I know this isn't quite the exact place to put this, but there have been other discussions like this here.
My suggestion is that we change the FA nomination page, so that there are three sections: Support, Oppose, and GA. Support means you think it should be a FA, GA means you think it should be a GA, and Oppose means you think it shouldn't be either. This means that if something is nominated for a FA but does not pass, if people have voted for GA, then it may be able to pass as that, without having to do a second separate nom. 20:39, January 22, 2012 (UTC)
- Support - Great idea; it makes sense to me, so yeah. Skdhjf(Talk!) 20:47, January 22, 2012 (UTC)
- Support--Berrybrick (Talk) 01:57, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Support-Cligra Join the redlink war!
- Or, we could do things discussion-style instead, thus allowing consensus for GA to arise from that without the need for headers :D!. Ah, whatever, support this >.> ajr 02:59, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Yay! Another wall of indecipherable text wall without any structure and we can leave the verdict up to a single random person! :P NightblazeSaber 05:12, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Support, I guess. On the condition it means simply adding the heading, not getting rid of the technical check and comments sections, like it sort of implies. And that we don't use the section if the article is already a GA. And that the GA section adheres to the GA rules (which are different to FA). Actually, changed my vote to neutral, since it would probably be easier to just nom it for both GA and FA
, and oppose if it does mean getting rid of the above-mentioned sections.NightblazeSaber 05:12, January 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Can we close this? It does seem as though it could be put to use since we have a few FA nominations which people are saying are only class 1. --Berrybrick (Talk) 19:07, September 7, 2012 (UTC)
- Closed. Will add the new heading to the FA preload text. NightblazeSaber 23:26, October 25, 2012 (UTC)