Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:16, 22 May 2013

• WP:AN
• WP:ANB

• For urgent incidents and chronic, intractable behavioral problems, use Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
• If you are new, try the Teahouse instead.
• Do not report breaches of personal information on this highly visible page – instead, follow the instructions on Misplaced Pages:Requests for oversight.
• For administrative backlogs add {{Admin backlog}} to the backlogged page; post here only if urgent.
• Do not post requests for page protection, deletion requests, or block requests here.
• Just want an admin? Contact a recently active admin directly.
• If you want to challenge the closure of a request for comment, use {{RfC closure review}}

When you start a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on their talk page. Pinging is not enough.

You may use {{subst:AN-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

Sections inactive for over seven days are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.(archives, search)

Template:Active editnotice

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 38 as Misplaced Pages:Closure requests/Archive 37 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Archives

Index no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present.

• WP:CR
• WP:RFCL
• WP:ANRFC

Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close a Misplaced Pages discussion. Do so when consensus appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our policies or guidelines).

Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.

Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, it is appropriate to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.

Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.

On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.

There is no fixed length for a formal request for comment (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.

When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.

Include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing easier. Move discussions go in the 'other types' section.

Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.

Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if the area is contentious. You should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the discussions for discussion page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.

Non-admins can close most discussions. Admins may not overturn your non-admin closures just because you are not an admin, and this is not normally in itself a problem at reviews. Still, there are caveats. You may not close discussions as an unregistered user, or where implementing the closure would need tools or edit permissions you do not have access to. Articles for deletion and move discussion processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.

If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.

Other areas tracking old discussions

• Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Elapsed listings
• Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Old
• Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion
• Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Awaiting closure
• Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion#Old discussions
• Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion#Old business
• Misplaced Pages:Proposed mergers/Log
• Misplaced Pages:Proposed article splits

Administrative discussions

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive367#RfC_closure_review_request_at_Talk:Rajiv_Dixit#RFC_can_we_say_he_peddaled_false_hoods_in_the_lede

(Initiated 20 days ago on 5 December 2024) - Ratnahastin (talk) 07:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive367#Close challenge for Talk:1948 Arab–Israeli War#RFC for Jewish exodus

(Initiated 12 days ago on 13 December 2024) challenge of close at AN was archived nableezy - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading

Requests for comment

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Mentoring process

(Initiated 223 days ago on 15 May 2024) Discussion died down quite a long time ago. I do not believe anything is actionable but a formal closure will help. Soni (talk) 04:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/In the news criteria amendments

(Initiated 78 days ago on 7 October 2024) Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Turkey#RfC_on_massacres_and_genocides_in_the_lead

(Initiated 78 days ago on 8 October 2024) Expired tag, no new comments in more than a week. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

 Note: This is a contentious topic and subject to general sanctions. Also see: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard topic. Bogazicili (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

 Note: Not sure if anyone is looking into this, but might be a good idea to wait for a few weeks since there is ongoing discussion. Bogazicili (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Talk_page_guidelines#Request_for_comment:_Do_the_guidelines_in_WP:TPO_also_apply_to_archived_talk_pages?

(Initiated 69 days ago on 16 October 2024) Discussion seems to have petered out a month ago. Consensus seems unclear. Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

 Note: Needs admin closure imho, due to its importance (guideline page), length (101kb), and questions about neutrality of the Rfc question and what it meant. Mathglot (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

And in true Streisand effect fashion, this discussion, quiescent for six weeks, has some more responses again. Mathglot (talk) 01:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 459#RFC_Jerusalem_Post

(Initiated 58 days ago on 28 October 2024) Participation/discussion has mostly stopped & is unlikely to pick back up again. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

 Note: This is a contentious topic and subject to general sanctions. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Archived. P.I. Ellsworth , ed.  22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Grey_Literature

(Initiated 45 days ago on 10 November 2024) Discussion is slowing significantly. Likely no consensus, personally. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Option 2 was very clearly rejected. The closer should try to see what specific principles people in the discussion agreed upon if going with a no consensus close, because there should be a follow-up RfC after some of the details are hammered out. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 03:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

 Doing... —Compassionate727  13:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

@Compassionate727: Still working on this? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Ugh… in practice, no. I'm still willing to do it, but it's in hiatus because of the three(!) pending challenges of my closures at AN, while I evaluate to what extent I need to change how I approach closures. If somebody else wants to take over this, they should feel free. —Compassionate727  22:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Taking a pause is fair. Just wanted to double check. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

asking for an update if possible. I think this RFC and previous RFCBEFORE convos were several TOMATS long at this point, so I get that this might take time. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 16:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment#RFC_on_signing_RFCs

(Initiated 42 days ago on 13 November 2024) - probably gonna stay status quo, but would like a closure to point to Bluethricecreamman (talk) 06:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• Done Soni (talk) 21:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Check Your Fact

(Initiated 41 days ago on 13 November 2024) RfC has elapsed, and uninvolved closure is requested. — Red-tailed sock _{(Red-tailed hawk's nest)} 15:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#RfC Indian numbering conventions

(Initiated 39 days ago on 16 November 2024) Very wide impact, not much heat. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Consensus seems clear, I don't think my Indian-ness poses a WP;COI here, closed. Soni (talk) 22:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of fictional countries set on Earth#RfC on threshold for inclusion

(Initiated 35 days ago on 20 November 2024) TompaDompa (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (music)#RfC about the naming conventions for boy bands

(Initiated 16 days ago on 8 December 2024) No further participation in the last 7 days. Consensus is clear but I am the opener of the RfC and am not comfortable closing something I am so closely involved in, so would like somebody uninvolved to close it if they believe it to be appropriate.RachelTensions (talk) 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not comfortable closing a discussion on a guideline change this early. In any case, if the discussion continues as it has been, a formal closure won't be necessary. —Compassionate727  13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#RfC: Should a bot be created to handle AfC submissions that haven't changed since the last time they were submitted?

(Initiated 40 days ago on 15 November 2024) This RfC expired five days ago, has an unclear consensus, I am involved, and discussion has died down. JJP_Master (she/they) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Len_Blavatnik#RfC:_NPOV_in_the_lead

(Initiated 9 days ago on 16 December 2024) RFC is only 5 days old as of time of this posting, but overwhelming consensus approves of status quo, except for a single COI editor. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

The CoI editor has now accepted that consensus is for the status quo, but I think a formal close from an uninvolved editor, summarizing the consensus would be helpful, since the issue has been coming up for a while and many editors were involved. — penultimate_supper 🚀 16:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

yes, despite multiple posts to WP:BLPN, WP:NPOVN, WP:3O, several talk page discussions, and now an RFC, I doubt the pressure to remove word oligarch from the lede of that page will stop. An appropriate close could be a useful thing to point at in the future though. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done by Nomoskedasticity. —Compassionate727  13:30, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox country#Request for comment on greenhouse emissions

(Initiated 89 days ago on 27 September 2024) Lots of considered debate with good points made. See the nom's closing statement. Kowal2701 (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done —Compassionate727  13:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Israel#RfC

(Initiated 32 days ago on 22 November 2024) Legobot has removed the RFC notice. Can we please get an interdependent close. TarnishedPath 23:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Chloe Melas#RFC on allegation of making a false allegation (resubmission)

(Initiated 31 days ago on 24 November 2024) The bot has removed the RFC notice. Can we please get an independent close. TarnishedPath 23:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done —Compassionate727  13:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading

Deletion discussions

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of songs recorded by Mohammed Rafi (A)

Please review this discussion. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:29, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion has now been relisted thrice. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:42, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading

Other types of closing requests

Talk:Arab migrations to the Levant#Merger Proposal

(Initiated 91 days ago on 25 September 2024) Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. Andre🚐 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:LGBT history in Georgia#Proposed merge of LGBT rights in Georgia into LGBT history in Georgia

(Initiated 79 days ago on 7 October 2024) A merge + move request with RM banners that needs closure. No new comments in 20 days. —CX Zoom 20:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done —Compassionate727  14:11, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump#Proposal: Age and health concerns regarding Trump

(Initiated 70 days ago on 16 October 2024) Experienced closer requested. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Tesla Cybercab#Proposed merge of Tesla Network into Tesla Cybercab

(Initiated 68 days ago on 18 October 2024) This needs formal closure by someone uninvolved. N2e (talk) 03:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be better to leave that discussion be. There is no consensus one way or the other. I could close it as "no consensus," but I think it would be better to just leave it so that if there's ever anyone else who has a thought on the matter, they can comment in that discussion instead of needing to open a new one. —Compassionate727  14:15, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Stadion Miejski (Białystok)#Requested move 5 November 2024

(Initiated 49 days ago on 5 November 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:JTG Daugherty Racing#Requested move 22 November 2024

(Initiated 32 days ago on 22 November 2024) Pretty simple RM that just needs an uninvolved editor to close. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 17:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done —Compassionate727  14:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Williamsburg Bray School#Splitting proposal

(Initiated 28 days ago on 27 November 2024) Only two editors—the nominator and myself—have participated. That was two weeks ago. Just needs an uninvolved third party for closure. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

 Doing... BusterD (talk) 20:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Winter fuel payment abolition backlash#Merge proposal

(Initiated 57 days ago on 29 October 2024) There are voices on both sides (ie it is not uncontroversial) so a non-involved editor is needed to evaluate consensus and close this. Thanks. PamD 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading

user:174.118.142.187

174.118.142.187 (talk · contribs) is being uncivil on his own talk page and at Talk:AC/DC (electricity), and accusing me of sockpuppetry without even informing me of that. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 05:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Comment - This likely belongs on Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. The 174.118 IP was engaged in a content dispute on AC/DC (electricity) and AC/DC (disambiguation) involving the scope and title of the former; details are on Talk:AC/DC (electricity). Instead of sticking to the issue (whether AC/DC (electricity) as currently titled includes AC/DC universal motors or should be limited to the now-obsolete All American Five "hot-chassis" tube radio) this user attempted a revert war against me on the disambiguation page and made accusations against me at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:K7L_reported_by_User:174.118.142.187_.28Result:_No_violation.29 which were dismissed. The same IP then created a spurious sock report at Misplaced Pages talk:Sockpuppet investigations/K7L which was speedily deleted as (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP: frivolous request). The allegation (made without the required notifications) claimed a Montréal Bell ADSL IP was me even though I'm in Ontario with no evidence presented other than the 65.94 Montréal IP having commented on a few of the same Misplaced Pages:Requested moves nominations. At this point, this is venue shopping. I did ask the 174.118 Toronto IP to stop here on user talk: but was reverted without a response. 65.94 is also trying to contact 174.118... via that user's talk page and being reverted without reply. This is making direct discussion with this user difficult. K7L (talk) 09:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• NOTE I did leave a notice on this user's talk page, but he reverted the edit that added the AN notice. So, the lack of an AN notice on his talk page is not because he was not informed. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 02:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
• Comment It looks like quite a few warnings were removed; including a 3RR on AC transformer here. K7L (talk) 13:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • According to Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/DieSwartzPunkt/Archive, his edits were characterized as "worrisome" -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

PC RfC 2013

The community at large should be made aware of Misplaced Pages:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2013, either by sitenotice or through bot notification of all past participants. WP:CD is insufficient given both the established controversy and scope of discussion.   — C M B J   11:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

It's already being advertised through a watchlist notice. That's usually the highest level of advertising we give policy discussions - I can't remember one being advertised by sitenotice. — Mr. Stradivarius 12:33, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I checked the revision history of Sitenotice and you're evidently right in that there haven't been any policy discussions published through it, although its talk page is home to a a very similar exchange. However, I do recall that the original PC RFC had over 650 participants and the SOPA RFC had more than 1,800 — and I could've sworn that at least one of those two received advertisement to all logged in users. In any event, I'm still inclined to stick by the suggestion that past participants be notified if nothing else, though in all fairness the debate's (affirmative) ramifications are pertinent to virtually all users.   — C M B J   13:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Given the problems with the SOPA rfc, not so sure thats a good idea. Given its irregularities. It would be better not to have a repeat. Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• During big policy RFCs I have put together, including the 2011/2012 PC RFCs it was made clear to me that a policy change that effects every single user on Misplaced Pages is not sufficiently important for the sacrosanct site notice. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

There's a not-unreasonable fear that over-using the sitenotice will limit its effectiveness. But this is kind of a big deal, isn't it? Hrm. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 12:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I would think deciding whether or not to use one specific facet of PC is a little bit less of a big deal than deciding if we were going to use it at all, and those discussions were deemed not to be important enough. As I recall I tried to make the point that a watchlist notice does not reach the IP users who would be affected by PC but that still didn't cut it. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

user:203.62.175.4

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

203.62.175.4 (talk · contribs) is vandalising pages by inserting/replacing/adding different names. Delljvc (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

This is a duplicate of Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#user:203.62.175.4, which is currently stale. K7L (talk) 16:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Central Time Zone (North America)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can an admin close the RM discussion listed here? Seven days have happened and there is a clear consensus. In this case it is needed an admin due to page protection. Thanks Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:16, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested redirect

Requesting redirect of epic fail guy and Epic Fail Guy to Guy Fawkes mask as per that article and Misplaced Pages:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Internet and tech culture.   — C M B J   10:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

There are no incoming links to those; what usefulness would they have? In addition, can you clarify what has changed since the most recent consensus that lead to the deletion of the redirect? :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 10:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

It is not unreasonable, given the subject's popularity, to assume that users will manually seek out an article at that title. As for the above discussion, it pertained to an inappropriate redirect that lacked any supporting content, whereas this target explicitly mentions the subject.   — C M B J   10:44, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

(EC) The request to remove the redirect from EFG -> 4chan was based on no mention in the article. EFG is mentioned at the guy fawkes mask article as part of its section on Anonymous usage of the mask, and its origins. The only redirect to 4chan kept in that discussion was one that was used in the 4chan article. No comment on how useful this is to have currently. Although Anonymous is a bit more noteworthy since 2009, I am surprised there is no mention at that article, as while EFG isnt notable in itself as a 4chan meme (there are loads of them) it is relevant to the Anonymous group. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Bad Bot

Could one of you good folks have a look into User:ClueBot NG? It's left at least two bad warnings in the last two days at User talk:Eric Corbett. I filed the report here, and left a warning with pings here, but noticed that Cobi hasn't edited since the 6th, and Crispy since Feb. I don't know bot coding; but perhaps one of you good folks could look into this before some good faith editors are chased away improperly and needlessly. Thanks folks. — Ched :  ?  20:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Administrative backlog