"denied" gives the feeling that the forge admin has refused the arcival, which is confusiong given that the process is not about asking a permission but to check wether the archival is doable.

I feel like "Blocked" which is shorter convey the same meaning.

In T4384#88820, @bchauvet wrote:

"denied" gives the feeling that the forge admin has refused the arcival

which is true according to the help page: Denied: The forge administrator(s) denied the request to list their forge.

which is confusiong given that the process is not about asking a permission but to check wether the archival is doable.

Which would match either of these definitions if it isn't: Rejected: The request is invalid. It is rejected by a moderator with an explanation. or Suspended:The forge listing is not supported yet.

"denied" gives the feeling that the forge admin has refused the arcival

which is true according to the help page: Denied: The forge administrator(s) denied the request to list their forge.

yes but that help page is obsolete.
Multiple oral (and probably in the forge) discussions mentioned that it's not up to upstream to refuse the listing of their forge.
If it's public, it's listable.

The add-forge-now functionality is making a courtesy ping through email to mention upstream
that we are going to make an archival pass on their forge.

Hence, why the functional change of renaming terms around the add-forge-now functionality is happening.
And that help page you just mentioned will have to be rewritten as well according to this.

indeed, modifying the status description in the help page is included in this task :)

I see. So it's actually about removing "denied" entirely, and added a new "unsuccessful" status that has a completely different meaning.

functionnally yes, but technically this state remains at the same position in the workflow