Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Format of this RfC: Reply |
→Format of this RfC: Reply |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:I like that! Depends on if we do one subpage for open discussion or many, so let's see what other people think about that. [[user:theleekycauldron|theleekycauldron]] ([[User talk:Theleekycauldron|talk]] • she/her) 21:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
:I like that! Depends on if we do one subpage for open discussion or many, so let's see what other people think about that. [[user:theleekycauldron|theleekycauldron]] ([[User talk:Theleekycauldron|talk]] • she/her) 21:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
:Thank you for the CC {{smiley}}. I'm not the most experienced with structured discussions, but this idea seems fitting given the specific proposal. —[[User:Sirdog|<span style="color:#056300">'''Sirdog'''</span> ]]([[User talk:Sirdog|talk]]) 21:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:55, 29 April 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors page. |
|
Format of this RfC
I am thinking of the old-fashioned RfC format where people state a view and then editors sign underneath it? CC @SchroCat, Theleekycauldron, and Sirdog. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 17:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- I like that! Depends on if we do one subpage for open discussion or many, so let's see what other people think about that. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the CC . I'm not the most experienced with structured discussions, but this idea seems fitting given the specific proposal. —Sirdog (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)