we haven't really developed a decent MoS for them, but in terms of other articles, 2 out of 3 were successful, would just like to see a bit more experience here and maybe a higher success rate. NightblazeSaber 00:55, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

  • Sorry but you just started to frequently edit here. My vote will probalby chnge though --Czech 04:34, January 6, 2012 (UTC) (Only Quality Check Group members can vote here)

Comments


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Harryhogwarts, Requested 23:04, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I have been on this wiki since January, and have been resourceful, and reliable on. I believe I can be a great rater. So, please, I'd like to become a rater.

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights You do some good work here, and I thank you for that. I am concerned with some of your edits, though, and that you don't respond to concerns left on your talk page. You also haven't suggested any articles for rating. Please get some experience at Brickipedia:Articles for Rating first. ajr 23:25, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Per Ajr's last part. (Of his ten-word sentence paragraph page opposition essay.) Jag 23:29, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights NightblazeSaber 00:14, November 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was unsuccessful

Crazed Penguin (2), Requested 00:14, November 3, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I think I could make a good rater. I'm studying the MOS and understanding it alot better.-CP

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights Sorry, but I haven't seen you actually successfully nominate an article yet. NightblazeSaber 00:35, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
    I have submitted a few for rating. 2 Succesful. Cp
    Sorry, but just all of a sudden nominating a heap of articles just to try and get some votes here doesn't convince me. Also, even with two successful noms, your success rate is still probably below 20% overall. NightblazeSaber 01:23, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
    What's this I hear about success rates? FB100Ztalkcontribs 01:26, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
    ??? He's nominated a lot of articles in the past, a lot of them have failed. Obviously if the majority of nominations are failing, it's not a good thing to let someone assign ratings NightblazeSaber 01:31, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
    Not the reason for nominating. I saw the articles and justrequsted higher ranking. User:Crazed Penguin/100DaySig
  2. Per NHL, sorry. ajr 01:21, November 3, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Neutral Crown Knights What do you think? It's in the Oppose section, isn't it? Jag 00:49, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  1. So you have been understanding the MoS better? Good. Now put into practice what you have learned from it, and then come back. Jag 23:32, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
  2. OK. For the next....3 weeks I will submit articles, checkthem for Eniglish UK and no US. User:Crazed Penguin/SigBlue 04:35, November 15, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Unsuccessful. ajr 23:39, October 5, 2011 (UTC)

TheGrandEditor, Requested 16:27, September 13, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments:

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights This is weird, because I thought you were already in it, or would be overqualified to join. While I know you to be a great writer and a great user in general, your contributions appear to indicate that you've never voted in FAN, GAN, or nominated an article for any rating (correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm sure I've seen you do these things, it's just that your contributions lists are telling me otherwise). I would just recommend submitting a few articles for rating/voting on things first to show you have experience in rating the articles, sorry (nothing personal) NightblazeSaber 00:52, September 14, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Per NHL, you haven't seemed to be active in this process before now... ajr 02:06, September 14, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Per NHL, please submit some articles for rating and if they pass I may make my vote a support. SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 06:22, September 15, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights Per the rest. You easily could be, with a few nominations. Unsigned comment by UltrasonicNXT (talk • contribs).
  5. Crown Knights Per everyone. Nominate some articles first. Jag 23:35, October 5, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  • Closed as not done. ajr 23:39, October 5, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Request unsuccessful

Mr. Minifigure, Requested 08:18, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments:

Support

  1. Crown Knights You are making so many pages, that this sure would make my job easier! -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  2. Crown Knights Are you not? </complete disbelief> NXT (PC Problems)
  3. Crown Knights Fortunately for the FA concerns, that always requires a vote :p ajr 22:39, September 12, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights Hell yeah! -NBP 22:41, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights Definitely a well-rounded editor. However, after previewing your Alpha Team FA nom, I think a bit more experience is needed. Once again, please don't take this as an offense because I truly believe you are one of the foremost and welcoming editors we have. Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 22:25, September 12, 2011 (UTC)
    • No offense taken. Also I would like to point out that thing sat there for onths :P klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 22:28, September 12, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Weak oppose. Just been through your contributions, while you have a great record for Class 3 and 4, personally what really counts for me is Class 2 and above. The only Class 2 noms I've seen are for parts, and I don't really consider them to be on the same level as other Class 2's- let's face it, basically all you have to have is a complete list of appearances and a filled out infobox. So the only "big nom" I've seen is the failed FA nom. Don't get me wrong, the lower classes do count to an extent, which is why this is only a very weak oppose. NightblazeSaber 00:08, September 13, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  • Has it been a week? klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 12:25, September 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Crown Knights It's only +2 though, would you really want it to end like that? --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:23, September 16, 2011 (UTC)
      • True yet you need 60% positive and i think altogether positive votes are 66.6666%. Correct me if I'm wrong. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 12:59, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
        • And a +3 vote count. Sorry but it's been open for nearly two weeks now, I've got to close it. NightblazeSaber 23:03, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed

Crazed Penguin (1), Requested at 9:51am AEST Sunday

Hi i'm Crazed Penguin and I believe i can rate articles well and i know a good article from a bad one and i know that rating an article is a serious process. If i join then i can be the little penguin who comes on everyday to rate unrated articles:

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights No way, Jose. You've hardly got any experience, and the quality of your edits are inconsistent. Also, your grammar is relatively poor, and others including myself have had to correct some of your grammatical mistakes on pages. Besides that, you haven't formatted this request properly. Sadly, I'm afraid this example inspires little confidence in me of your abilities. Sorry, Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 00:03, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Not enough experience yet, sorry. ajr 01:18, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

How should I improve? Because I would like to join in the future. --User:Crazed Penguin/Sig 2 09:18, August 28, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Successful

Berrybrick, Requested 01:34, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments:

Support

  1. Crown KnightsJust because you formatted your nomination right. Lol. NBP 01:41, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
    It took me a moment Berrybrick talk -- "That's Mr. Commander Sergeant to you. 01:47, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights We could really use another reviewer... ajr 02:11, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights I have no objections. A solid editor who appears to have a grasp for these matters. =) Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 02:15, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights Per B3. SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 07:46, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights Jag 05:46, August 29, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Crown Knights - nxt 10:50, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
  7. Crown Knights -Cligra Join the redlink war!

Oppose

Comments

I don't want to sound impatiant, but it's been a few days over a week so… Berrybrick (Talk) 19:19, September 7, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failed

Mr. Minifigure, Requested 19:55, July 20, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I have nominated many articles and most of them have passed. I feel I would be a great addition to his gruop and have improved since my last nomination. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user

Support

  • Crown Knights Jag 19:57, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
  • Can I do this without being a member? Anyway, I don't care whether they have nominated articles for class whatever, he is a good user and trusted, and you can't exactly say the QCG has many active members atm. - Kingcjc 20:00, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
    Read the red text. Jag 20:04, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
    So, the problem is you have practically no active members, and yet you can't get more active members without active members. :P - Kingcjc 20:11, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
  • Crown Knights NBP 21:52, July 22, 2011 (UTC)


Oppose

  • Crown KnightsSorry, but the only articles I have seen you nominate are Class 2, 3, and 4. What about Class 1? I understand about FA. •myk 20:14, July 20, 2011 (UTC)
  • It isn't exactly necessary for a candidate to nominate Class 1 articles- Crown Knight's can't just put an article up to Class 1 by themselves. Jag 19:57, July 22, 2011 (UTC)

Comments


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Request successful

Mykheh, Requested 18:51, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I am applying for QCG Member once again. Throughout the time period from resigning to applying, I have nominated many more articles. I now have nominated three Class 1's (all successful), as well as all other Classes except FA (high success rate).

Support

  1. Crown KnightsPer last time. ajr 18:52, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown KnightsOf course. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  3. Crown Knights Skdhjf(Talk!) 18:55, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights Has definitely proven himself to be capable for this job. Good luck :) NightblazeSaber 00:55, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights Totally. =) Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 01:40, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
  6. Crown Knights Yup. - nxt 04:16, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

CAN I JOIN THE AGENTS!04:01, July 10, 2011 (UTC)Lego Leader

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Request failed

Mr. Minifigure, Requested 19:13, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I feel that I am expierenced enough to take on this task. I know I am not the best editor but I think this would help me become a better editor. I have nominated articles before and most of them have passed. Please take the time to vote.

klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user

Support

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights Concerns with lack of experience in article rating. Maybe he/she could be more active in the branch before placing another nomination? Skdhjf(Talk!) 22:17, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Per above. Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 22:22, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Only nomination to date for any class is the one Fudgepie said- a Class 2 nomination for Part 93666, which was initially not approved (see project namespace contibs). So I feel they need a bit more experience before joining (sorry) NightblazeSaber 23:15, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights Per Tatooine, concerns with experience. ajr 23:22, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights Per others, doesn't have enough experience. - nxt 11:35, June 19, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

  1. You said you've nominated articles? Looking back in the archives, I've only seen you nominate one article for Class 2... Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 22:16, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Can i join the crown knights ?03:21, June 26, 2011 (UTC)Lego Leader


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Request failed

Agent Swipe, Requested 01:22, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments:None

Support

Oppose

  • Crown Knights Eh, I don't know if the nominee has enough experience in Article rating yet. Nothing personal. Skdhjf(Talk!) 03:32, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • Crown Knights Same feeling as Tatooine, haven't seen them around much. ajr 03:38, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Yeah I probably don't deserve this yet sorry guys... The Legend of Swipe Talk --- The dawn is coming...

  • Don't feel sorry - you're a great user, Swipe. But you just need more experience in Article Rating before this nomination can pass.:) Skdhjf(Talk!) 18:32, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
    • Exactly, it isn't a matter of deserving, just of not enough experience in this area yet. Keep up the good work that you've been doing and then request this again later :) ajr 18:39, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
  • Isn't the idea of joining the group so they can rate articles? In which case, surely it makes sense they have no experience. CjcDonut Kingcjc 21:33, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
    Thats only if they have experience in rating them - if we pick a user who has little experience on article rating, and throw him on the job, we'll have LOTS of contested ratings let me tell you that. The user can gain experience though by successfully nominating articles for their respective ratings on the nomination pages.:) Skdhjf(Talk!) 22:04, June 18, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Request withdrawn

Mykheh, Requested 04:40, June 8, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: Sometimes when I am active, no other QCG member is, which means nominations may not receive a verdict for awhile. I have completely met the qualifications for this position. My successful nominations out number my failed ones-only one has been marked with the Not Done template, and two, I believe, were moved to either a higher or lower class.
Based on the fact that I have only nominated one article for Class 1 and one or two for class 2, I choose to withdraw from this nomination. If I was another user voting for this user, I would oppose.myk 15:47, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support

  1. Crown Knights Sure. Why not? User has experience in Article rating, and has successfully nominated various Articles for Class 2, and one GA. Only got one ND template for an article he nominated. Skdhjf(Talk!) 00:40, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights Per Tat. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  3. Crown Knights ajr 01:50, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights After reconsidering my former stance, I believe Mykheh would be a valuable member since he can give ratings when most of us probably aren't around. What are a few failures compared to the overall success he's had in nominating articles? Shouldn't be a reason not to support. =P Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 02:35, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

# Neutral lol, once again I have something long to say. =P Anyway, I'm neutral for now, since I have one objection. For the good part, I believe Mykheh is a good user who is generally quite knowledgeable and would make a good member of the QCG. However, I'm still a tiny bit wary of his nominations. Firstly, some of his nominations seemed a bit "premature" for certain classes. Simply put, a miniscule amount of articles he has nominated doesn't exactly fit the guidelines of those classes. Of course, this is just my opinion, but I feel it might be best if he can have a bit more experience in successfully nominating class 2 or even class 1 nominations. That's why I would neither support nor oppose. For now. That might change... =) Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 01:54, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

  • Fudgepie: The word miniscule means small, so that means the larger portion of the articles I have nominated were not premature. What matters should be the larger portion. Unsigned comment by Mykheh (talk • contribs).
  • Okay, scratch that. I suppose I'm just being a bit too severe in regards to article standards. Maybe my perception is just too high of a standard for class 2. Please forgive me for my curtness, Mykheh. =( In this regard, I'm probably in the one in error. Again, please accept my most humblest apologies. Sincerely, Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 02:28, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral as per Fudgepie's above struck out comments. Really hasn't had any experience in nominating articles for Class 2 or higher, which is really the borderline between "meets MoS" and "doesn't meet MoS", something that QCG members should really be the most clear on. I'm not saying this user doesn't know the difference, just that there hasn't been any evidence that they do. NightblazeSaber 08:27, June 10, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failure

Lego lord Requested 23:28, 4 April 2011

Request comments: I try deciding how great an article is in my mind. I am very familiar with our Manual of Style and I believe that I can help the group by becoming a member. Please give a solid reason as to why you agree or disagree. LEGO Lord Talk 13,498 Edits! ---- LEGO LOTR is coming! 23:28, April 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

Comments

  • Don't know yet. But nominating this for a GA when it clearly doesn't meet the GA criteria (ie ...have at least one long original paragraph that describes the subject in extensive detail, as well as at least one additional original paragraph that contains further information about a different aspect or peculiarities of the subject) does make me lean towards opposing due to not quite having a good enough knowledge of the system. Will have a look through a few more noms/votes in the history when I have time before I make a decision. NightblazeSaber 23:41, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
  • Also, you know the exact time by copying the syntax above as it says to, or just use five tildes, ie ~~~~~, which prints the time only. NightblazeSaber 23:41, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. sorry about nominating 3365_Space_Moon_Buggy for a GA, I should have nominated that for a CA instead. LEGO Lord Talk 13,498 Edits! ---- LEGO LOTR is coming!
The only reason I nominated that article is because I was getting confused with the ratings "complete" and "featured" - I thought they were the same thing, but now I'm cleared up. It's getting quite late, and I haven't had any supports or opposes. LEGO Lord Talk 13,498 Edits! ---- LEGO LOTR is coming!


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Failure

Agent Swipe, Requested 15:37, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I think I would be fine for this kind of job on this wiki.

Support

Oppose

Comments

Have you nominated any articles for 'Complete Article' Status? SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 16:34, April 12, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Success

UltrasonicNXT, Requested 18:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: there are so many articles that I come across that have inaccurate ratings, that I easily spot. I would definately help us (Brickipedia) in becoming a better rated place, by being able to change them myself, rather than having to nominating them. (I also tend to want to change class 5/4/3 articles, rather than further up ones) - nxt

Support

  1. Crown Knights All of his proposals are correct. Jag 19:00, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights ajr 21:33, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 05:49, April 12, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Success

SKP4472, Requested 09:13, April 2, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I have requested to become a member of the BOR/CCG because I feel that I'm capable of changing the ratings to the rating that suits the articles quality best. I'm also familiar with the Complete Article criteria and Manual of Style and believe that I can be of allot of help to the group by being a member. Thanks, kind regards. SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 09:14, April 2, 2011 (UTC)

Support

  1. Is active in making well-reasoned FAC and GAN votes, and nominates articles at CAP, with a fairly high success rate. Crown Knights NightblazeSaber 09:16, April 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. See no reason why not.Crown Knights ajr 15:28, April 2, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights. Good at checking for ratings. P.S. Can we make a rule that you put {{RG}} at the start of your message? Then it's much easier to quickly count them. Jag 20:58, April 3, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

  • (off-topic): If any other member votes here, can they take a look at the talk page please? NightblazeSaber 09:16, April 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • It's been a week now. Can we come to a verdict please? Thanks. SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 16:40, April 9, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Success

Fudgepie, Requested 02:44, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: I've seen quite a few pages whose ratings are not very consistent. Already I have successfully nominated 3 pages for Complete Status, and I believe I can do a good job for future ones. Thanks Byzantium 3000!8,856 edits! 805px-FistoOverVassekMoon-LoG 02:44, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Support

  1. Crown Knights Clueful user, no problems here. ajr 02:45, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights - nxt 17:12, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Jag 04:36, April 26, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Success

UltrasonicNXT, Requested 18:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: there are so many articles that I come across that have inaccurate ratings, that I easily spot. I would definately help us (Brickipedia) in becoming a better rated place, by being able to change them myself, rather than having to nominating them. (I also tend to want to change class 5/4/3 articles, rather than further up ones) - nxt

Support

  1. Crown Knights All of his proposals are correct. Jag 19:00, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights ajr 21:33, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 05:49, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

  • Have we come to a decision yet? - nxt 07:20, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
Voting lasts for one week. Jag 07:35, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
oh, ok I didn't know that. - nxt 09:01, April 17, 2011 (UTC)


The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was Success

Tatooine, Requested 21:32, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Request comments: So far, as you can tell, a lot of articles come flying in the class X nominations pages; and eventually they build up. I feel that I can help. So far I have nominated 3 articles for CA and one for FA (2 for, 2 oppose) and a lot for classes 3 and 4. And all of them have been successful. Skdhjf(Talk!) 21:32, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Support

  1. Crown Knights Jag 05:48, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Crown Knights - nxt 15:09, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights Nerfblasterpro: Always supplying the boomsauce...Maverick 19:14, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights ajr 19:42, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

The following section is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. The result was successful

ToaMeiko, Requested 19:31, September 3, 2013 (UTC)

Request comments: Pretty self-explanatory why I'm requesting this — to continue to help improve the wiki. I've been doing a good job (from what I have heard) as RQM and CQM, so I figured it was worth going for QCG as well. --ToaMeiko (talk) 19:31, September 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support

  1. I feel his skills in writing and identifying errors in articles, as well as the research he puts in to articles should give him this title. -Crown KnightsNBP 20:13, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Imperial guards Had some good ones at BM. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:18, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Crown Knights --Berrybrick (Talk) 03:18, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
  4. Crown Knights SKP4472 Talk 13,998 Edits! Welcome to Click a Brick! 07:44, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
  5. Crown Knights @Jeyo below- I definitely remember Meiko nominating a lot of things somewhere, must have been on the other site as mentioned Crown Knights NovaFlare 22:51, September 8, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Crown Knights Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you've nominated many articles for a higher class, nor were they mostly for c2 or c1. -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 20:11, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
    I've only nominated one article here (Wikia), which was then chosen for C2 (which was what I nominated it for). At Brickimedia, I had several article nominations, where all were given what I nominated it for or higher. --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:29, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
    What were the other nominations for? -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 20:51, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
    Various articles I spent time editing to get them up to MoS compliance. I can't think of specific ones. The one I did here at Wikia was 30106 Ice Cream Stand. --ToaMeiko (talk) 20:54, September 3, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

  • I know it isn't required, but can those who support please provide reasons for doing so? -- Jeyo Lord VladekTalk The Forge 08:01, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
  • You have to be different, don't you Ajr :P ~ CJC 12:28, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
    I love that old symbol D: Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:27, September 10, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.