| Revision as of 00:43, 25 March 2007 editCentrx (talk | contribs)37,287 edits rm RfCs older than 1 month← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:00, 21 October 2009 edit undoXqbot (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,319,594 editsm Robot: Fixing double redirect to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture | ||
| (127 intermediate revisions by 66 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| {{shortcut|]}} | |||
| {{RFCheader|Society, law, and sex}} | |||
| <!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> | |||
| *]Information about forced circumcisions has been totally rejected by two other editors on two grounds: "undue weight" and that the editor putting forward the information has refused to answer their questions on the talk page about his motives. Is the material unduly weighty? Are the editors' actions appropriate? ] 15:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Does the article have appropriate length, neutrality and attribution? 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] - Is concluding that discrimination based on ethnicity is a kind of racism original research? Are the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International and the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights reliable sources? There may be more ... 13:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Edit-war problem: appropriate? See also ]. 22:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --] 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --] 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --] 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * Dispute whether the should be removed. 16:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *Is appropriate on its own? ].18:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Is a newly-added section "Principles of constitutional design" POV? 17:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] -- Is ] a reliable source or an extremist source? Is this article NPOV? 15:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Should the ] be merged into ] or should it exist in summary style. 20:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] - need input on if the article has improved or not. In particular whether it is still unbalanced with respect to ], written in a brochure style or deals with controversies in an inappropriate manner. Thanks in advance. 17:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. Dispute over whether it is appropriate to state that all students "have at least average ability". 01:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. Edit warring by editors who evidently believe that there really is no such thing as Islamphobia, and the Muslims have only themselves to blame. 00:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. One editor isnists on adding long sections of exhaustive detail concerning the performance of the school's sports teams. 22:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] - are recent changes to the article helpful and do they adhere to NPOV? Which of two versions of the article is preferable? 15:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <!--Add new items at the TOP, NOT HERE. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign--> | |||
Latest revision as of 15:00, 21 October 2009
Redirect to: