User talk:Extorc/Archive 8

Why did u close the tamil genocide move request as non consensus?

The arguments from the parties arguing that it should be kept seemed particularly weak as they were purely arguing that it shouldn’t be moved because of their personally held belief that it is real. CaptainPrimo (talk) 07:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

United States government group chat leaks

Good day! Do you know when United States government group chat leak might be moved to United States government group chat leaks? Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot make the move, since this is a technical move, it will be made by the folks at RMT. I have raised the request. Sit tight. >>> Extorc.talk 14:52, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move not finished

Hey Extorc, you didn't finish the move from 2011 Joplin tornado to Joplin tornado. StormHunterBryante5467⛈️ 10:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@StormHunterBryante5467 Since this is a technical move, I have raised the request on RMT. Sit tight. The move request is closed so the close will definitely take place. >>> Extorc.talk 10:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rename of Universal Studios United Kingdom

Hi Extorc, re this close, could you please give the evidence that you based this close on. Most contributors gave votes but with no reasoning or evidence for their assertions. I looked at the official website of the project and couldn't find "Great Britain" used anywhere on it. OTOH, "United Kingdom" is used everywhere when referring to its location. Neither the "UniversalStudiosGreatBritain.com" or "UniversalGreatBritain.com" domains mentioned in the article are accessible, but "UniversalStudiosUnitedKingdom.com" is. -- DeFacto (talk). 10:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My role is not to assess evidence. My role is to assess consensus. Four participants of the discussion pointed out that Great Britain is the common name. The persons who opposed were rebutted by the supporters. @DeFacto >>> Extorc.talk 10:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but usually the participants provide the evidence and rationale to support their opinion, but as in this case they didn't, I assumed you looked for some evidence, at least. From your reply, it seems you simply treated it as a support or oppose vote rather than as per WP:DCON ("Consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy.") - would that be fair to say? -- DeFacto (talk). 11:24, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have to evaluate the discussion as a whole. Yes I see the evidence. I see users provided links and search results of articles using the proposed name to demonstrate COMMONNAME. I dont see any such thing on the other side. @DeFacto >>> Extorc.talk 11:52, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your replies, but I'm not convinced that there was enough there to support anything other than a "no consensus". -- DeFacto (talk). 12:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thats alright. But I am not inclined to reconsider the close. >>> Extorc.talk 12:29, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, that's your prerogative. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]