Wikipedia:Closure requests/Archive 12
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Closure requests. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
2014
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Circumcision#Should we have both absolute RR and relative RR for the HIV benefit from circumcision? (initiated 11 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Traffic (band)#Proposal to remove fair use images of the band (initiated 15 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Stoning#RFC - Lede, map, sources (initiated 4 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:UK Independence Party#(Old) Request for comment (initiated 15 April 2014) and Talk:UK Independence Party#Request for comment: Lead (initiated 7 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2013–14 Thai political crisis#RfC: Should the "hidden agenda: royal succession" phrase be included as a fact? (initiated 18 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Jaymoe (initiated 6 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Done by Xaosflux. Number 57 19:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition:
Closed by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 21#Sentence fragment
- Closed by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 10:38, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
which have all been relisted and have been open for more than one month. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:47, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cskumaar/Maruthuvar community (initiated 15 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Abhinav0927 (initiated 13 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closure would be most welcome here. The discussion has been running two weeks and a consensus appears to have been achieved, but be warned that closure may still be contentious. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done I await the inevitable complaints on my talkpage. Number 57 08:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Not from me. Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2014 Formula One season#Request for comment: double points in the lead (initiated 3 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "In 2014, for the first time, double points are to be awarded for the final race of the season. Can this fact be mentioned briefly in the lead, thus?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:University of Wisconsin–Whitewater#Request for comments (initiated 14 April 2014). The opening poster wrote:
This talk page section sums up the issues concisely. The Controversy section of this article is poorly written. Its sole purpose appears to be to impugn the university. It overemphasizes a couple of incidents of questionable notability. AmericanDad86, who has been editing this section for months ([1]), has disregarded all comments of other editors ([2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]), may have edited anonymously ([9]), and I suspect has a conflict of interest, or at least an axe to grind.
- Is the Controversy section of the article needed?
- Is it fair, neutral,and balanced in tone and emphasis?
- Does it contain the right amount of detail?
- Is it well-written?
Previous comments on this issue can be found at the WikiProject Universities talk page.
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines#Talk page guidelines versus reference page ones (initiated 28 March 2014)? The opening poster wrote at Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines#Poll:
Should the statement:
- Other namespaces: Additional reasons may be specified in the guidelines for any page where users directly interact outside the user and article namespaces (e.g., the WP:Reference desk).
be included in talk page guidelines?
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
30 period on RfC expired. However, I am requesting a neutral party formally close the discussion and assess consensus (or lack thereof). I ask this because I am a heavily involved editor in the discussion and there is a wide range of opinions on the issue, especially the 3rd RfC. I would appreciate anyone taking the time to read the comments and assess it. There are three RfC to assess:
- Talk:Jodie_Foster#RfC_1_-_Should_LGBT_categories_be_added_to_page.3F
- Talk:Jodie_Foster#RfC_2_-_Should_.22lesbian.22_be_used_to_describe_Foster_in_categories.3F
- Talk:Jodie_Foster#RfC_3_-_Should_.22lesbian.22_be_used_to_describe_Foster_in_the_body_of_the_article.3F
Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:46, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Has gone over 7 days LibStar (talk) 08:15, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Robert5687 (initiated 12 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 07:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Altering pages with NoteTab (initiated 10 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done — xaosflux Talk 02:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at article talk page: Talk:Dihydrogen monoxide hoax#Requested move 21 May 2014. Thank you, GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- I cannot see any reason to close this early of the normal seven days. There are editors with valid points on both sides of the discussion, and everyone should have the chance to have their opinion heard. As a side note, you've only first joined the discussion 10 hours ago, so there is obviously still people with opinions who haven't comment yet. This should not be closed until 28 May 2014. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 20:52, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 04:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Propose clarification: CSD G6 - when does it apply to disambiguation pages with only two listed articles? (initiated 3 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Editor review#Proposed solution (initiated 28 April 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Please consider the earlier discussion Wikipedia talk:Editor review#RfC: Should we mark WP:ER as historical? in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 25#Leader of Government Business which has been open for more than one month after relisting. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:23, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Relisted by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 20:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Been open for a very long time and has recently become a bit heated. Could do with an uninvolved editor stepping in and seeing if it can be closed. Thanks.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:02, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition:
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 28#Google Australia
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 28#Auburn Middle School (Disambiguation)
which have now been open for over one month. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:32, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Gun politics in the United States#Request for comments (RFC) about whether tyranny argument is confined to USA (initiated 22 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Motshegwe/sandbox (initiated 9 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_29#Manmohan_Tiwari, which has been open for over one month after relisting. --Jax 0677 (talk) 05:19, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Two 40-day old TfDs
These (which raise different issues – the 1st is a trio of shorthand templates, the 2nd [or 4th, if you like] is an accessibility template with a similar name netted incidentally included in the same string of nominations):
- WP:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 April 20#Template:Tlb, Template:Tlxb, Template:Tlxi (see in particular the moving-forward discussion at #Shorthand there, which essentially supersedes most of the prior, duplicative discussion)
- WP:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 April 20#Template:Tn
Over-a-month is long enough for people to have raised any new issues. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 07:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done Number 57 12:34, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Could you remove the TfD template from {{Tn}} (it's template protected). Armbrust The Homunculus 12:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Number 57 12:46, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Could you remove the TfD template from {{Tn}} (it's template protected). Armbrust The Homunculus 12:44, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 26#Unsimulated real sex which has been open for more than one month after relisting. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Anyone wanting to wade into a highly controversial and tumultuous discussion is invited to see the the Move Review involving Hillary Rodham Clinton's article. This may be a job for multiple individuals given the review is looking at a decision made and endorsed by a three member panel. NickCT (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:02, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 11:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate discussion of that at WT:V#Repeated removals of refimprove tag and Talk:Harlequin Shopping Centre. There is no discussion relevant to the page. Unscintillating (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Sunrise (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
An RfC has been opened on the Talk page of Dalmatia to have comments about the boundaries of this historical region and try to solve a long standing discussion between 5 users (User:Director, User:Silvio1973, User:Tomobe03, User:Bejnar, User:Joy. All users that had already participated previously to the discussion have again expressed their opinion in the RfC. Unfortunately User:Director ignored their comments and kept the article written his way. All attempts to make any modification to the article have been immediately reverted by Director. User:Silvio1973 has posted a discussion on the DRN but this has been closed because the existing RfC is still open. Can an expert administrator assist please? --Silvio1973 (talk) 14:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
| Hating, as this isn't the place to continue the dispute. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:15, 30 May 2014 (UTC) |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Done I have closed this RFC because it was malformed (there was no question). Please open a new one. Number 57 12:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Request closure by an experienced editor. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:47, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 08:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DVMt/sandbox (initiated 14 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Manuel Mayorson which have been relisted since over one month ago.
On a side note, WP:ANRFC#WT:Shortcut#Template shortcuts has been open for over one month. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 09:09, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ankur The Mystery Boy (initiated 8 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Scott Illini/David Madden (Jeopardy! contestant) (initiated 5 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Need an experienced editor to assess 32-day consensus for re-expanding Template:Cita web to handle Spanish or Italian parameters, at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Template:Cita web (initiated 23 April 2014, relisted 2 May 2014). Thanks, Wikid77 (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 18:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I've closed the request multiple times per WP:PER as an administrator (Beetstra) has contested the edit being made and no consensus has been achieved. There has been some edit warring between Weireth and I about the request being open or closed and they are refusing to accept that it is inappropriate for there to be an active edit request template in the section since the edit has been contested and they are refusing to accept the PER says there needs to be a consensus. He also seems to be of the mindset that since I'm not an administrator I can't close the request when PER specifically says that is not required to decline a request. Weireth is usually fairly level-headed, but often strong willed to get their way. Please have a look into this. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 19:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. You failed to perform due diligence when closing the request. While you were not out of line in doing so, you could have also proposed an alternative path to whitelist when the petitioner did not. I have just done so. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Some older RfDs
Several RfDs appear ripe for a close:
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 10#Template:Wpco
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 11#Windows 9
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 19#Ombre (hairstyle)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 22#Template:WPCO
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 24#Central Nation
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 24#Spot-winged
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 28#Template:WPCL
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 28#Template:WPFK
Do take a look at other open discussions too. Consensus isn't as clear there, but maybe that just means they need an NC closure. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Requesting another opinion or closure. There is no consensus at this point. Thanks in advance.(Nightwolf87 (talk) 21:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC))
Two discussions without consensus
Two discussion were relisted twice and haven't reached consensus nor proper discussion in that period of time:
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomas Gorny
- Closed by Northamerica1000 (talk · contribs). Armbrust The Homunculus 08:47, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FileHold Systems
- Closed by Joe Decker (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 21:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Requesting no consensus closure by a neutral contributor. Thank you. --BiH (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 15:25, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia talk:Shortcut#Template shortcuts, which has remained unchanged for over one week. I can not close due to WP:INVOLVED. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:43, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Please don't, this isn't a high-pressure issue that requires being "dispositioned" (can we avoid the business jargon, too?). — Scott • talk 00:39, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
- Reply - Dispositioned is neutral language, and this discussion, which has now been open for over one month, affects several RfDs. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Cunard (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Reply - Dispositioned is neutral language, and this discussion, which has now been open for over one month, affects several RfDs. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Tom Walsh (Jeopardy! contestant) (initiated 5 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Bonkers The Clown (initiated 6 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:26, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Atama (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 18:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Sam Harris (author)#RfC:Should Sam Harris be called a philosopher? (initiated 25 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Michael Grimm (politician)/Archive 1#RfC on "succession" in Congress (initiated 4 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Donald Sterling/Archives/2018#RfC Scott Sterling "cause of death" (initiated 5 May 2014)? The question posed was: "Ought this BLP allege or imply in any way that a son (Scott Sterling) of the subject died of a "drug overdose"?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Zinedine Zidane#RfC: Arabic transliteration in lead sentence (initiated 6 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cher#RfC: Lead Image discussion (initiated 8 May 2014)? The question posed was: "Should the current infobox picture be changed in favor of a more recent one?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Argentina–Indonesia relations#Proposed merge with Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear (initiated 27 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Suggest that Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear be merged with redirect into Argentina–Indonesia relations section Trade and Commerce." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ronn Torossian#Reestablishing the 5W Public Relations Article (initiated 29 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
This article was merged after being established since 2006 and being passed through a few deletion debates. When it was merged a week or so ago, it was done with just a few editors discussing it without a more Wikipedia style consensus, and the user who merged it suggested, as seen above, that "admittedly, there were only four of us in that discussion. Perhaps I acted precipitously.". Since the merger, all info on the company itself has been removed, rendering the merge possibly wrong, and maybe making a case for re-establishment. All I am asking is for that RFC conversation.
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is Not (Organizations)#This essay (initiated 2 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
Should this document be:
- A user essay that "may represent a strictly personal viewpoint" and "should not normally [be edited by someone else]"[11]
- A Wikipedia essay, which contains "advice or opinions" that may be representative of widespread norms or minority viewpoints[12]
- A Wikipedia guideline, which outlines best practices for how policies are applied in specific contexts and reflect community consensus[13]
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Template talk:Location map Israel#RfC: Change of images in Location map Israel and related templates
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Location map Israel#RfC: Change of images in Location map Israel and related templates (initiated 30 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Sunrise (talk) 18:19, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC Talk:Cdrtools#Are the sections Compatible operating systems and Availability needed? (initiated 6 May 2014)? There is disagreement about the RfC's result at the subsection Talk:Cdrtools#Conclusion?. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Please assist with closing. We don't even have an consensus on having a consensus (the reasoning of the editor being: if we don't have one, we cannot "censor" the debated contents!) --Chire (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:52, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion/Archive 53#Proposal for C4: Blatant overcategorization (initiated 5 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships/Archive 40#RfC: Inclusion of "Lost at sea" and "Missing person" incidents in ship articles (initiated 30 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Sunrise (talk) 04:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Glenn DeLaune (initiated 2 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:35, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Amber-Lauren Ballantyne-Styles (initiated 2 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tkech/Grantville Gazette IV (initiated 2 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Bencherlite (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Dr zahida shah (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Fritz Odilon (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Finster Febb (initiated 30 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:5th Avenue Records, Inc. (initiated 30 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Taipei Assassins (TPA) (initiated 22 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Quiñenco (initiated 22 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Keith Olive (initiated 22 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Bencherlite (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Richie Notar (initiated 21 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:OpenCart (initiated 21 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:UK Independence Party#Request for comment: Lead (initiated 7 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 05:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done, closed. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor close the discussion which started May 19? Thanks We hope (talk) 00:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks#RFC to resolve conflict between MOS:TM, MOS:CT WP:TITLETM WP:RS WP:COMMONNAME (initiated 7 February 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
- Now archived at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks/Archive 16#RFC to resolve conflict between MOS:TM, MOS:CT WP:TITLETM WP:RS WP:COMMONNAME. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- Restored and Closed --Mdann52talk to me! 15:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Restored and
Request closure of this discussion which petered out a long time ago. The history of this is that there was a 2011 discussion at CFD which led to a unified approach proposed for so-called 'bias' categories, which agreed that people accused of being racist, anti/Semitic, etc should not be placed in categories like Racism or Anti-semitism. I attempted to enforce this consensus with a few articles and got into a big debate, which eventually ended at the link above. The Wisdom of a neutral closer is desired to decide what should be done with the allegedly anti-Semitic people in this (and other) categories. (note: I suggested several times that people who disagreed with the 2011 consensus should formulate a new RFC to establish a new consensus, but no-one did so afaik.)-Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
- Anyone willing to take this on, pretty please?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:05, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed --Mdann52talk to me! 15:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Narendra Modi#RfC (initiated 17 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Considering the changed stature of the subject over the years, the article needs a rewrite, I suggest removal of sections related to trivial incidents in a politician's life (1) Spat with governer and (2) Uttarakhanda controversy they are completely undue." WP:SNOW may be applicable. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Personnumber99 (initiated May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 17:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sean R. McCormick (initiated May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 17:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Ecotourism Australia (initiated 22 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by JohnCD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 17:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Gun politics in the United States#RfC: Replace existing Nazi gun control paragraphs? (initiated 25 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closing. Formerip (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by FormerIP (talk · contribs). Armbrust The Homunculus 07:19, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Requesting closure by a neutral administrator. Move was proposed May 25. The 'vote' is now 14-3 in favor of name change. Thanks in advance.Haberstr (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- The conversation continues to fester disagreeably, and no new input recently. Last editor 'support/oppose' input was on June 4.Haberstr (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xoloz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 07:32, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Autism#"Autistic person" versus "person with autism" (initiated 6 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Sunrise (talk) 21:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jim Femino (initiated 2 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jmadhura (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted for a better consensus by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 13:08, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sainiraj55 (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 13:08, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jimgaven (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) TLSuda (talk) 13:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jim singleton (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 13:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 03:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 13:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:The Bible and homosexuality#RFC: Which translation of the Bible to use? (initiated 1 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Go Phightins! (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 20:48, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 04:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
The move request has been open for nearly two months. Other requests need attention too. Calidum Talk To Me 05:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Pavle Đurišić#RfC: Should this article contain wikilink to article about Moslem militia? (initiated 4 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities#RfC: When is the presentation of statistics excessive? (initiated 9 May 2014)? The question posed was: "Should use of {{Weather box}} and {{Climate chart}} be restricted in some way?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Snakebite#RfC:Should the List of most venomous snakes by LD50 from reliable sources stay in the article? (initiated 27 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 7#Nac1, which has been relisted twice and has been dormant for over one month. --Jax 0677 (talk) 05:46, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by The Whispering Wind (talk · contribs). Armbrust The Homunculus 11:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Schiller Institute#Request for comment on "Allegations of antisemitism" section (initiated 1 May 2014)? The questions posed were:
There are multiple issues on which outside input would be helpful. In particular,
1. Is a YouTube video of an undated news program a suitable source? Does it present a copyvio problem?
2. The video contains allegations against the institute, including a claim that a student's lecture notes at a S.I. conference indicate antisemitic tendencies on the part of the institute, and a commentator who says that at a hypothetical S.I. meeting, one should expect "over time" to hear "an echo of the old classic antisemitic conspiracy theories" which would "not be obvious at first." How much weight should be given to these allegations?
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closing. Formerip (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by FormerIP (talk · contribs). Armbrust The Homunculus 16:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 10#Category:Fictional captains (initiated 6 March 2014 and later relisted)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 16:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 10#Category:Princes and princesses of Piombino (initiated 27 February 2014 and later relisted)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Ricky81682 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 16:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 01:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted by Slakr (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 03:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Please disposition the following, which have both been relisted twice and open for more than one month:
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 12#Нас Не Нагонят
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 12#Эўро
--Jax 0677 (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Both done. Number 57 15:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Venomous snake#RfC:Should the List of most venomous snakes by LD50 from reliable sources stay in the article? (initiated 27 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#OPENPARA RfC (initiated 7 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
Should the sentence "Birth and death places should be mentioned in the body if known, and in the lead if they are relevant to the person's notability; they should not be mentioned within the opening brackets" be removed from the section about the opening paragraph?
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closing. Formerip (talk) 21:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Watch also all redirects to a page (initiated 16 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mobile site strapline (initiated 6 May 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Now over 30 days old. Drmies requested a close a few days ago. It led to another flurry of votes and discussion, but no close. It really only needs a "yes" or "no", with a dispassionate and common-sense rationale. I believe editors will accept either, but a failure to close will lead to renewed edit-warring or indefinite page protection, all over a single word. Scolaire (talk) 08:52, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Number 57 09:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the speedy response. Scolaire (talk) 09:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Right Sector#Recent changes (initiated 28 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features)#Request for comment (initiated 9 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
This is a request to re-promote this page to guideline status. The page was originally promoted in 2012 after a 3 month RfC, but was then unpromoted a month later due to concerns that not enough people participated in the original RfC. The wording of the page has been stable for years and it is frequently cited in deletion discussions even though it is not technically a guideline. There is nothing controversial here. This page consists only of well-established rules of thumb that are already in practice. By promoting them to be official guidelines, we can make the AfD process a bit more efficient and help new administrators learn the ropes more easily.
The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Coat of arms of Mauritius#RfC: Which coat of arms should be used? (initiated 11 April 2014)?
See previous close request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 11#Talk:Coat of arms of Mauritius#RfC: Which coat of arms should be used? and previous close here. The close was reverted to allow for more participation, which has happened. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:49, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cārvāka#RfC: Was Cārvāka a Hindu Nastika system? (initiated 23 January 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
- I have looked at this several times, and cannot really understand if there is a consensus. I suggest someone with a decent knowledge of Hinduism would be well placed to close this, as there does look like it was moving towards some kind of agreement, but I couldn't really say what. Number 57 21:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
- Closing. Formerip (talk) 13:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 14:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board#RfC: Citizenship Issue for Spanish Catalan biographical articles (initiated 30 April 2014)? Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 14:32, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Guy Fawkes Night/Archive 5#RFC:Ambiguous birth date for William? (initiated 29 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
The article gives the birth date of William III of England thus: "William's birthday fell on 4 November..." Considering that William was born in the Netherlands where the Gregorian calendar was in force, but later became King of England (among other places), where the Julian calendar was in force, is it ambiguous to state the birthdate without providing an explanatory note about which calendar the date is stated in?
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 23:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
3 file-related XFDs
- Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 June 6#File:South sydney rabbitohs logo 1988.jpg
- Done TLSuda (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 June 11#File:HKundersecretaries1.jpg
- Closed by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 14:21, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 June 7#File:Bohemia and Moravia 10 haleru 1940 obverse.jpg
- Withdrawn TLSuda (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
The above three file-related XFDs need closure. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:33, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mary Tyler Moore/Archives/2014#New image: free or non-free? (initiated 8 April 2014)? See the subsection Talk:Mary Tyler Moore#RfC for lead image (initiated 12 June 2014). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cro-Magnon#RFC: Should this article suggest an identity between Cro-Magnon and EEMH or say that CM is a subset of EEMH? (initiated 19 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 13:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cro-Magnon#Proposed move of article content to European early modern humans (initiated 29 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ontario general election, 2014#Libertarians? (initiated 11 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should the Libertarians be included in the candidate tables as a separate column?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Fedor Emelianenko#RfC: Should the lead contain the suggested paragraphs ? (initiated 15 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Policy#RFC for change to this page (initiated 21 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote:
There has been a substantive change to this widely used template [14] based on a discussion held on a different talk page that did not have wide participation. In order to assess if the change is widely supported by the Wikipedia community at large, I am starting a greater discussion here. The RFC question is:
- Does the community support the change in this template from "...should normally follow..." to "...must normally follow..."
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#disambiguation pages which have less then three blue links should be speedy deleted (initiated 14 June 2014)? WP:SNOW may be applicable. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Banc de Binary, Round 2 (initiated 13 June 2014)? See the topic/site ban proposal in the subsection Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Bittergrey (initiated 12 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marylandstater/sandbox8 (initiated 10 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 13:37, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jiawhein/sandbox/googology/ (initiated 10 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by JohnCD. Number 57 11:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Seems not to have been closed though it appears it may well have a consensus which needs to be spelled out, alas. This s not the first RfC on the same basic issue, but Talk:List_of_Bohemian_Club_members#RfC_dated_21_March_2014 had an odd close as only two editors supported inclusion of "honorary members", and six opposed inclusion. Collect (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- WP:NOTAVOTE. Number 57 14:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Where the issue is content oriented, and no strong policy based reasoning was cited in the close otherwise, the concept of "no consensus" is more generally the stated result. Instead the close seems to have suggested a sort of compromise which was rejected by the proponent of inclusion of all the "honorary members." Where such a close has been rejected by the proponent of inclusion, it is possible the close should have been more strongly worded. In any case, we have a second RfC with fully as strong a consensus which should be closed. YMMV. Collect (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Gout#RfC: Is the is the current infobox image preferable? (initiated 15 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Naresh Kumar Raja (initiated 10 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted by Xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 14:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Has gone over for a while, now at seven days since last edit other than me. Novato 123chess456 (talk) 00:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 21:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Conchita Wurst#Personal pronoun (initiated 8 May 2014; see the subsection Talk:Conchita Wurst#RFC: Personal pronouns)? The opening poster wrote: "This article is about a female drag act created by a male person. Issues have been raised as to what gender context should be used within the article. Should it be entirely written using female gender, male gender, or a combination of the two." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 20:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Progressive tax/Archive 4#RfC on what to include about progressiveness of US tax system (initiated 21 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Right Sector#RfC: Do major papers describe Right Sector as neo-Fascist? (initiated 11 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 20:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Right Sector#RfC: Should we say in the lead say that group members are neofascist? (initiated 30 April 2014)? WP:SNOW may be applicable. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 21:05, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:X Blake Freeman X (initiated 12 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done by xaosflux (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 14:26, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Joe Decker (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 05:36, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3? (initiated 29 April 2014)? The last comment was made 12 May 2014. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Part of the discussion is now archived: Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3? and part of it is still on the talkpage. TLSuda (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- The whole discussion is now archived above at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3?. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 18:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- The whole discussion is now archived above at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63#RfC: Is stamp non-free content use explained by WP:NFCI Guideline #3?. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 18:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Angela Merkel#Image (initiated 29 June 2014)? See the subsection Talk:Angela Merkel#RfC (initiated 19 May 2014). The question posed was: "Should the article on Angela Merkel include an image of her grandfather, Ludwig Kasner?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Something new, a subsection of Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User_talk:Russavia#Unblock_request. (initiated 15 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Coffee (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 14:27, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Could an uninvolved editor or administrator please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)/Archive 2#RfC and close the discussion? Thanks. Steel1943 (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Narendra Modi#Request for Comment-2 (initiated 27 May 2014)? Please consider the earlier RfC closes Talk:Narendra Modi#Request for comment and Talk:Narendra Modi#RfC. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters merge discussions
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at:
- Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters#Big the Cat
- Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters#Rouge the Bat
- Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters#Shadow the Hedgehog
- Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters#Silver the Hedgehog
- Done Mz7 (talk) 22:28, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Politics of the United States#RfC on added charts (initiated 10 May 2014)? The question posed was: "Are the charts added by [15] supported by consensus for use in this particular article?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cannabis (drug)#RFC: Should the section about the dried whole-flower-and-leaf preparation have its own article? (initiated 29 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Comics#RfC: Proposed rewording for instructions for disambiguation (initiated 28 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at:
- Talk:Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley#RfC:Right then, how many paragraphs should the Climate change section have? (initiated 19 April 2014)
- Talk:Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley#RfC (initiated 20 April 2014). The RfC asked: "Two proposals, or a third to be suggested here, if any, would concern the "Climate change" section of this BLP. Which one best fits the strictures of Wikipedia policy?"
Because the RfCs are related, please consider combining the two sections and assessing the consensus in both. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
I think that we're ready for an uninvolved editor or Admin to close this RfC on Stefan Molyneux. It's been open for two weeks and nothing new is happening. I think a formal close will help editors move on to other topics rather than remain stuck on this issue. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 22:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Not even close to the usual 30-day RfC window. Wait for some more outside uninvolved opinions. -- Netoholic @ 00:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- The 30 day window is a default for automatic closing of the RFC template. Closures can be made before then. On the other hand, we have some new commentary coming in on the question. – S. Rich (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- No we don't. There has been nothing but the same old arguments ...and any new editors that have come along recently, have done nothing other than to repeat the same arguments and views, as that of the general consensus.--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- The 30 day window is a default for automatic closing of the RFC template. Closures can be made before then. On the other hand, we have some new commentary coming in on the question. – S. Rich (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- 30 days on this RFC have now elapsed. (Template removed by bot.) Last entry was 7 June. Renewing request for closure by uninvolved editor or admin. – S. Rich (talk) 01:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Georgism#Double checking Notable Georgist references (initiated 14 March 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Open for +3 weeks. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:47, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Category talk:Filmographies#Naming of articles about an actor's roles and awards (initiated 15 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "What is the most appropriate format for articles about an actor's filmography and the awards won by that actor?" If no consensus can be found from this lengthy discussion, please consider adding to your closure advice to the participants about how to proceed to better frame the discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 16:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Plutocracy#RFC on US material (initiated 1 May 2014) The opening poster wrote: "Is this edit [16], which contains substantial material about the United States being a Plutocracy, proper in this article?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Desireé Cousteau#Request for comment (initiated 22 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "The real name of the actress, who uses a stage name, is cited by a newspaper article. Is this an acceptable citation?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
This is a snow keep, based on a very poor (and disruptive) nomination: could someone please come and close this asap. Thanks - SchroCat (talk) 13:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Not now... Five votes is not a snow anything. I would say at least 10-15 are needed. Give it some time. Number 57 15:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
- Number 57, Ordinarily I would agree with you, but for a particularly pointy and ridiculous nom that shouldn't have been started in the first place, five seems more than enough. Unfortunately the nom is mis-using the AfD process: there is absolutely no justifiable reason why this nom should be there in the first place. - SchroCat (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Drmies (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 21:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- Number 57, Ordinarily I would agree with you, but for a particularly pointy and ridiculous nom that shouldn't have been started in the first place, five seems more than enough. Unfortunately the nom is mis-using the AfD process: there is absolutely no justifiable reason why this nom should be there in the first place. - SchroCat (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Comfort women#RfC: Is disambiguation between the article comfort women and other articles useful or useless ? (initiated 14 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 12:41, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
The new move request has been open a while, please close it, thanks. wirenote (talk) 12:06, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 13:53, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
In a week and a day, discussion will be two months old. A few days after that, the last comment will be 1 month old. In short, this discussion died a natural death, then it died again of boredom. Oh, and for the record, RfD is hilariously backlogged right now, so any RfD closures would be greatly appreciated. --NYKevin 03:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
4 RFDs
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 30#Mike Harmon Racing
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 4#Carl Long Motorsports
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 5#Template:Cita web
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 6#Template:No-link
These are four of the "oldest" open RFD discussions, and they needed a closure or a relist. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Has been open for 24 days, with substantive input since the two week mark, but with much input in the first two weeks. The RfC must be closed by an admin as it implicitly requires adding material to the template instructions which are protected. Collect (talk) 16:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:5:2 diet#RfC: What should the opening line be? (initiated 20 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 11#Foodcalc
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 11#South Mexico
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 11#东京
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 11#OS X El Cap
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 11#Physiological and molecular wheat breeding
These RFDs from 11 June need a closure or a relist. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done Four closed, one relisted. Number 57 18:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
The AfD has been open since the 19th, and there is tendentious editing on the article and AfD discussion page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal. Can someone close this so we can move on. Thank you. --Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 17:03, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by DangerousPanda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 05:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 01:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
6 RFDs
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 12#Living Titanic Survivors
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 15#Great Green Ocean
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 16#Linguistic comparison of Chinese and English
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 16#ZipDash
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 17#Wikipedia:DONTCITEESSAYSASPOLICY
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 19#More Windows redirects…
These old RFDs need either to be closed or relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done One close, five relists. Number 57 11:47, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Article has run it's course for two weeks now, I need this closed so I can archive the large lot of completed AfDs on top of this one over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Anime and manga. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted by Number 57 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 12:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
This RfC has run its course and is quiet. Because there are questions about the applicability of certain policies and guidelines, please could an administrator close this one? Thanks in advance. --Stfg (talk) 09:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
AfD on BLP about vulnerable minor. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
- Another editor deleted the above message and replaced it with his own (see history). This is inappropriate conduct. If he wishes to comment he should add his own message below. The message that he replaced mine with is "Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Barnett (2nd nomination) (initiated 25 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)" Administrators are capable of making their own decisions and messages that are sent to them should not be censored. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
- Further discussion here at the AfD. Would an uninvolved editor replace this entire section with a neutral request for closure? Thank you. Cunard (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- Another editor deleted the above message and replaced it with his own (see history). This is inappropriate conduct. If he wishes to comment he should add his own message below. The message that he replaced mine with is "Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Barnett (2nd nomination) (initiated 25 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)" Administrators are capable of making their own decisions and messages that are sent to them should not be censored. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
- The discussion has become sufficiently long so that it is circling back to previous arguments. All that can be said has been said. It is begging for closure. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 13:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC).
- The question of Jacob Barnetts welfare seem a little off hand. His mother has written a long biography about her kid, so this one book contains many more revealing thruths about young Barnett than anything written here on Wikipedia so far. When the book where published, an article about Jacob Barnett already exsisted, and the article is cited in the book. I can't by any of my senses imagine why a number of Wikipedians suddenly find it important to delete the article - I can read there various arguments, but I can't comprehend, why they find this matter of a proposed deletion important? Oleryhlolsson (talk) 17:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- The original article was deleted though, for basically the same reasons that this one should be. Also, our WP:RS guideline explicitly warns against circular referencing. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- This section is a clear example of why the noticeboard's instructions say that "Please ensure that your request for a close is brief and neutrally worded." A non-neutral closure request invites a rebuttal of the arguments made in the closure request and a rebuttal of that rebuttal and so on. Cunard (talk) 04:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- It's quite clearly an open and shut case - can someone please just get rid? Barney the barney barney (talk) 06:58, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done Although I fully expect some flak for it. Number 57 11:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Number 57 (talk · contribs) what the fuck have you just done? Do you not understand WP:BLP policy at all? Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, but it appears that you might not. BLP is primarily about the article content, not about article existence. They are required to have at least one reliable reference, which this article does. If you believe something in the article is a BLP violation, remove it. Please also see WP:BLPDEL for further information. Number 57 13:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Number 57 (talk · contribs) what the fuck have you just done? Do you not understand WP:BLP policy at all? Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Could someone close this MfD? Armbrust The Homunculus 05:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
relist has gone over 7 days. LibStar (talk) 01:26, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
The last comment on this RfC was five days ago. Any experienced, uninvolved editor should be able to close this RfC pretty easily. Thank you.- MrX 16:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Not done Comments have since restarted. This should probably be left to run for the full 30 days. Number 57 20:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Srich32977 (talk · contribs) and is now archived at Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity#RfC: Should Tesla's birthplace be changed?. Armbrust The Homunculus 05:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Could someone close this FFD? Armbrust The Homunculus 08:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by TLSuda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 05:17, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Some more RFDs
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 22#Various nonexistent Windows year-names
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 22#Windows NT 7.0
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 23#Template:Element-arch-stub
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 23#Mathematik
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 23#Gemmes
These RFDs need either a closure or a relist. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 05:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done the rest. Number 57 17:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:List of Palestinians#Should Jesus be removed from the second "pre-mandate" list of geographical Palestinians? (initiated 16 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Not going to touch this myself, but I strongly recommend anyone closing this considers ignoring the comments of anyone heavily involved in that topic area (all of whom have entirely predictable !votes), and concentrate on the arguments put forward by outside editors who are not heavily infected with bias. Number 57 21:40, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. I, JethroBT drop me a line 05:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
5 TFDs
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 June 12#Template:Edit notice discussion
- Closed by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 June 14#Template:Disused-stations
- Closed by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 June 16#Template:Cite South Park commentary
- Closed by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 June 17#Alabama and Georgia counties
- Relisted by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 June 17#Template:Cite CAstat
- Closed by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
These TFDs need a closure or a relist. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Category talk:People with disabilities#RFC for mental illness inclusion (initiated 1 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Yank Barry#RfC: Should Barry be characterized as a former member of The Kingsmen? (initiated 2 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 23:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Veronica Vera#Request for comment (initiated 27 June 2014)? The RfC initiator is proposing the merge of several articles and wrote in response to a comment about bolding merging the articles, "I already tried that and was reverted". Because an earlier attempt at a merge was reverted, it would be helpful to have an uninvolved editor formally assess the consensus in this discussion. Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Academi#Request for comment on merging of Blackwater article into this article (initiated 29 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Parmigiano-Reggiano#RfC on Parmesan/Parmigiano-Reggiano split (initiated 5 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Germany#Split Weimar and Third Reich? (initiated 14 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Padmanabhaswamy Temple#www.vaikhari.org (initiated 28 April 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:History of the United States#RfC: Is the U.S. founded as a new nation in 1776 or not? (initiated 2 June 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should “History of the United States” restore narrative describing the Declaration of Independence as establishing an independent nation?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:China University of Petroleum#RfC: One or two articles? (initiated 31 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:United States Senate election in North Carolina, 2014#excess polls (initiated 30 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Template talk:Vulgar slang#Need (initiated 26 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "What is the purpose or need of this template? What is 'vulgar' is also somewhat subjective depending on the person and nation." Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 86#RfC: Directors, chairmen and investors (initiated 5 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup/Archive 4#RFC (initiated 28 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 5#RFC: Citation Style 1 parameter naming convention (initiated 24 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality#Adding another group of people to this guideline (initiated 3 May 2014)? A subsection of the discussion, Wikipedia talk:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality#Survey on proposed addition #Disability, medical, or psychological conditions, was marked as an RfC. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2014 June#Space Shuttle main engine (initiated 24 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2014 June#The Beatles (album) (initiated 15 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
This RfC has Wikipedia-wide implications, has run for 30 days, and is ready for an experienced editor to close. RockMagnetist (talk) 06:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
2 FFDs
- Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 June 28#File:MTR Adult Single Journey Ticket.jpg
- Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 June 28#File:UrbanDayPass.jpg
These FFDs need closure by an admin. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Both were Closed by Peripitus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 06:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 24#Wikipedia:Deletion is not clean up
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 24#Kim Pyo
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 24#פֿאַרבאַנד פֿונ סאָציאַליסטישע ראַטנרעפּובליקנ
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 24#IWatch
- Done by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 23:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 24#OCLUG
- Done by BDD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). TLSuda (talk) 23:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
These RFDs need a closure or a relist. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Median strip#Should the variety of english be consistent throughout? (initiated 25 May 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should the same word be used throughout the article, irrespective of which country it is discussing?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#RfC closure review: Coat of arms of Mauritius (initiated 28 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Despite the slightly historic nature, Done Bellerophon talk to me 19:23, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal to topic ban Ubikwit from AN/I (initiated 4 July 2014)? If there is consensus for a topic ban, please log the topic ban at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Could any uninvolved admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Polling is not a substitute for discussion on whether to keep WP:PNSD as a guideline and close the discussion? Thanks. Forbidden User (talk) 07:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 22:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people#BLP PROD application outside of article space (initiated 3 June 2014)? The question posed was: "Does BLPPROD apply to all biographies or only biographies in article space?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Article wizard#Feedback on WP:Article Wizard (initiated 25 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- I see no benefit in formally closing this one; the nature of the question invites views from community but does not seek to resolve any kind of conflict or address a policy issue. Moreover, the small number of participants makes it almost impossible the judge a consensus for directed improvement. It is essentially a short list of potential changes that are neither broadly supported or opposed. Bellerophon talk to me 20:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- I withdraw this closure request per Bellerophon's well-reasoned comment that a close would not be helpful in this case. Cunard (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#Closure of RfC: Should Tesla's birthplace be changed? (initiated 6 July 2014)? Please close the discussion after sufficient time has elapsed and there is sufficient participation. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Oathkeeper/Archive 1#RfC: May statements indicating what parts of a source novel contain the same content as certain scenes from a television series be sourced to the book alone or do they need secondary sources? (initiated 25 May 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Formerip (talk) 13:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#Topic ban proposal for Gibson Flying V (initiated 2 July 2014)? If there is consensus for a topic ban, please log the topic ban at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- This discussion is still being heavily discussed and I do not believe it to yet be ready for close. Perhaps in a couple days if discussion has settled down or stalemated. I'm disclosing myself as involved in the discussion as I have commented with an opinion and although I believe a closure at this time would reflect my opinion on the matter, there still seems to be some productive commentary at this time. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- That sounds good to me. The most recent comment right now was made 12:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC), so after 24–48 hours of limited activity on the thread, I think it should be closed. Cunard (talk) 06:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Callanecc (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 13:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#Template Editor User:Technical 13 (initiated 4 July 2014)? Please close the discussion after sufficient time has elapsed and there is sufficient participation. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by Go Phightins! (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 12:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Could an uninvolved admin please review and close this merger discussion? More than 30 days has elapsed. Thank you very much. Softlavender (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Proposed indefinite topic ban for User:Memills from issues related to men's rights, broadly construed (initiated 28 June 2014)? If there is consensus for a topic ban, please log the topic ban at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Closed by DangerousPanda (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 05:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Consensus unclear. Little input. Unlikely to see more without prompting. Merge proposal has been up for a year. Time to resolve. Thanks. ~KvnG 13:53, 9 July 2014 (UTC)