Wikipedia talk:Oversight candidates

Why are these statements not on RFA where they should be? Is there any point in this extra page? Majorly talk 16:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I really don't know. Probably we should create the "real" vote pages and start the elections? Time something like 2 or 3 weeks? --Barras (talk) 16:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

We should start them now, and stop dragging it out for no reason. Majorly talk 16:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

We should have a fix number of days, how long the RFOs should be opened. Barras (talk) 16:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Why? We should run them as long as we need to. Majorly talk 16:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I created a request page here. I transclude, when the others have done the same. Barras (talk) 16:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I assumed it was because it was decided not to run the actual elections till the end of August/September...but I am just going with the flow. -Djsasso (talk) 17:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Like Majorly said, they can still keep open, until consensus is reached. Barras (talk) 17:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure why we need to wait so long, if oversights are needed right now. Majorly talk 17:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I like it better in this format as opposed to an RFX. It works this way for Enwiki. Shappy ^talk 17:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It's basically the same as RFX format, just on a different page. Majorly talk 17:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

And questions and answers without any votes yet... -Djsasso (talk) 17:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

 (change conflict)  ENwiki transclude subpage in a page. Same like Rfx. I doesn't matter wherer wy transclude subpages. on enwiki is it a arbcom page here is it WP:RFA. Barras (talk) 17:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Questions and answers can be done during the votes. Barras (talk) 17:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)