|This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.|
BlueMoonset, I am contacting you to ask that you close Sleaford's GA review due to it bein abandoned and, if possible, retain its place in the list. The review was opened by a very inexperienced editor on the day I nominated the article; his brief comments were clearly insufficient, so I posted at WT:GAN to report the issue. Ritchie333 came forward and said that he would review it , which I was very pleased with, given his experience and competence at GAR. The GA Cup had just finished and he was burnt out by it, while I wasn't expecting a review for a couple of months, so it lay, unattended to. It's since received a good copy-edit by an experienced editor, and he seems happy with it too. I've contacted Ritchie to ask whether he's still interested and you recently asked him again at the GAR page; he replied to both, suggesting he'd get to it in about a week , but on both occasions that hasn't happened. It's a shame, but I feel that, with his new RFA and one of his own articles being reviewed (a couple of days after it was nominated), it seems unlikely Sleaford will get looked at anytime soon. Therefore, if you wouldn't mind doing whatever you do to close the review but keep its place in the list, that would be much appreciated. Regards, --Noswall59 (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2015 (UTC).
- Noswall59, done. I'm sorry it didn't work out. I hope you get someone interested and competent soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Please Don't block me.
I hope you like t-shirts...
- Thank you for your DYK revision of my self-nominated Waldemar Hammenhög article. I wasn't quite aware that additional revisions were required, but I'm currently reviewing the Arikamedu article for the DYK. Thanks again, --Bruzaholm (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)