How to Use Nominator In Sentences - Examples Of Nominator In Sentences

Search your words in sentences https://englishteststore.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20211&Itemid=1131 - The nominator has covered almost all there is to say, too. - Though the nominator could have taken that unilateral action initially without any kind of sanction, the result of this VfD discussion is that the subject will keep a separate article unless future discussion reverses that consensus. - The nominator seems to be confused with the VfD process and taking this to RfC seems to be jumping the gun. - Nominator is apparently unaware of relevant conventions. - Is the nominator better known to wikipedia under other user names or been active as an anonymous editor? - The nominator appropriately converted the stub into a redirect to Bootheel. - It is probably a much more notable than average prison and the nominator has provided no evidence or arguments to the contrary. - The nominator suggested merging, and the final commenter cast his lot that way. - Nominator placed inappropriate tag on article so prior discussion would not be visible. - When listing here, the nominator should provide the specific criteria concerns and proposed remedies. - rodii also raises a good point about the nominator. - Plenty of consensus for keep, even the nominator does not appear to have wanted this deleted. - The talk page is the first place the nominator should have gone to, not VfD. - Nobody expects you as nominator to automatically implement whatever decision the rest of us take. - As much as I sympathize with the nominator trying to deal with a lot of borderline notable toy languages, this is just not the right solution. - As the nominator, I think this VfD should be closed now. - The large number of comments and votes that have showed up since the nominator patched up the holes in the process shows that the patching up was sorely needed. - If the articles it contains would be deleted, deletion of the category may be a matter of discussion and the nominator can make a new attempt by going through proper channels. - Nominator shows unhealthy preoccupation with cleansing Wikipedia of subjects whose native tongue is not English. - Here, the nominator said that the article was copyvio. - The author should be slapped with a big fish for for doing poor research, not the nominator. - The nominator attempted none of these remedies. - The nominator is included in the number of supporters. - Also, the fact that the nominator created an account simply to AfD this article is a little curious. - Incivility is obviously not a good thing, but as the nominator says, Wikipedia will probably be better off if Rob is an admin. - If the nominator does not supply a reason for the page to be gone, then us Wikipedians have no idea why this page should be gone. - The nominator lists plenty of verifiable reasons to include them in Wikipedia. - Votes should be made not based on the nominator but on the user who is up for nomination. - Is your vote based solely upon your dislike of the nominator? - Worries me also that nominator appears to be a family member. - The original nominator listed them on May 11th, but the user was not notified per policy. - Perhaps the nominator, who I agree put this up in good faith, could simply withdraw the nomination. - If this survives AfD, it needs to be relisted and the nominator needs to a better job pointing out the 20W issue, which is less than a lightbulb. - However, some of them should be kept, but the nominator indiscriminately list everything here, and thus it is too generic to vote for a yes. - Now if a disinterested party was noting lack of experience, it would be fair, but it appears that the nominator is seeking only to negate the views of those who are anything other than deletionist. - The nominator did not even provide a reason for deletion. - If you want to thank a RfA supporter, or nominator, a WikiThanks or barnstar will do just fine. - I also have very great reservations about the motives of the nominator. - Anonymous nominator fails to demonstrate a grasp of proper VfD rationale. - Perhaps we should be clear about what this vote represents, and what the nominator believes it should be for. - At least say you agree with the nominator, even if just for the sake of form. - Since all the delete votes cited it as a hoax, the confirmation by the original nominator should put to rest any controversy about keeping this article. - Nominator should also be cautioned about making frivolous nominations. - As nominator, I see that it may well be significant, per discussion below. - Intentions and credentials of nominator not relevant. - Only delete vote came from the nominator.