Wikipedia:Closure requests/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions about 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 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
(Initiated 2383 days ago on 30 April 2018)? Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Catholic Church and abortion#RfC on two references to history sources in the Church doctrine section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}}--GRuban (talk) 18:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2382 days ago on 1 May 2018)? Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Category talk:Catholic organizations#Parent caregory? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2370 days ago on 12 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan#Should the Wikipedia namespace page on Wikipe-tan mention past deletion nominations? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric (talk · contribs) --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2348 days ago on 4 June 2018) I went ahead and closed this discussion as delete the other day because the administrator who normally closes MfDs voted and thus cannot close it. I was aware of the guideline that users shouldn't make closes they cannot implement, but decided that was getting in the way of this being closed and ignored it. Now that I think about it, I should have just come here. Thus, would some uninvolved administrator look over the MfD, re-assess the consensus if they feel my closure was in error, and action it if consensus is to delete? —Compassionate727 (T·C) 13:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Premeditated Chaos. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Whoops, I didn't realize this had been posted here, I'd have left the MfD alone if I'd seen this. That being said, I'll say again that I'm happy to reverse my actioning of the close if anyone sees it as inappropriate. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2400 days ago on 13 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Music sources discussion (part 2)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} One discussion marked "Resolved", the other "unresolved". (I figured the interested parties didn't care enough about the subject to continue the unresolved discussion.) -- llywrch (talk) 17:36, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2350 days ago on 2 June 2018) This discussion on an ambiguity in the deletion policy seems to have petered out. I think it would be useful to have a formal close so that Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Redirection, WP:BLAR, and WP:SK, can be updated accordingly. As it stands they have conflicting advice on what editors should do when a blank-and-redirect is contested. – Joe (talk) 07:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric (talk · contribs). —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2368 days ago on 15 May 2018) Could an uninvolved editor please assess consensus at Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 81#North Korea in lead? This was meant to be a quick survey to pick one of two versions of a phrase in the lead after some recent edits, but there is no obvious consensus, so the discussion requires a more subtle closure. There is an element of timeliness that weighs against keeping it open for 30 days. — JFG talk 19:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note there is an intimately related debate in the section below it: Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 81#The North Korea talks are WP:UNDUE for the lead. Any closer should consider whether the two sections should be closed as a single unit. Alsee (talk) 21:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
- {{Not done}} – Withdrawing close request. In a parallel discussion, North Korea has been temporarily excluded from the lede section entirely, so that the question of which version to include is moot. — JFG talk 18:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2380 days ago on 3 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Leo Tolstoy#Tolstoy influenced Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr. and .... a man convicted for being guilty incest.? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 10:05, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2367 days ago on 15 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at this RfC please? Thylacoop5 (talk) 21:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2377 days ago on 6 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Flag of Syria#RFC: One primary flag, Syrian government to be known as "Syrian government."? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2366 days ago on 16 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:White Helmets (Syrian Civil War)#RfC: Roger Waters controversy? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 21:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2372 days ago on 11 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Germanic peoples#lets remove the line about "Modern ethnic groups descended from the ancient Germanic peoples"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2373 days ago on 10 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#New RFC on linking to Wikidata? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Doing... by Winged Blades of Godric (talk · contribs) --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:11, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2362 days ago on 21 May 2018) Would an experienced involved editor please assess the arguments and close the discussion? Thanks LK (talk) 04:25, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Neutrality. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:16, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2336 days ago on 16 June 2018) This was discussion initiated by User:IanPCP since the protection of article(don't go at today's initiation template), Continuously arguements regarding separating 205 Live section from RAW, WWE.com is authentic website as unsourced editings resulting in accusation against website for being glitch which is wrong, and providing such source which is not reliable and trivia. I request it for deletion immediately. Thanks.CK (talk) 21:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Broken nutshell: I have just re-read this. You state "I request it for deletion immediately" - you are at the wrong venue. The avenues open to you are described at WP:DELETE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} Nothing to close.Regular t/p discourse.∯WBGconverse 14:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2415 days ago on 29 March 2018) Could an uninvolved party please close the discussion at Talk:Banaras Hindu University#Merger proposal 3? As the initiator I rather not close it myself. --Muhandes (talk) 15:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2378 days ago on 5 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Communist Party of China#Political descriptor RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}-Please re-conduct a RFC.Much of the text in the RFC has been posted by a now-blocked-account and it's just implausible to maneuver through the discussion and evaluate it.I see they are yet again re-litigating it at a normal t/p discourse.So, let it be......∯WBGconverse 15:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2373 days ago on 9 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Busts of Cristiano Ronaldo#Request for comment: Should the article "Bust of Cristiano Ronaldo" exist in main space?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2334 days ago on 18 June 2018) The RfC participation is dwindling so this one should be ripe for closing. Thank you. - MrX 🖋 13:49, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Not done}}-Let it run.Working definition of stale is around nil participation in a week or more, at minimum.Nowhere close.∯WBGconverse 15:16, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2363 days ago on 20 May 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Santa Fe High School shooting#List of victims' names? --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:23, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
There are a large number of open discussions on the talk page. I feel that some of them have reached consensus, including "Trump/Rodman image", "Apprentice - I removed a newly added paragraph about the show's ratings", and "Murals". Others, such as the "Religion" thread, may not have consensus yet. Could an experienced editor assess the open talk discussions, and enact those changes which have consensus, and close idle threads which will not reach a consensus for any changes? power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:29, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
- Most of these things don't need closing by a third-party; they will be auto-archived after 7 days of silence. "Rodman" and "Apprentice" look settled; "Murals" is just FORUM; "Religion" is messy, not sure what an uninvolved closer could say except "please raise an RfC". — JFG talk 07:52, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
- It might be fine now, I simply thought the page desperately needed some janitorial work, and I had already commented on all the discussions so didn't want to do it myself. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:14, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Power~enwiki: I've done some cleanup, and the archive bot has done some more. Looks to me like only the "Religion" section could use a third-party close, however in the meantime somebody else has requested a close specifically for that section at #Talk:Donald Trump#Religion. Given the current state of affairs, would you agree to withdraw your blanket request? — JFG talk 12:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} per Power~enwiki's withdrawal of the request. Cunard (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Power~enwiki: I've done some cleanup, and the archive bot has done some more. Looks to me like only the "Religion" section could use a third-party close, however in the meantime somebody else has requested a close specifically for that section at #Talk:Donald Trump#Religion. Given the current state of affairs, would you agree to withdraw your blanket request? — JFG talk 12:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- It might be fine now, I simply thought the page desperately needed some janitorial work, and I had already commented on all the discussions so didn't want to do it myself. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:14, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2376 days ago on 7 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hospitals#RfC on rules for rankings, reputation for hospitals and related institutions? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2354 days ago on 29 May 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2018 May#Kshmr? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:30, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 03:37, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2328 days ago on 24 June 2018) An obvious consensus has been reached. The discussion was interrupted by a sockpuppet investigation requested by the initiator that resulted in no action taken. An uninvolved administrator should close it down. The Gnome (talk) 07:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Done by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2332 days ago on 20 June 2018) A clear consensus has been reached in a discussion to merge Rocket League x Monstercat Vol. 1 into Music of Rocket League. Would an administrator be so kind as to close the discussion? Thanks in advance! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 01:32, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done Daask (talk) 20:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2336 days ago on 16 June 2018) Would an experienced editor or admin please assess the consensus for the above mentioned discussion? Thank you. - MrX 🖋 11:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2359 days ago on 23 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#WP:NOTMEMORIAL Victim lists in mass tragedy articles - Round 2? Please consider these related closed discussions in your close: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 138#WP:NOTMEMORIAL and victim lists in tragedy articles, Talk:Stoneman Douglas High School shooting/Archive 6#Victims list revisited, and Talk:Santa Fe High School shooting#List of victims' names. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by TonyBallioni. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2365 days ago on 17 May 2018) Could an uninvolved page mover or admin evaluate the consensus at Talk:Plymouth#Requested move - 17 May 2018? Iffy★Chat -- 11:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Pinging TonyBallioni and Primefac.∯WBGconverse 14:14, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- I closed the one last year as no consensus, so I don’t want to do this one. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:25, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by BD2412. Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- I closed the one last year as no consensus, so I don’t want to do this one. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:25, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2425 days ago on 18 March 2018) Proposal to merge Mandarin orange and Mandarin orange (fruit). Month since last discussion. Seems like a straightforward consensus, but would prefer to avoid accusations of COI that might come from closing my own proposal. Agricolae (talk) 17:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done --slakr\ talk / 04:47, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2333 days ago on 19 June 2018) Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 19#Wikipedia:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Most regular RfD closers have contributed to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 13:11, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2380 days ago on 3 May 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 3#Film soundtracks by language The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:55, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2384 days ago on 29 April 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 29#Category:Lists of clans based in Korea The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done by someone else --slakr\ talk / 04:49, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2387 days ago on 26 April 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 26#Category:Christian ethics in the Bible. The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by someone else --slakr\ talk / 04:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2390 days ago on 23 April 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 23#Category:Field hockey terminolgy. The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2393 days ago on 20 April 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 April 20#Category:16th-century animal births. The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:13, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2351 days ago on 1 June 2018) There have not been comments on this proposal for more than a week. I think it's time to wind it down. Mz7 (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
Would an uninvolved editor please determine consensus? Thank you.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by Primefac. Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2350 days ago on 1 June 2018) Closing by an independent editor would tidy this up. Shouldn't be difficult. Batternut (talk) 08:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2353 days ago on 29 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Living dinosaur#RfC on changing "Living dinosaur" from a standard article to a disambiguation list page? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done Daask (talk) 03:01, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2353 days ago on 29 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Delete IABot talk page posts?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
Already done by User:Winged Blades of Godric. Deryck C. 16:59, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2356 days ago on 27 May 2018) This RfC has expired, and it appears all the major arguments on both sides have been made. Like nearly every discussion on this talk page, the RfC was contentious. Some editors even speculated that policy does not give clear direction with regard to the issue being discussed and that new policy guidance should be written to handle the situation, so I do not anticipate that this will be an easy close. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:42, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
- Doing... ∯WBGconverse 07:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2357 days ago on 25 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ideological bias on Wikipedia#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2362 days ago on 21 May 2018) The RFC ran for over a month and last responses (except me linking to a comment made outside the RFC) were left 3 weeks ago. Can someone not involved please close it ? “WarKosign” 12:34, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2363 days ago on 20 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of Singapore Airlines destinations/Archives/2018#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done Daask (talk) 21:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2366 days ago on 16 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Colt AR-15#RfC: AR-15 style rifle subsection? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2368 days ago on 14 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Douma chemical attack#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Doing... Expect some delay-∯WBGconverse 16:01, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2371 days ago on 11 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus for this RfC? It's been open for only 3 weeks but there have been no comments in the last 2 weeks and although the issue is contentious the consensus seems rather clear. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 19:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Working Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:06, 13 July 2018 (UTC)- Done Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2373 days ago on 10 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Star Wars: The Last Jedi#RfC: criticism in the lead? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Doing... -- llywrch (talk) 02:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done -- llywrch (talk) 02:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2379 days ago on 4 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Vitamin B3#RfC Do the refs support this content?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done --GRuban (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2396 days ago on 17 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Junípero Serra#Miguel or Miquel?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done -- llywrch (talk) 18:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2325 days ago on 27 June 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 June 27#Comparison of web browser engines (typography support)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done by TheSandDoctor (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2332 days ago on 20 June 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 June 20#List of national capitals in alphabetical order? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Anybody? -- RoySmith (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- Doing... Regards SoWhy 13:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done Regards SoWhy 13:57, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Move review of List of Presidents of the United States
(Initiated 2342 days ago on 10 June 2018) Could an uninvolved admin, preferrably experienced with the page move review process, kindly evaluate the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2018 June#List of Presidents of the United States? — JFG talk 11:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
- Done --slakr\ talk / 02:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2346 days ago on 5 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Help talk:IPA/English#RfC: Should we acknowledge /ɜː/ as a marginal diaphoneme distinct from /ɜːr/?? Thanks, Nardog (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2377 days ago on 6 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Flag of Syria#RFC: One primary flag, Syrian government to be known as "Syrian government."? A previous close by 198.84.253.202 (talk · contribs) was reverted under WP:NACIP which prohibits unregistered editors from closing RfCs. Cunard (talk) 06:30, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 01:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2372 days ago on 10 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption#RfC: Criteria for granting IP block exemption? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 02:12, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2364 days ago on 18 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Diamond and Silk#RfC about the caption on the image in the infobox? Thanks, GRuban (talk) 20:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2355 days ago on 27 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Wound characteristics of military-style rifles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- I've unarchived the discussion and removed the not done template so this closure request will not be archived by the bot. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} The Gnome (talk) 22:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2348 days ago on 4 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Wayward Pines#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2344 days ago on 7 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Football Lads Alliance#RfC about restoring content? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2341 days ago on 10 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge#Trim down the intro.? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- not done Not an RFC. Fish+Karate 09:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Fish and karate: Yes, it was an RfC. See these edits: initiation; recognition by Legobot; thirty-day expiry. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Fish+Karate 12:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2340 days ago on 11 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Alex Jones#Sandy Hook RfC 2: Electric Boogaloo? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2340 days ago on 11 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:InfoWars#Sandy Hook RfC 2: Electric Boogaloo? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2337 days ago on 14 June 2018) Would an experienced and strictly uninvolved editor or admin please evaluate the consensus at Talk:Political views of American academics/Archive 2#RfC about HERI survey? Thanks, --Tryptofish (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by The Gnome. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2316 days ago on 6 July 2018) This RFC should be speedy closed as a "false start" - the opener has very strong views on this topic, and opened this despite an on-going discussion of the scope/wording of a potential RFC. Once can easily read from the heading, the question, and the BADGERING of the opener already that this is not a clean start. He's jumped the gun, missed the full scope of the question, and uses wording which poisons the discussion. -- Netoholic @ 04:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- I actually agree – this is not a neutrally worded RfC in my estimation, and should be speedy closed on those grounds. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:48, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- I would advice against any such close, given that there are "very strong views" on both "sides" and it looks like there is just as much badgering going in both directions. Better to let the community discuss it, and to be measured in assessing what the eventual consensus ends up being. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- Asking a single editor for sources is not "badgering", it's standard operating procedure when someone offers an empty WP:IKNOWIT argument in an RfC the entire point of which is review of reliable sourcing. An admin already dismissed the claim that it's a non-neutral RfC [1]. The RfC has broadened, and includes three (not just two) versions plus the "write your own" fourth option. The RfC's proceeding fine, to the extent people are interested, including (in "Extended comments") some discussion of various news-site evidence, and what spurred this dispute (possible connection to WP:ARBAP2 matters, and definitely a connection to someone else's WP:MEATBOT spree, which should have been an ANI matter, not a "go change the guidelines" kneejerk reaction).
PS: Frankly, this RfC is more than neutral enough, given that it's addressing someone's bold attempts to change a guideline without discussion, revert warring against the existing language after someone else has already objected and restored it, then finally opening discussion only to claim that the language they're trying to get rid of is what was a bold change when it was in fact the product of an extensive consensus discussion last year, not to mention then posting a bad-faith-assumptive conspiracy theory about other editors. (Diffs about all this are included in a user talk post [2].) It wasn't necessary to open an RfC on this disruption at all (just reverting back to status quo ante would have been fine, and some of this stuff might have been ANI- or AE-worthy). But I RfCed it in a good faith attempt to resolve a "three versions" editorial dispute and to address this editor's addressable concerns. Some of them are off-topic, and are basically a challenge to MOS:ABBR being able to recommend "UK and UNESCO" style over "U.K. and U.N.E.S.C.O." at all; I was not able to work something like that into an RfC about US/U.S., and Netoholic is unreasonably angry about it. I don't see a away around that problem other than just letting people own their own emotions, and moving on. I'm attempting to make peace with this editor [3], but it's difficult when I find I'm being maligned as some kind of RfC faker at an admin notice board without even being pinged about it. If Netoholic wants to upend MOS:ABBR, the place to propose that is probably WT:MOSABBR, and it has nothing to do with MOS:US in particular, which is just a partial exception to MOS:ABBR.
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 00:39, 7 July 2018 (UTC) - {{Not done}} — I don't feel there's a compelling enough reason for me to be comfortable with a WP:SNOW-close or otherwise "procedurally" close the RFC early. It looks like this RFC—however flawed it may be perceived by some editors—has likely been created as a good-faith attempt at WP:DR. If it goes nowhere, a new one can be made to address its flaws. Anecdotally, I usually find that flawed RFCs end as no-consensus anyway (the closer will almost certainly see that people disagreed with or were confused by the question to begin with), yet they can still develop themes such that a closer can point the discussion in a better direction (e.g., "These were the main things people were concerned about.... Therefore, consider a new RFC over...." or "There was concern that the RFC wasn't neutrally worded in the first place, perhaps consider...."). Apart from that, this board is usually for old stuff and difficult/contentious closes that have run their course. If you feel the RfC is worded confusingly or problematically, consider raising that point there (consensus might even develop that it truly is problematic and should be closed early). If the editor's conduct is generally disruptive or clearly questionable, consider WP:ANI or WP:RFARB. --slakr\ talk / 05:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2363 days ago on 20 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Trans man#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2349 days ago on 2 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:University of London#Request for comment? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2349 days ago on 2 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Liberty University#RfC on LU's relationship with Trump? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2383 days ago on 30 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion#When is deletion of drafts and userpages acceptable?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- Does every RFC require a closure?∯WBGconverse 15:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- This RfC asked the community to answer several questions. Here is one section:
An RfC close would be useful to determine what the community consensus is on these questions.The questions for this section:
2. What standards and/or uses make a userpage "useful to the Project" and, conversely, what failures make it "detrimental to the Project"?
- 2.1 At what point does a useless draft become a violation of CSD U5 and WP:NOTWEBHOST? For the purposes of CSD U5, what is a "plausible draft"?
- 2.2 Can a stale userpage (one that has not been edited in more than a year) of an inactive user (someone who has not edited in more than a year) be considered "useful to the Project"?
- 2.3 Does a userpage's uselessness alone warrant deletion at MfD or any other venue, or must it also pose some detriment to the Project, such as by qualifying for speedy deletion?
- 2.4 If the answer to the above question is "depends", what other criteria should be considered in deciding about deletion?
- Working WaggersTALK 11:37, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} WaggersTALK 13:09, 23 July 2018 (UTC). User:Waggers, did you sign your close? SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:55, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2339 days ago on 12 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Kombucha#RfC on adding current research status? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2338 days ago on 13 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Kombucha#RfC on its biological properties? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2321 days ago on 1 July 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 July 1#Twitter redirects recently created by R64Q? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{already done}} by Amorymeltzer (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Deryck C. 14:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2360 days ago on 23 May 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive984#Boundarylayer and abortion? There is an interaction ban subsection. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} by request of Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2365 days ago on 18 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Campaign Against Antisemitism#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 16:42, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2361 days ago on 22 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Succession to the British throne#Henry or Harry, again.? Please consider the closed RfC Talk:Succession to the British throne#RfC about Prince Harry or Henry in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2359 days ago on 24 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps#Should we dedicate a whole section to this?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2352 days ago on 30 May 2018) An uninvolved editor to close this debate would be greatly appreciated.GPRamirez5 (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2371 days ago on 12 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Joy Reid#RFC: The section on controversial blogposts is too long compared to the rest of the Careers section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 16:28, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2370 days ago on 12 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Exercise#RFC Animal Exercise section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 16:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2336 days ago on 16 June 2018) Could an uninvolved administrator (or other editor, if someone prefers) evaluate consensus for this discussion? Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 09:50, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} by Deryck Chan. Jc86035 (talk) 11:43, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2379 days ago on 4 May 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 4#Graphs by vertex and edge count. The two editors who do most of the CfD closures (including myself) are both involved in the discussion, so we need an outsider admin to close. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:59, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
- Please give this one another week from today, as the creator had not been notified. – Fayenatic London 15:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2334 days ago on 18 June 2018) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 June 18#Category:Crimes related to the European migrant crisis.
Would an admin please close. The discussion has run for a full month and there have been no new participants for some time. Thanks. Pincrete (talk) 12:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present)
I'm not 100% where to put this, so please move if i've put this in the wrong place. The article above is at FL discussion here. Having noted some of the comments made, I decided to "improve the article by being bold." - but this has now twice been reverted. Firstly, by someone who just reverted because I'm an IP, and secondly by someone who accused me of trying to make a Point, when all I'm trying to do is help. Can you please let me know the proper procedure here? I thought anyone could help wikipedia, but obviously some users either don't want IPs to help, or think that every IP is trying to ruin wiki rather than help. so what channels should I go through in order to try and help out? 2A02:C7D:159:6A00:6599:3B2E:8DEE:562C (talk) 18:15, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- What exactly are you asking us to close? You originally put this in the section for requests for comment, but I can find no evidence of a related RfC. Also, you have not linked a discussion, other than one WP:FLRC discussion. Is it that which you wish us to close? If not, please link the actual discussion you wish os to examine. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: There is no RFC; they seem disgruntled that their edits were reverted (see their contributions), and have come to the completely incorrect venue to talk about it. This should be removed from here. -- AlexTW 12:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} No discussion has been named, other than Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present)/archive1, which being a FLRC should only be closed by Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and The Rambling Man. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2366 days ago on 16 May 2018) This is a somewhat contentious case, and I'd appreciate someone uninvolved checking the consensus and closing. Much thanks, GPRamirez5 (talk) 00:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- This case has made some progress towards consensus - and is more than six weeks old - so I think an uninvolved editor's investment of time here would be very, very well spent. Best, GPRamirez5 (talk) 18:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 18:20, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2359 days ago on 23 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jabel Mukaber#External links? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2296 days ago on 26 July 2018) Please could someone look at the requested move here, as it's on the mainpage right now. I have commented on the move myself. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 16:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Danski454 (talk · contribs) at 18:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:47, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- slight correction, I only added the archived discussion template. User:John closed the discussion, sorry for the confusion. --Danski454 (talk) 20:51, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2362 days ago on 21 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World Rally#Request for comment on results tables? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2359 days ago on 24 May 2018) This has been a long and contentious discussion, and I'd appreciate someone experienced/uninvolved checking the consensus and closing. Thanks, VeritasVox (talk) 19:13, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2358 days ago on 25 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#RFC on the use of notable games sections? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2357 days ago on 25 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:1946 British Embassy bombing#RfC about Bagoon Source? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2352 days ago on 31 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes#RFC regarding primary topic? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} : RfC has been archived. -The Gnome (talk) 08:51, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2349 days ago on 2 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Brian Martin (social scientist)#RfC on statement by article subject and its source? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2342 days ago on 9 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jordan Peterson#RfC on section order? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2302 days ago on 20 July 2018) AfD nominator eventually voted against deletion, omitting to withdraw proposal and close the process. Admin closure requested. -The Gnome (talk) 05:55, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
- @The Gnome: {{not done}} See WP:WDAFD - once anybody (other than the nominator) has !voted to delete, an AfD cannot be withdrawn by the nominator. This AfD therefore stays open for discussion until closed by the normal process, and since it was relisted yesterday, that closure may be expected on or about 4 August 2018. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Muslim conquest of Khorasan#Suggestion: Merge Islamic conquest of Afghanistan with this Article
(Initiated 2975 days ago on 15 September 2016) There is a September 2016 merge proposal on a marginally contentious topic where discussion has been quiet for more than a month, related to Muslim conquests of Afghanistan and Muslim conquest of Khorasan. Could an uninvolved editor review? Klbrain (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} I have now done a non-admin closure. It was not included in the merge lists, so I closed it as a discussion rather than a merge. Hope that is OK. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 15:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2354 days ago on 29 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust/Archive 4#RFC: Inclusion of list of towns and villages sourced to self-published Mark Paul, and placing Mark Paul's documents in the Bibliography? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 16:16, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2353 days ago on 30 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Roseanne Barr#BRD and RfC over recent edit? I think one of the options has a clear consensus but am not closing the RfC. This is a contentious RfC because a participant wrote that there is a clear lack of consensus. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} You were kind of both right.
--GRuban (talk) 16:49, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2351 days ago on 1 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Goliath#Request for comment: should acromegaly be included in the article?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} -- llywrch (talk) 23:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2337 days ago on 15 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Richard B. Spencer#RfC on size of lead? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2311 days ago on 11 July 2018) Would an uninvolved editor please close this? Nothing has been added since 16 July. jamacfarlane (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- I have made a non-admin closure. Could an admin confirm all is OK? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 22:31, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Steelpillow: I agree with your assessment of what was said in that discussion. Marking as {{done}}. Deryck C. 14:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
This is a train-wreck situation (pun intended), a progressively WP:TALKFORKing series of at least five (four still-ongoing) discussions on different pages. The RfC proper looks to be "no consensus", being 5 or 6 competing proposals none of which has broad support, and the one with the most marginal "ILIKEIT" local support conflicting directly with the MOS:NUM guideline.
Not counting earlier discussions going back several years, the dispute erupted at Talk:Darlington railway station#Distance from London in January, fizzled, then re-erupted at Talk:East Croydon station#Chains, migrated to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways#Chains RFC, thence to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Distances_measured in chains, and has since then continued at Talk:Chain (unit)#Attempt to clean up the lede and the article. The concurrent four are all July – and often at cross-purposes (e.g., there are proposals to simply eliminate sourced material from Chain (unit), seemingly just to bolster one side of the RfC, while much of the WT:MOSNUM discussion seems to be refuting the validity of the local-consensus RfC at WT:UKRAIL, and so on). It might not be a bad idea to close them all at once other than the one at the article talk page.
- RfC proper: (Initiated 2313 days ago on 8 July 2018)
- Entire concurrent mess: (Initiated 2320 days ago on 2 July 2018)
- Counting the January genesis: (Initiated 2492 days ago on 11 January 2018)
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 11:07, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
- This closure request appears to suggest that the debate has been fruitless, that there is no consensus for change from the status quo. That is not accurate. It appears to me [although an involved editor] that there is broad consensus for a compromise between proponents and opponents. What is needed now is for an univolved editor to review the debate [in the interest of sanity, I advise limiting this review to the last seven days or so] and make a fair, npov, determination. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
- I would be willing to make a non-admin closure, although Mjroots has requested an admin close. Should I go ahead? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- AFAIK, Steelpillow, you've not participated in the discussion. You are also an editor in good standing, so I'd be happy for you to close the RFC. It's run for long enough and needs to be put to bed. Mjroots (talk) 12:04, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} I have not looked at the earlier discussions, will be happy to look at a specific one if asked. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- AFAIK, Steelpillow, you've not participated in the discussion. You are also an editor in good standing, so I'd be happy for you to close the RFC. It's run for long enough and needs to be put to bed. Mjroots (talk) 12:04, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- I would be willing to make a non-admin closure, although Mjroots has requested an admin close. Should I go ahead? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2352 days ago on 31 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality#RfC on categorizing biracial people? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2325 days ago on 27 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Alt-right#RfC: Should the lede continue to show the current two images?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2324 days ago on 28 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of most-viewed YouTube videos#RfC: Expansion to 200 videos? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2356 days ago on 27 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus for the above mentioned RfC? There have been no new comments in 3 weeks. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 05:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2326 days ago on 25 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Waterboarding#RFC: Should this article define "waterboarding" as a form of torture in the first sentence of the lead, or not?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2534 days ago on 30 November 2017) It initiated last year! 177.58.226.37 (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2312 days ago on 9 July 2018) Would an uninvolved Admin be able to close this? Nothing has been added to it since 12 July, well over the requisite week ago. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- I don't see how this can have been initiated on 9 July 2018 when it was only posted on 24 July 2018 and refers to the last comment on the discussion being 12 July. jamacfarlane (talk) 18:42, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Creation diff dated 9 July. Is 12 days of quiescence too short to bring it here? Is there a guideline about that somewhere? I couldn't find one, my apologies if I missed it. A couple of comments have been added to the discussion since I posted here, but they are not hugely significant. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's my mistake. I thought the date in the {{initiated}} template was the date the request for closure was initiated, not the date the discussion started. jamacfarlane (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} Swarm ♠ 06:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2298 days ago on 24 July 2018) Could some admin review and close this ~12 day old move request? Pinging Dekimasu and BD2412 who have been recently involved in the WP:RM area. Abecedare (talk) 01:05, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} bd2412 T 01:37, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank for the superfast reaction time! Abecedare (talk) 02:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2289 days ago on 2 August 2018) I believe that the above discussion has fully run its course. No need for further discussion. Asking here for an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close this discussion on Wikipedia. Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2343 days ago on 8 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Quds Day#Images from Iran? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}}, closed. – Joe (talk) 14:48, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2337 days ago on 15 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jimmy Savile#RfC on "alleged"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} – closed. – Joe (talk) 14:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2339 days ago on 13 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 370#RFC: GEOMAR Flaperon Analysis Map? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2352 days ago on 31 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes#RFC regarding primary topic? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} Article moved. -- Beland (talk) 15:47, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Beland: Why didn't you move the archives? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2313 days ago on 9 July 2018) Could an uninvolved admin kindly close this discussion? — JFG talk 05:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2320 days ago on 2 July 2018) Would an admin or template editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Infobox criminal#RfC on "trial" parameter? Template:Infobox criminal has template editor protection applied to it. An admin or template editor will be needed to implement the consensus. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2348 days ago on 3 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Lawrence Liang#So, about the SH case..? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} - The Gnome (talk) 09:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2347 days ago on 5 June 2018) This has been a very contentious RfC about lists of awardees in articles about those awards. The closer should determine whether there is consensus to remove the list of awardees, if there is consensus for various proposals to change or remove information within the list, and what version remains in the case of a no consensus determination. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 09:17, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- Done by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- Actually it's only
Partly done. The initial discussion was closed, but we still need a close on the more complex discussion at Talk:Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology#!Vote about list format. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 21:26, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the correction. I've removed the done template so that this close request will not be archived by a bot. Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- Actually it's only
(Initiated 2345 days ago on 7 June 2018) Requesting close of this RfC. Jbh Talk 02:54, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Winged Blades of Godric: just a bump since this has been in Doing for several days. Cheers. Jbh Talk 01:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- My PC has gone into permanent hibernation and......∯WBGconverse 14:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the update. I am sure someone else will pick up the close. I hope your computer is recoverable! Cheers. Jbh Talk 20:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Deryck Chan. Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the update. I am sure someone else will pick up the close. I hope your computer is recoverable! Cheers. Jbh Talk 20:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- My PC has gone into permanent hibernation and......∯WBGconverse 14:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Winged Blades of Godric: just a bump since this has been in Doing for several days. Cheers. Jbh Talk 01:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2312 days ago on 10 July 2018) Could an uninvolved admin close this discussion? The RfC pertains to the inclusion in articles of "In wrestling" sections, typically constructed from bulleted lists. Note that the RfC initiator did have local consensus for his proposed changes, and /r/SquaredCircle was alerted to the RfC's existence (link was posted in discussion). Please disregard my comments here other than the request to close because I participated in the discussion and am therefore irreparably biased. Jc86035 (talk) 19:17, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- doing.∯WBGconverse 16:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2294 days ago on 27 July 2018) This discussion turned into a quasi-RfC. Could an uninvolved admin please assess consensus and close appropriately? — JFG talk 10:01, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Awilley. Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2387 days ago on 26 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Request for comment: categorizing by year of formal description? An editor wrote, "I was hoping some uninvolved editor would formally close the RfC above". Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --GRuban (talk) 15:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2328 days ago on 24 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Death of Mustafa Tamimi#RFC See also? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} Seraphim System (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 5 August 2018) Could an uninvolved editor/admin close this survey? See here for why the survey needs to be formally closed. Abecedare (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} (see the closing comment for rationale). Abequinn14 (talk) 03:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2321 days ago on 1 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Natalie Portman#RfC about the opening line? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2306 days ago on 16 July 2018) Can someone put this thing out of my misery? Ta. Guy (Help!) 17:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2280 days ago on 10 August 2018) Close the SPI. It's been open for more than a week without any progress, and has been allowing users to violate WP:PA (in reverting my and others' edits) with impunity. Mithrandir the Grey (talk) 10:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Either block me, or not. Or at least explain why it's taking so long. If no admin responds within the next 24 hours, I'll close the SPI myself. It's time to put a stop to this indefinite waiting period. Mithrandir the Grey (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Blocked and tagged, as requested. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)- {{done}} for the archiving bot Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2266 days ago on 24 August 2018) @Vanamonde93:, @Nosebagbear:, @RoySmith:, could an experienced editor review the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 August 24#2017–18 North American cold wave? This should be backed out, as I filed this change when the verdict for the article was "Merge". The verdict for the article was changed after the fact to "No consensus". I should not close this discussion, due to WP:INVOLVED. Also, should there not be a tag at the article and the AFD while there is a DRV in progress? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Jax 0677: This edit will not have notified Vanamonde93, Nosebagbear, or RoySmith. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Reply - @Redrose64:, "should there not be a tag at the article and the AFD while there is a DRV in progress"? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:29, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Re your last question: were all the steps at WP:DRV#Steps to list a new deletion review followed? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Reply - @Redrose64:, AFAIK the steps at WP:DRV#Steps to list a new deletion review were followed. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- There's your answer then. If all were followed, this must have included steps 5 & 6 must have been carried out, which cover your question. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Reply - @Redrose64:, AFAIK the steps at WP:DRV#Steps to list a new deletion review were followed. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Re your last question: were all the steps at WP:DRV#Steps to list a new deletion review followed? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Reply - @Redrose64:, "should there not be a tag at the article and the AFD while there is a DRV in progress"? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:29, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}}. – Joe (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2430 days ago on 14 March 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#RFC - Infoboxes and Third Parties BEFORE an election? There is a related discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Candidates in Infoboxes on upcoming election articles. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2359 days ago on 24 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Steve Down#Request for Comment on Consensus for SEC Charges May 2018? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2336 days ago on 16 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Placebo#RfC on? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 14:30, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2333 days ago on 19 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2018 in heavy metal music#RFC: Album inclusion in "year in genre" articles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2332 days ago on 20 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Żegota#RfC on Żegota funding? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2323 days ago on 29 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Yusuf bin Ahmad al-Kawneyn#RfC on the ethnicity of Yusuf al-Kawneyn? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2317 days ago on 5 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Adolf Hitler#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2317 days ago on 5 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:United States presidential election, 2020#RFC on article contents? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2311 days ago on 11 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Microaggression#Request for comment on bias, especially in the second paragraph? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2310 days ago on 11 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Blond#Request for comment on the lead image? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2306 days ago on 15 July 2018) Could an uninvolved admin kindly assess consensus there? — JFG talk 17:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2305 days ago on 16 July 2018) Would an experienced and strictly uninvolved editor or administrator please assess the consensus at Talk:Political views of American academics#RfC on inclusion of HERI data chart? Thanks, --Tryptofish (talk) 23:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2303 days ago on 18 July 2018) Would an uninvolved and experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Elon Musk#RfC: Nationality? THE DIAZ userpage • talk • contribs 17:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2301 days ago on 21 July 2018) Recently expired. Needs a close. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2299 days ago on 22 July 2018) May an uninvolved editor please assess the consensus? Abequinn14 (talk) 21:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} Closed as keep. Abequinn14 (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2297 days ago on 24 July 2018) This article recently had a discretionary sanction applied, after an Arb Enforcement submission, as pertains to the use and discussion of infoboxes. Specifically, when the above discussion is closed, there is a restriction on discussion for one year. The proposal started at the time above, and the last new !vote was on July 30. The AE submission did not attract much or any new discussion to this page/section. Outriggr (talk) 02:13, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 6 August 2018) May an uninvolved editor please assess the consensus at that talk page section? Thanks, Abequinn14 (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} Closed as no consensus by an admin. Abequinn14 (talk) 16:48, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an uninvolved admin please assess the consensus for the two proposals listed here? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} — I went ahead and closed it. Abequinn14 (talk) 16:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2339 days ago on 13 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party/Archive 3#Request for comment on neutrality and recentism tags? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 18:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2334 days ago on 17 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:March 1947 martial law in Mandatory Palestine#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --GRuban (talk) 20:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2321 days ago on 1 July 2018) Someone on my IP range opened this proposal last month and it seems to have no opposition. Is there an uninvolved editor that can assess the consensus for this proposal? Thanks. 2601:589:8000:2ED0:2567:8240:1F23:EDE7 (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{nd}} Piranshahr,_Iran article was created by a WP:SOCKPUPPET, so can't merge it into other article. Have tagged it WP:G5 so it gets deleted instead Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2310 days ago on 12 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Request for comments: Should the automatic taxobox system be the current recommended practice?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2268 days ago on 23 August 2018) Could an experienced editor review the consensus at Talk:Disappearance_of_Mollie_Tibbetts#Requested_move_August_23,_2018? --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} — Amakuru (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2304 days ago on 18 July 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2018 July#Gjon Kastrioti? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2297 days ago on 25 July 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2018 July#Isometric computer graphics? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2277 days ago on 14 August 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 August 14#Kane Tanaka? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 07:11, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Last post was 23 Aug (yesterday as of this posting), indicating that discussion is still ongoing. Primefac (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2340 days ago on 11 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar#RfC about using the title "Shahanshah"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2338 days ago on 14 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes#RfC: Should we remove the "85 and 100 million" number from the lead?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Beland with this edit. Have refactored to be a "proper" RFC close with this edit, though there was zero content change. Primefac (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2318 days ago on 4 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:No original research#Rfc on How we interpret "published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2308 days ago on 14 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Bernie Sanders#RfC: Social democracy? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Should Hope not Hate publications be considered reliable sources?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2277 days ago on 13 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC about the reliability of The Verge as a source for use in articles relating to tech, science, culture, and cars? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2306 days ago on 15 July 2018) Could an uninvolved admin kindly assess consensus there? — JFG talk 17:47, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Closed by non-admin on 16 August. Close review requested on 23 August. — JFG talk 21:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Marking as {{done}} since nothing more has to be done here, whichever way the close review goes Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:38, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2290 days ago on 31 July 2018) Talk has largely ended and the bot removed the tag. Would an uninvolved editor please determine consensus? I'm afraid that there is quite a lot to read. Thank you. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:26, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Will an uninvolved administrator please assess the consensus for all discussions that began before 17 August 2018? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:45, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Marking as {{done}} for archival; there is currently no old business at MfD Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:11, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2307 days ago on 15 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Real Steel#RFC on including talks of sequel? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2349 days ago on 2 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Marketing of electronic cigarettes#RfC about evaluating the accuracy of marketing claims? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- Could I request an independent assessment of consensus (es) at this RfC, please? HLHJ (talk) 22:41, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't see that it had been nommed already. Thanks to Redrose64 for the merge, and Cunard for nominating it. HLHJ (talk) 23:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'll do my best to tackle this, but it may take me a day or two. Vanamonde (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Vanamonde93: Ah, sorry, I started last week (because of Wikum) and closed it today. I should've claimed this first! Marking as {{done}}. Deryck C. 20:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Deryck Chan: No worries: Amy warned me that you were working on it over email, so I didn't actually end up spending any time on it. No harm done. Vanamonde (talk) 22:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks to both of you for being willing to resolve it, and thanks to Deryck for doing so. Apologies for the sprawling discussion. HLHJ (talk) 06:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Deryck Chan: No worries: Amy warned me that you were working on it over email, so I didn't actually end up spending any time on it. No harm done. Vanamonde (talk) 22:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Vanamonde93: Ah, sorry, I started last week (because of Wikum) and closed it today. I should've claimed this first! Marking as {{done}}. Deryck C. 20:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- I'll do my best to tackle this, but it may take me a day or two. Vanamonde (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2291 days ago on 30 July 2018) Would an uninvolved administrator please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources#RfC: Should this guideline contain a link to WP:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources?? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 23:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2311 days ago on 10 July 2018) This RfC has been running for more than a month and has attracted a lot of discussion but difficult to determine if there's consensus or not. Could someone experienced in this have a look?--Obi2canibe (talk) 14:53, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Following disputes across several articles and an RfC on one article, this RfC was initiated to establish broader guidance across the topic area. There is considerable debate in the RfC, and a patient uninvolved editor is needed to assess the strengths of argument and provide a usable summary to conclude the RfC. Thanks in advance. --RexxS (talk) 20:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Doing... Closure will be processed within 2-3 business days Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:23, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2263 days ago on 28 August 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Killing of Mollie Tibbetts#Seriously, Alien is a slur.? --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:37, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Amakaru. Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2308 days ago on 14 July 2018) Requesting an experienced and uninvolved editor or admin to assess the consensus at Talk:List of military occupations#RFC: Should East Jerusalem and Gaza be moved from Current military occupations for the sake of consistency?. Thanks-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 07:28, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of military occupations#RFC: Should East Jerusalem and Gaza be moved from Current military occupations for the sake of consistency?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Working on it. It may take a couple of days because I will be using Wikum.- MrX 🖋 23:44, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} - Closed as No consensus to remove Gaza from the list. Consensus not to remove East Jerusalem. - MrX 🖋 16:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2294 days ago on 28 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Flag of NATO#RfC about the inclusion of an alternative color and ratio of the flag used in recent documents? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} A close here appears unnecessary, just one person (now blocked for "Abusing multiple accounts"..) arguing against many others, and the issue appears to be settled now. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy#Does the community really agree with WP:ATD as policy?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} this is more of a "thoughts" RfC than a concrete one requiring closure. It should be pretty obvious to Adam9007 that from the comments that the community does support WP:ATD Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2255 days ago on 5 September 2018) The redirect ended up being speedily deleted as a hoax (see the RfD discussion and this ANI discussion for context). I can't close the discussion myself because I was involved in the discussion and the speedy deletion. funplussmart (talk) 19:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 25 August 2018) After discussion, Piotrus, the user to whom the page under discussion belongs, has agreed that the page ought to be deleted, making it eligible for WP:CSD#U1, with the consequence that the revisions 856740453 to 856742680 of Political scandals in South Korea and 856740628 to 856889465 of Talk:Political scandals in South Korea must also be deleted as they contain material copied from the said page. I assume this revision deletion is admissible under WP:CRD#5, applying WP:DEL1 and then WP:G7.
In short, the closing result would be: "Speedy delete; also delete revisions 856740453 to 856742680 of Political scandals in South Korea and 856740628 to 856889465 of Talk:Political scandals in South Korea". I apologize for the rather complex request, but since the user has agreed with speedy deletion, I figure this MfD can now be closed without further discussion. Nardog (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Amakuru. Nardog (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2342 days ago on 9 June 2018) Talk has winded down. Would an uninvolved editor please determine consensus? Thank you. Garuda28 (talk) 17:09, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Working Give me a day or two. Vanamonde (talk) 22:23, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Vanamonde93: How are you doing with this? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: I'll be done in the next 18 hours: RL intervened, and I was trying to use a new RFC closing tool that's being developed (you may have heard about it?). Vanamonde (talk) 02:16, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}, finally. Vanamonde (talk) 21:38, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: I'll be done in the next 18 hours: RL intervened, and I was trying to use a new RFC closing tool that's being developed (you may have heard about it?). Vanamonde (talk) 02:16, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Vanamonde93: How are you doing with this? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2295 days ago on 26 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Bipolar disorder#New RfC on the mask image? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2257 days ago on 2 September 2018) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Roe (talk • contribs) 19:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2253 days ago on 6 September 2018) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Roe (talk • contribs) 19:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2253 days ago on 6 September 2018) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Roe (talk • contribs) 19:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2347 days ago on 5 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mass killings under communist regimes#RfC on figures presented by Courtois in the Black Book introduction? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. -The Gnome (talk) 09:12, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 15:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2337 days ago on 15 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Meaningful vote#Request for comments on the first line of this article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2328 days ago on 23 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Swiss sovereign-money initiative, 2018#Request for comments on the inclusion of historical context? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2321 days ago on 1 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:California Proposition 187#RfC: "Illegal aliens" vs. a synonym? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 25 August 2018) Could an experienced page mover or admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2018 August#In My Feelings (song)? Iffy★Chat -- 16:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Cúchullain. Iffy★Chat -- 10:23, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2263 days ago on 27 August 2018) We need an uninvolved admin to have a look at this and see if there's consensus or not to add a new line to the instructions when editing on an RfA page. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. I'm working on closing this but I figured I should hit this first just to avoid any ecs. Primefac (talk) 01:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2323 days ago on 28 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Should WP:TWL be allowed to acknowledge the services they have partnership with in our articles?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. Primefac (talk) 19:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think that Rhododendrites has struck the perfect balanced note, as to the consensus.Lack the inclination to drag that out of the archive and make a close, when the ground reality will be hardly affected, for all practical purposes....... ∯WBGconverse 16:27, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for reviewing the discussion, Winged Blades of Godric (talk · contribs). I have unarchived the RfC so that the RfC's archival is not a barrier to recording what the consensus is. Cunard (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} via=the shoulders of giants--GRuban (talk) 20:19, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for reviewing the discussion, Winged Blades of Godric (talk · contribs). I have unarchived the RfC so that the RfC's archival is not a barrier to recording what the consensus is. Cunard (talk) 05:11, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2328 days ago on 24 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Presidency of Donald Trump#RfC: Public health analysis by Harvard scholars? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. Primefac (talk) 19:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 22:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2326 days ago on 26 June 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please close the lengthy RfC at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#RfC: INTDAB links to non-dab pages. Thanks, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:41, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2308 days ago on 14 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Proposal to draftify UDP-tagged articles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2323 days ago on 29 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster#RfC about the infobox image? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'll take this--also since there is no rush with it. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Drmies: I didn't see your comment here. I already closed this one as 'no consensus'. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- Anachronist, I don't mind--I was doing this with some new fancy software as a trial run, not a very successful one I might add, and apparently I forgot to, ahem, you know, do the actual closing... Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:55, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Drmies: I didn't see your comment here. I already closed this one as 'no consensus'. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}, then. I hope my closure didn't contradict what you would have written. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:03, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2289 days ago on 2 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Neighborhoods of Tel Aviv#Request for comment about the notability of the neighborhoods listed in this template? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2287 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of cities in Israel#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}/needed for now, as Amakuru has relisted the RfC Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2287 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:RAS syndrome#RFC on including DC Comics? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2277 days ago on 13 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Guardians of the Galaxy (film)#Request for Comment on Carina's status? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 2 September 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Breitbart? Thank you. Zazpot (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- Pending another day of !voting inactivity, I will close, (for the sake of it).Pretty one-sided, till now. ∯WBGconverse 14:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Fish 'n' K Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2241 days ago on 19 September 2018) The involved users have been indefed. As an involved editor I cannot close it myself. funplussmart (talk) 01:01, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} Funplussmart I don't see any necessity for a closure here; closures are only generally needed if a consensus is needed to be determined, of which here there is none to determine; the indeffing of the users resolves the issue. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:54, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2303 days ago on 19 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Christian ethics/Archive 2#Request for Comment on inclusion of Old Testament material in the article? The responses predominately are "yes" with two editors recommending "Move to cancel the Request for Comment as unclear". Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Requesting a closure on this RfC on the use of Old Testament material in the context of Christian ethics in the article Christian Ethics. Thanks. --Airborne84 (talk) 10:27, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2294 days ago on 28 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Help talk:Citation Style 1#Permit access-date in absence of a URL? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2264 days ago on 26 August 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Brave (web browser)#Request for comment on "pay to surf" classification? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 00:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2254 days ago on 6 September 2018) As discussion has been dormant for a week now, would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Daniel Mallory Ortberg#RfC on article image? Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:11, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by The Anome. Cunard (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2599 days ago on 26 September 2017) There is a discussion to merge a MoS page into another page last year but nothing has taken place. The editor whose username is Z0 13:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- It's on my to-do list. Virtually on one else does MoS merges these days (probably because they don't have the asbestos armor that I do). I dealt with all the other out-standing MOS:BIO merges first, and have let that settle out over the last month. The MOS:PN one is a split-and-merge; it'll be a more complicated section-by-section job, since parts of it are about human names, others about titles of works, other about geography, etc. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 10:47, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. Cunard (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2302 days ago on 20 July 2018) Could an uninvolved editor close the discussion, please? --Pelmeen10 (talk) 20:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2290 days ago on 1 August 2018) Could an uninvolved editor close the discussion, please? Thanks in advance. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 05:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Why? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. Cunard (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2271 days ago on 20 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Venezuelan bolívar/Archives/2018#Merge proposal? Thanks, Nicolas Perrault (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2279 days ago on 12 August 2018) Would an uninvolved editor/admin assess the consensus at Talk:Green Bay Packers#Merge proposal and close the discussion? This discussion relates back to a previous WP:FLC nomination and it would be good to have a formal archive of the discussion if it goes back to WP:FLC. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2243 days ago on 17 September 2018) Could an experienced editor review the consensus at Talk:Apeshit (song)#Requested move 17 September 2018? Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
- Jax 0677, there's no harm but there's no real need to list requested moves here because they're listed at WP:RM which is regularly checked over by closers and is generally not too backlogged. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:51, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Born2cycle. Cunard (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2299 days ago on 22 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Rahul Easwar#Request for Comment? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Discussion is largely dormant among regular users, and last few weeks have seen a sprout-up of single-purpose IPs coming by to !vote. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:20, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} -The Gnome (talk) 21:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 2 September 2018) discussion has slowed. I suggest a highly experienced closure, or small group to review this for closing. A list of suggested closing elements are included in the link above. The original stop-gap users will begin to expire in a few weeks. Thank you for your time! — xaosflux Talk 18:03, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} was closed by Cyberpower678. — xaosflux Talk 02:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2237 days ago on 23 September 2018) This page was proposed for deletion on 16 September 2018. The PROD tag was removed to contest the deletion on 22 September 2018. A discussion was started the following day on the talk page. Seven days have passed since the last comment, could an admin or experienced editor review the discussion/straw poll to determine the next course of action? Thanks - wolf 04:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} - WP:AFD is that way. Iffy★Chat -- 12:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2315 days ago on 7 July 2018) Could an uninvolved admin close this discussion? New comments have dried up on this RFC. Last comment was at 11:09, 2 August 2018 (UTC). --DBigXray 09:15, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2313 days ago on 8 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:British Jews#RfC "'Central Orthodox Judaism'=Modern Orthodox Judaism? - To Wikilink or not?"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2250 days ago on 9 September 2018) A close would be appreciated. This was archived by a bot, and legobot pulled the RfC tag here. I pulled it out of the archive, so that it could be closed. Jytdog (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2257 days ago on 3 September 2018) This discussion has managed to pull in all six active admin RfD closers, so I have a feeling this one will sit in the backlogs for a while unless it's posted here. -- Tavix (talk) 19:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Two other discussions on the 17 September RfD page also remain open. Thryduulf (talk) 13:24, 6 October 2018 (UTC)These closed by Deryck Chan, but as they have contributed to the Stephni meyer discussion that remains open and in need of closure. Thryduulf (talk) 14:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2238 days ago on 22 September 2018) Could an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Killing of Mollie Tibbetts#WP:DISINFOBOX? --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2280 days ago on 11 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ayn Rand#RfC Lead sentence? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 25 August 2018) Having run for about 30 days, this needs a formal close please. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:36, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2297 days ago on 25 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Oscar Wilde Memorial Sculpture#RfC on including sentence with nicknames? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2295 days ago on 26 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of 7400-series integrated circuits#RfC Combining 'legacy' vs 'modern chips?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2295 days ago on 27 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Boeing 787 Dreamliner#RfC on main image? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2291 days ago on 30 July 2018) Would an uninvolved and experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Elon Musk#Request for comment: Tham Luang cave rescue/namecalling to avoid any edit wars when the protection is peeled back? Thanks! ⠀TOMÁSTOMÁSTOMÁS⠀TALK⠀ 15:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2283 days ago on 7 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:RF resonant cavity thruster#RfC: Should the EmDrive be labeled as Pseudoscience?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2278 days ago on 13 August 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:United States elections, 2018#RFC on Russian Interference? Thank you.Casprings (talk) 03:42, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2267 days ago on 24 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of films released in IMAX/Archive 1#Request for comments on the removal of digital DMR titles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} Issue looks resolved with reversion back of original version of the list Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:10, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2260 days ago on 31 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Flag of Australia#Request for comment? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2257 days ago on 2 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Suicide#RfC: Neutrality Challenged? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2254 days ago on 6 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Sugar#RfC on sugar industry influence on health information and guidelines? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2293 days ago on 28 July 2018) Seeking a neutral, uninvolved editor willing to take on an Rfc in an area subject to WP:AC/DS sanctions for gender-related controversies and disputes. Talk was on-going right up till the end, until Legobot removed the expired Rfc header. An involved editor (the creator) then assessed it and I reverted. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2289 days ago on 2 August 2018) This RfC has been running for 1 month. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2222 days ago on 7 October 2018) I understand it's only been a day, but the discussion has garnered significant attention, a consensus appears to be forming, and the item is time sensitive as it is related to a nomination at WP:ITN/C. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Black Kite (talk · contribs) --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2307 days ago on 15 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Proposed MoS change: actors' names (not) in plot sections? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2283 days ago on 8 August 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources#RfC: Should Template:Supplement be added to WP:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources?? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 05:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 1 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Greece#Inclusion of the League of Corinth in the infobox? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 1 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Perche#RFC: the Perche vs. Perche? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2304 days ago on 17 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Disappearance of Asha Degree#Clothing taken? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC) {{done}}Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 00:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2284 days ago on 6 August 2018) Could an administrator (participants specifically request an administrator) please assess the outcome of this RfC? Thanks. -sche (talk) 00:16, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2238 days ago on 22 September 2018) Could an uninvolved editor please assess the consensus for a merge proposal at Talk:List of airliner shootdown incidents#Requested move 22 September 2018. The Banner talk 07:55, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Frayae Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2286 days ago on 5 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Martha McSally#RfC on Political positions section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2257 days ago on 2 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jeremy Corbyn#RfC on use of Morning Star as a source? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2249 days ago on 10 September 2018) Legobot came along and removed the notice. We would appreciate a closer for proposal B and proposal C. I closed A as being a no-go and D as being reasonable only when WP:CAPITALS/MOS:TM are necessary. --Izno (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2248 days ago on 12 September 2018) Please determine a consensus for this recently expired RfC (Talk:Here_(Alicia_Keys_album)#RfC:_Should_the_critical_reception_section_be_trimmed?) Dan56 (talk) 11:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2246 days ago on 13 September 2018) An early close would be appreciated. If it turns out that there is a consensus to include certain content in the lead, then it shouldn't be kept out indefinitely just on the basis that "there is an ongoing RfC". The article is semi-protected because of the issue. The RfC has been running for a reasonable time, and nobody has posted to it in the last seven days. It is long-ish and at times heated, but a close should not be difficult. Scolaire (talk) 08:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- There's no reason to close this RFC early, given how contentious it has been and the edit warring that led to the formation of the RFC in the first place (I am the initiator of the RFC). Iffy★Chat -- 10:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- What is the point in keeping open an RfC when nobody is contributing? There has been enough contributors and enough discussion to determine a consensus. A close might have the effect of ending edit-warring; keeping it hanging certainly won't. Scolaire (talk) 12:00, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- It is now over 30 days. Nobody has contributed to the poll since 1 October (day 17). Protection has been removed and edit-warring has already begun. Somebody please close this ASAP. Scolaire (talk) 12:26, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Swarm talk 01:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2771 days ago on 7 April 2017) Could an uninvolved editor please assess the consensus for a merge at Talk:Jordanian disengagement from the West Bank#Merger proposal. The merge was proposed 18 months ago, has several comments (none in the last month), and relates to a page with active arbitration remedies. Klbrain (talk) 07:58, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2275 days ago on 16 August 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 92#Wording for sentence in lead on racial stance.Casprings (talk) 00:07, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 2 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Special Counsel investigation (2017–present)#RFC on Patten? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2255 days ago on 4 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Hamas#Request for Comment - Including China's stance on Hamas in the lead? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2253 days ago on 6 September 2018) Consensus is pretty clear, but as this will result in a large number of page moves, I thought it would be best to get it formally closed by a third party. Cheers, Number 57 23:07, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2305 days ago on 16 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Fountain (Duchamp)#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2296 days ago on 25 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#George Cross Disambiguation? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2283 days ago on 8 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography#RFC for stub mountain articles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Winged Blades of Godric this has been "closure in progress" for 20 days :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
- I hereby initiate a request for WBG to get closer to closing.
-The Gnome (talk) 08:49, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
- I hereby initiate a request for WBG to get closer to closing.
- {{Done}} feminist (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2277 days ago on 13 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jordan Peterson#RfC: Climate science? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2301 days ago on 20 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Trypophobia#Should we only use a source's exact wording and/or quote extensively from a source (free or not)?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Without an article? See the "RfC" subsection. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2261 days ago on 29 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:How to write a plot summary#Rfc on Character Names? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2304 days ago on 18 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Quneitra Governorate#RFC on map version? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 07:42, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2287 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of cities in Israel#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2301 days ago on 20 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cathy Newman#Merge Peterson interview section?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2291 days ago on 30 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#RFC about the article's lead section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#RFC about the article's lead section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 08:50, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2251 days ago on 9 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Geoffrey Owens#Request for comments: Working at Trader Joe's? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2246 days ago on 14 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Winona Ryder#RfC: "Marriage" to Keanu Reeves? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2246 days ago on 14 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Keanu Reeves#RfC: "Marriage" to Winona Ryder? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2245 days ago on 15 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Quiet storm#RfC: Should "quiet storm" be identified in the lead as a radio format, genre/subgenre, or both?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2244 days ago on 16 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Nabil Gabol#RfC: Should we mention the murder allegation ?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2298 days ago on 24 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Millennials#RfC about the editing the lead on the Millennials article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} --GRuban (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2294 days ago on 28 July 2018) Would an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Template talk:Death year and age#RfC: Age format when the birth date or death date is unknown. Regards, —usernamekiran(talk) 10:32, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Death year and age#RfC: Age format when the birth date or death date is unknown? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2219 days ago on 10 October 2018) Consensus could likely be evaluated by this point. It's also nearing the 30-day point, with barely under 2 weeks left until it's a month old. Kirbanzo (talk) 19:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Kirbanzo: {{not done}} Twelve days left is not "nearing the 30-day point"; it's only just past half-way. It's not as if there have been no comments for several days, either - there have been four in the last four days, two of which were today. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:19, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2209 days ago on 21 October 2018) A request for move was initiated on 21 October. After the first two days of the discussion, during which there were 7 editors in support and 1 in opposition, there has only been one further comment two days ago (in opposition). I asked the new dissenter a question and there has been no response. The request for move should be accepted, the move made, and the discussion closed. Thank you. --Taivo (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- @TaivoLinguist: There are several problems here.
- You have posted this in the RfCs section, but a WP:RFC has never been held at Talk:Rise of Macedon.
- You have linked to the talk page in general, not to the specific discussion that you wish to be closed - I assume that is Talk:Rise of Macedon#Requested move 21 October 2018, which is a requested move discussion, not a RfC.
- In the
{{Initiated}}template above, you included the parameter|done=yeswhich means that no further action is required. You also omitted the time that the discussion began (19:47), although that is less crucial. - Since this is a requested move discussion, once the seven day period has elapsed it is automatically listed at WP:RME (which has been done); hence, it should not also be listed for closure on this page.
- Accordingly, I am marking this {{not done}}. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- User:Redrose64, I am sorry for troubling the page. Wikipedia can be a confusing place with twenty different places to post issues requiring an admin's attention (and mysterious bots doing some things automatically). Thank you for clarifying the situation. --Taivo (talk) 09:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2210 days ago on 20 October 2018) This article is on the Main page. 7 days that are stipulated for a move discussion are over and the thread has drawn immense participation. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:04, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2268 days ago on 23 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology#RfC on list format? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- I'd like to emphasize the need for an administrator with experience in closing controversial discussions. This is the fourth structured discussion in a row on this article, and we need a thorough and decisive close. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 00:38, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- I have moved the close request from the "RfCs" section to the "Administrative discussions" section. Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
I will close this later today. ~Awilley (talk) 15:45, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} ~Awilley (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2290 days ago on 31 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Timeline of the war in Donbass (July 2018–present)#RFC on article content? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC) {{Done}}
(Initiated 2289 days ago on 1 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Joan Freeman (politician)#Request for comment regarding family? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC) {{Done}}
(Initiated 2221 days ago on 9 October 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 October 9#Category:People of Huguenot descent? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. --RL0919 (talk) 12:14, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2248 days ago on 12 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Francis Beaufort#RfC on National Origins? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2233 days ago on 26 September 2018) Any uninvolved editor is welcome to assess consensus. Lorstaking (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2766 days ago on 11 April 2017) Would an uninvolved editor assess the merge consensus at Talk:Fenway Park#Merger of Pesky's Pole back into Fenway Park; April 2017 proposal with no further discussion in more than a month? Klbrain (talk) 14:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Miscellany for deletion
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion closures are behind - 4 days, 12 MfDs. Thanks Legacypac (talk) 03:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Marking as {{done}} as the backlog is now only 2 discussions. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2272 days ago on 19 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is Designers & Dragons a RS for: (a) games and game companies, (b) BLPs?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2242 days ago on 18 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Notify pending-changes reviewers during large backlogs? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2226 days ago on 4 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:List of missing aircraft#Scope of this article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2228 days ago on 1 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Christine Blasey Ford#RFC on removal of Journal Articles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Christine_Blasey_Ford#RFC_on_removal_of_Journal_Articles? Casprings (talk) 22:30, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by User:Cinderella157. Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:27, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2227 days ago on 3 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Boeing#RfC on hatnote? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- The hat-note has been removed so this is {{resolved}} and it is unnecessary to close this. Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:32, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 2 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Political activity of the Knights of Columbus#RFC on quotation marks? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
{{close}}2001:A61:443:7700:88EE:A210:51F0:818E (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2238 days ago on 22 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture criteria#Proposal? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2236 days ago on 24 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Proposed deletion policy? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2233 days ago on 27 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Manchester Baby#RFC on capitalizing small-scale experimental machine? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 02:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 2 August 2018) Legobot removed RfC template. Would an editor assess the consensus at Talk:The Bank of New York Mellon#Request for comments on Historical data section? Disclosure: I have a financial conflict of interest as I am here on behalf of BNY Mellon as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Danilo Two (talk) 13:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 3 August 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess consensus for this RfC? jamacfarlane (talk) 15:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#DAB schools with commas or brackets?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2239 days ago on 21 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Stephen Miller (political advisor)/Archive1#RfC: Immigration hardliner? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:39, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2232 days ago on 28 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Communist Party of China#RFC: Political Orientation of Communist Party of China? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defend Ukraine
(Initiated 2199 days ago on 31 October 2018) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defend Ukraine is ready to be closed. Atsme✍🏻📧 18:21, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Atsme: So are dozens of others listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 October 31. Why should this one be given priority? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Redrose64 - the editor is a SPA and appears to be connected to two articles - Defend Ukraine and GBKSOFT (may have been Gbksoft), the company that created the video game (Gbksoft was recently deleted). On Oct 30th, I asked Ped4enko on their TP to disclose any COI they may have because they appear to be connected to Gbksoft, and to the game subject of this AfD. I had editors from WikiProject Video Games review the article as well because I'm not all that familiar with the topic. Perhaps both articles should have been G11s. If none of the aforementioned fits the bill for listing here, please accept my apologies. Atsme✍🏻📧 23:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- It was Gbksoft that was deleted. Anyway, I don't see a reason why this one should not be processed in the normal course of things, along with the other AfDs that were filed on 31 October. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:15, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Redrose64 - the editor is a SPA and appears to be connected to two articles - Defend Ukraine and GBKSOFT (may have been Gbksoft), the company that created the video game (Gbksoft was recently deleted). On Oct 30th, I asked Ped4enko on their TP to disclose any COI they may have because they appear to be connected to Gbksoft, and to the game subject of this AfD. I had editors from WikiProject Video Games review the article as well because I'm not all that familiar with the topic. Perhaps both articles should have been G11s. If none of the aforementioned fits the bill for listing here, please accept my apologies. Atsme✍🏻📧 23:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Sandstein. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2219 days ago on 10 October 2018) RFC has run the full 30 days, needs an uninvcoled admin or other experienced user to close. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:48, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. --RL0919 (talk) 22:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2288 days ago on 3 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal#Suspected perpetrators parameter RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- It has been archived. -The Gnome (talk) 08:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
- Archive --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:31, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Special:Diff/869037321. --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:45, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2274 days ago on 17 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cleveland, Texas#RfC: 2011 rapes? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Barkeep49 Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2469 days ago on 3 February 2018) Would an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:List of best-selling singles#Proposal to set 10 millions copies sold as the minimum.? Thanks, feminist (talk) 14:53, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Pennsylvania's 7th and 15th congressional district special elections, 2018#Keep merged or separate?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. Closed as no consensus. --TheSandDoctor Talk 04:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2285 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Caucher Birkar#RfC about Caucher Birkar's nationality in the lead? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} Closed as no consensus. Special:Diff/869226090 Special:Diff/869226115 --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2271 days ago on 20 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Sealioning#RfC about the inclusion of suggested ways to deal with sealioning? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2319 days ago on 2 July 2018) Comments have stopped coming in for a while, though it won't hurt to let this hit the full 30 days. It would be very helpful if this were carefully assessed. It is not a proposal to actually implement a particular bot, but an advisory RfC to ArbCom on what such a bot might do (and not do, and why), and what issues with current WP:AC/DS practice are inspiring the desire for such automation in the first place. ArbCom has promised to take the RfC under careful consideration as community feedback. Actually, one closing option would be to simply close it without an admin analysis, instead explicitly reserving that assessment to ArbCom. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. Primefac (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} - SMcCandlish has stated that "this one came to no consensus (about a 60/40 split), but had the desired effect anyway (ArbCom acted on it in response to the community input, which was the intent)." --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2253 days ago on 7 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#RfC on article's timeline? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2216 days ago on 14 October 2018) Could an uninvolved experienced editor assess and close this RfC? Thanks. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 21:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2203 days ago on 27 October 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive303#Request to lift topic ban? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by L235. Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2202 days ago on 28 October 2018) Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive303#Unblock appeal by SashiRolls? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by RL0919. Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2284 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Highway 2 (Israel)#RFC: Which table should be used? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. Closed as No consensus Special:Diff/869385817. --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:44, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2283 days ago on 8 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#RfC: Should this article mention Trump's trip to Moscow in 1987?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2277 days ago on 14 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Project namespace#Creation of a new category for consensus summaries? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}. According to the discussion, a formal closure is not needed here. — Newslinger talk 04:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2273 days ago on 18 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#RFC: Regarding genre listings in infobox for music band? Thanks - wolf 00:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
- The RfC is now at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Archive 38#RFC: Regarding genre listings in infobox for music band. Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} — Newslinger talk 03:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 26 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 208#RfC on single subsections? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 26 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Saudi Arabia#RfC on the manual of style? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2265 days ago on 26 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Machine Intelligence Research Institute#Request for comment on NPOV and sourcing? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2264 days ago on 26 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Human evolution#RcF on Denisovan 11? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2263 days ago on 28 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Module talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 4#Request for comment? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2249 days ago on 10 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Lisa Littman#Possible courses of action regarding this BLP? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2242 days ago on 18 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Dark wave#RfC: Does this article suffer from WP:SYNTH?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2237 days ago on 22 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 71#Request for Comment: Is it relevant to list all production companies or just main animation studios in the infobox of film articles?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2234 days ago on 26 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of Humans episodes#RfC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}} The version currently in the article appears to be where the consensus lies, and there is no edit warring going on; the discussion is almost entirely back and forth between two editors so there isn't too much point in a close, and let sleeping dogs lie. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2233 days ago on 27 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Chick-fil-A#Untrue statement and/or inaccurate source.? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2232 days ago on 28 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Dissent from Catholic teaching on homosexuality#Request for comment on the church teaching section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2224 days ago on 6 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Donald Trump#RfC: Birtherism in the lede? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2223 days ago on 7 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:D. H. Lawrence/Archive 1#Second RfC request about differing views on Lawrence's philosophy and politics? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2223 days ago on 7 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Far-right politics#RfC: should we remove "anti-communism" in some or instances in the article?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2220 days ago on 10 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:2019 Formula One World Championship#Semi-protected edit request 19 October? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- The correct link to the RfC is Talk:2019 Formula One World Championship/Archive 1#Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2018. The discussion has been automatically archived. — Newslinger talk 09:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}. The article has already been updated with more recent information, and the RfC (which didn't show consensus) doesn't need a formal closure because it's no longer applicable. — Newslinger talk 09:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2219 days ago on 11 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Center for Immigration Studies#Request for comment on description: anti-immigration, low-immigration or both? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2214 days ago on 16 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of vegetarians#RfC about Hitler being a vegetarian? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2214 days ago on 16 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Tucker Carlson#RfC: White supremacist praise? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2212 days ago on 18 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ron Stallworth#RfC about using a high school yearbook photo as the lead image? There also is an ongoing RfC at Talk:Ron Stallworth#High school yearbook image in Early life section? about using the image not as the lead but in the early life section. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2316 days ago on 6 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Revisiting the perennial US/U.S. debate? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. Primefac (talk) 20:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} — Newslinger talk 22:34, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2274 days ago on 17 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations)#RfC on promoting this page to a guideline? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2251 days ago on 9 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Year range for two consecutive years? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2249 days ago on 11 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Adam Milstein#RfC on Al Jazeera Documentary? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2245 days ago on 15 September 2018) Would an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Sport in Australia#RFC on Population-Wide Metrics? Thanks, Siento (talk) 10:25, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2244 days ago on 16 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche#Activity in Slovenia section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2243 days ago on 17 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Monsanto#RfC: Coverage of Roundup Cancer Case? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2210 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced administrator please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Survey? The RfC was initially initiated 6 September 2018, but was reopened 20 October. No one has commented since 8 November 2018 (~8 days at the time of posting). --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- I have moved the close request from the "RfCs" section to the "Administrative discussions" section. Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:35, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2253 days ago on 6 September 2018) Would an experienced admin please close this very well-attended debate on a proposal to make a change to this naming guideline. It was originally closed on 15 October 2018, but was then reopened on 20 October after objections that there had not been sufficient participation. Cheers, Number 57 18:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- Marking as {{done}} as this has been closed by GorillaWarfare. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2190 days ago on 9 November 2018) - Could an experienced editor please assess consensus here? This discussion meets at least one of the criteria stated above for uninvolved close. Some participants feel that "consensus remains unclear", and the raw count is 11–8. There is little question that "the issue is a contentious one". Thanks very much. ―Mandruss ☎ 14:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} by User:L293D. ―Mandruss ☎ 14:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2210 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources#RfC: Designating web content by non-staff contributors as questionable (revised)? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 03:01, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2209 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC on use of CoinDesk? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2218 days ago on 12 October 2018) Could an uninvolved experienced editor assess and close the discussions regarding the use of Electronic Intifada as a reliable source. Thank you --Andromedean (talk) 10:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- I've corrected the link to actual discussion; original link was to side discussion Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} — Newslinger talk 23:50, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2207 days ago on 23 October 2018) The period of 30 days at Talk:Health and appearance of Michael Jackson#Should the disability categories be retained? will be over soon. Comments have not been added for more than a week. Closing summary by an uninvolved editor and closure requested. Thanks. Quaffel (talk) 16:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2284 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington#RFC on first sentence of article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 03:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2272 days ago on 19 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation#Request for comments on the opening sentence? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 03:52, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2239 days ago on 21 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jeremy Corbyn/Archive 17#RfC about a letter from Orthodox Rabbis? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2238 days ago on 21 September 2018). Would an administrator experienced in BLP matters please assess the consensus at Talk:Oscar López Rivera#Request for comment: lead sentence? Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:43, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{Done}} --slakr\ talk / 05:41, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2229 days ago on 30 September 2018). Any uninvolved editor is welcome to assess consensus, or proper closing if determinate as no consensus. Matthew hk (talk) 03:32, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2205 days ago on 24 October 2018) Given there is a disagreement underlying this RfC that has already gone through a couple of stages of dispute resolution, I am requesting formal closure of this RfC by an uninvolved person. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2200 days ago on 30 October 2018) Given as the discussion has run its course, with no new input in the last 3 weeks. GoodDay (talk) 23:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} Cinderella157 (talk) 09:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2216 days ago on 14 October 2018) Would an admin please assess the consensus in the discussion? Thanks, feminist (talk) 05:13, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} closed by Amakuru. Flooded with them hundreds 13:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2346 days ago on 5 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#How to/should we add a Wikidata item link to Authority control? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
- Now archived, at here Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:13, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}}. I observed that the pencil has been there since shortly after this discussion went stale and has been stable. Since the pencil is one of the trending opinions in the discussion, and the discussion isn't really set up to absolutely require third-party closure, I've closed this by accepting the state of affairs as of today: keep the pencil. Deryck C. 17:51, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2210 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal - Allow non-admins to close deletion discussions as "delete" at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2202 days ago on 28 October 2018) Would an admin please assess the consensus in the discussion? Thanks, feminist (talk) 05:13, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2226 days ago on 3 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ben Shapiro#RfC: Abortion and LGBT rights? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2214 days ago on 16 October 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Sci-Hub#Request for comment on opening paragraph? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 23:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2204 days ago on 26 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Trypophobia#Should the image be removed, retained in the lead but collapsed, or moved down?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2380 days ago on 2 May 2018) Can an admin assess the consensus of this merger discussion, please? --Mhhossein talk 16:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} by Winged Blades of Godric. Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2190 days ago on 9 November 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Corey Taylor/1? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2208 days ago on 22 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Xinjiang conflict#RfC: Infobox? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
{{done}} Cinderella157 (talk) 11:06, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2356 days ago on 27 May 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Doria Ragland#Photo? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2208 days ago on 22 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Louis Farrakhan#Request for comments concerning opening sentence? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2206 days ago on 24 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Brett Kavanaugh#RfC -- polls on nomination? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2221 days ago on 8 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:The Man in the High Castle (TV series)#Third season reconsideration? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC) {{Done}} signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2213 days ago on 17 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Request for comment: DIFFCAPS? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} (non-admin closure) by --John Cline (talk) 22:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2197 days ago on 2 November 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:French and Indian War#Should use "the British monarch" instead of "His Britannic Majesty"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
ANI thread about James500
(Initiated 2188 days ago on 11 November 2018)
There seems to be a general feeling that this has played out and should close, but with an actual close (due to observations of previous promises by the subject to stop various unconstructive behaviors which then resumed after scrutiny dissipated). I opened the report, and am semi-mollified by the subject's responses (am no longer seeking a T-ban, though several others are). However, an actual administrative warning is probably in order, at the minimum. This shouldn't just archive without action, or we have every indication that the problems would resume. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 15:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- It is not apparent to me that there have been any broken promises. In the one instance that I can find in this very lengthy (almost unreadable) thread, I think there may have been a serious misunderstanding as to what was being promised, as I did not expect my words to be construed by reading them one sentence at a time, in an entirely literal fashion, that ignores the context in which that sentence appears, the circumstances under which it was written, and whether the literal meaning is likely to be the intended one. I am not sure whether I should say anything else in the ANI thread. James500 (talk) 11:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2207 days ago on 23 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:David M. Cote#Request for comment on political donations? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}. This RfC is malformed, since it was phrased in a manner that solicits local consensus on a more general matter (with the phrases
"a company"
and"a CEO"
referring to any company or any CEO). Additionally, while the !votes suggest no consensus, the discussion has progressed to a point where interested editors have agreed on the article content. A closure is not needed here. — Newslinger talk 11:27, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2207 days ago on 23 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of cults of personality#RfC about the inclusion of the United States section and Trump’s entry therein? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2201 days ago on 29 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Drafts#RfC about the draft deletion log? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2200 days ago on 30 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Smith & Wesson M&P15#Request for comment: add three instances of criminal use? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2736 days ago on 12 May 2017) Could an uninvolved editor assess the merge discussion proposal (Church music into Liturgical music) at Talk:Liturgical music#Merge with Church music? Klbrain (talk) 09:56, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2165 days ago on 4 December 2018) Can an uninvolved admin please assess the procedural closure discussion on this RfC? Whilst it's only be up a day it's also clear that the general discussion on the RfC won't go forward until it's addressed, one way or the other. Whilst it's fair to say that the RfC (which was initially made in an unusual but not unknown format with the voting delayed) has ended up looking a bit of a mess, every issue raised by the initial proposers has been addressed to some extent, so it is as close to being acceptable as it ever will be. Alternatively, if the decision is in favour of a procedural close then this should not be delayed as this will simply waste people's time discussing an RfC that is destined to be procedurally closed. FOARP (talk) 14:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- {{already done}}. This discussion has already been closed by power~enwiki. — Newslinger talk 04:36, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2210 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One#British racers? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2208 days ago on 22 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Irish stations)#Request for Comment on adopting Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Irish stations)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2206 days ago on 24 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Proud Boys#RFC: Promotes Political Violence? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2205 days ago on 25 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Ron Stallworth#High school yearbook image in Early life section?? There is a related closed RfC at Talk:Ron Stallworth#RfC about using a high school yearbook photo as the lead image. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2202 days ago on 27 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex#RfC: Paternity? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2194 days ago on 5 November 2018), only one new comment in the past two weeks. Thryduulf (talk) 14:57, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2333 days ago on 18 June 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus for all of the sections at Talk:Sabrina Carpenter discography#WP:ACCESSIBILITY violations? --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{not done}}. As this discussion concerns the application of a Manual of Style guideline across a broad range of articles, conclusions drawn from this discussion would only show local consensus and not be particularly useful. I encourage interested editors to start a request for comment on this issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music, or another similar venue. — Newslinger talk 04:25, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2197 days ago on 2 November 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess consensus? –dlthewave ☎ 15:15, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- Adding Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Opinions sourced to WorldNetDaily which is closely related –dlthewave ☎ 16:14, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- {{done}} for the original issue. -The Gnome (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2219 days ago on 11 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:George Soros#American conservatives have repeated conspiracy theories about Soros? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2209 days ago on 21 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Proposals regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht and formally close it? Discussion seems to have reached a conclusion, with no comments for a week. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2208 days ago on 22 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2018 Yilan train derailment#Request for comment on article title? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2207 days ago on 23 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:NPOV dispute#RfC: POV Pushing On Talk Pages? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
(Initiated 2186 days ago on 13 November 2018) Beyond the RfC, it would be highly appreciated if an administrator could address the concerns at Talk:BTS (band)/2018 controversy as well. The concern comes from the fact that three editors feel that the consensus of the RfC was that a draft of the section be prepared ahead of time, while one believes that consensus was simply to have the section added. In order to prevent edit warring it would be highly appreciated that an administrator or uninvolved editor determine whether or not consensus was to prepare a draft ahead of time or not. DanielleTH (Say hi!) 20:02, 23 November 2018 (UTC)