| Revision as of 22:00, 10 April 2007 editTHF (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers17,107 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 14:01, 26 December 2024 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,661 edits Added: Talk:1996 New Zealand general election. |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
<noinclude> |
|
{{shortcut|]<br>]}} |
|
|
|
{{rfclistintro}} |
|
{{RFCheader|Politics}} |
|
|
|
</noinclude> |
|
<!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
*] ] says that ''"The lead should ... briefly describing notable controversies, if there are any."'' deleted all mention of notable controversies from the lead paragraph, leaving only laudatory remarks. Should the lead paragraph comply with ] and ]? 22:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
*] ] forbids as ] the synthesis of cited sources to reach a conclusion not expressly stated in those sources. An editor believes the New York Times analysis recounted in the article is incorrect and has added cited original research purporting to refute the New York Times, though none of those cites mention the New York Times article. Do these edits comply with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines? 22:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Should the bottom of the infobox in this election and all elections that follow it, which use the mixed-member proportional system, show the Prime Minister and their party alone (similarly to other Westminster systems, such as ], ], and ]), or the Cabinet and its member parties (similarly to other systems that have coalition governments, such as ], ], and ])? ] (]) 13:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
*] Should we have an external link to a critical obituary? 15:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
*] There is a dispute about whether or not the infobox should contain a flag16:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
* ]: Should a mention of ]'s three months working for ] in 1985 be part of the ]? 10:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
What should the infobox indicate as the location of the hostilities? |
|
* ] Whether or not to include national flags in teh article, and if so, whether those flags should represent the present nation that city resides in, or the historical nation the city was capital of. 04:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*] '''Primary question:''' Is making the charactarization or drawing the conclusion that ''"the Drudge Report sets the tone for national political coverage"'', or is it an interview/book review that only reports the charactarizations of other parties? '''Secondary question:''' If the conclusion is being drawn or charactarization made, can that conclusion be appropriately attributed to ABC News, when authorship of the source is not disclosed (no byline), or is an additional reliable secondary source required to make that attribution? - 23:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
*'''Option 1''' - ] and ], ] |
|
*] Is claiming that the Santa Cruz Sentinal article is referring to Zombie's (only) photo of an antisemetic sign Original Research ? Is claiming that a copyrighted but unsourced pic on an antisemtic conference site, which might be Zombie's, as being Zombie's pic Original Research? (see discussion) 21:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
*'''Option 2''' - ] |
|
*] Should this article have inline citations and footnotes or are they not applicable to the article? An editor thinks they are not applicable to the article. Does the US National Archive meet WP:V and WP:RS? Should the article detail the United States embargo against Cuba and similar episodes, or is that POV? 07:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*] This is a dispute about the inclusion of an anonymous article published by a reliable magazine, which is critical of the Union 06:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Please enter Option 1 or Option 2, followed by a brief statement, in the Survey. Do not reply to other users in the Survey. Back-and-forth discussion may be conducted in the Discussion section. ]] 16:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
* ] Is AEI's rebuttal to accusations made by the Guardian fairly characterized? 02:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
* ] and ] - What's the best way to avoid ] problems? Is it appropriate for two editors to remove tags from an article when there is a lack of consensus? 16:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
* ] - What's the best NPOV way to handle the lead about a controversial documentary concerning contentious scientific topics? 20:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
This a request for comment on the above question and previous section. Is the Mackinac Center for Public Policy a Conservative group and should be described as such? And does the polices listed above overrule the more widely available references describing their relationships and them as Conservative vs Free-Market? ] (]) 02:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
*] Want to remove POV terms in the title to stop debates over how to frame the article. PRevents edit wars and POV forks and other problems. 17:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
*] -- How much weight to give to those who claim the term itself is perjorative; and there is a disagreement over what consitutes Original Research, and what is needed in terms of cites.15:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
*] -- Does belong in an article about black supremacy? 11:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Should the Riverina chapter of the NSN be included in the infobox? ] (]) 16:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
*] -- Should a section on "Use by Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers" be included in the article? Is undue weight given in the article to criticisms of Shahak? 10:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
*] -- Are National Socialism, Nazism, and Fascism forms of "collectivism" and thus related to all forms of socialism? This dispute has gone on for over two years. 12:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
*] -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --] 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Should the article include the guard’s actions (grabbing the camera lens and touching Hersant’s shoulder) and the court’s findings regarding Sewell’s claims on racial motivation and self-defence? |
|
*] -- 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) |
|
|
|
] (]) 15:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
* -- Dispute regarding whether info offering historical context in an FA should remain. 01:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
*] -- Is a newly-added section "Principles of constitutional design" POV? 17:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
*Is appropriate? Note, a non-neutral RFC, admiteed by third party at the time, was filed last year by a ] which resulted in merge yet the current version is not identical and has new sources. ] 17:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Should this template (a modified version of the political party infobox) be used on US political party pages? (]) ] (]) 14:57, 16 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
] |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
The current lead contains a simple mention of Trumpism. Should a brief description be added to this mention? A proposed wording for the added text, which is also up for debate here: {{tq|characterized by ], "]" nationalism, and economic ].}} — ] (]) 04:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
The RfC is whether to retain or remove Syrian mercenaries from the belligerents section of the infobox. ] (]) 02:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
Is the Syrian civil war over? ] (]) 00:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
I'm opening a new RfC in an attempt to permanently solve this dispute. Should the Estado Novo regime be considered fascist? -- ] (]) 23:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
Debate is ongoing as to whether content should be included in this article. This RfC covers two questions: |
|
|
|
|
|
*'''Question 1:''' Should this article mention the John Conyers report "What Went Wrong In Ohio" |
|
|
*'''Question 2:''' If so, what wording should be used? |
|
|
'''] ]''' 18:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
Does this sentence violate NPOV and should it be removed from the lead and the body? |
|
|
|
|
|
"Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine with as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible" ] (]) 18:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
Should Masha Amini be referred to as Kurdish-Iranian in the first sentence of the lead? |
|
|
|
|
|
This has previously been discussed at ], ] and ]. '']''<sup>]</sup> 02:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
Should allegations of child sex trafficking and statutory rape be covered in the lead? If yes, to what extent? |
|
|
|
|
|
Prior discussions have occured at ], ] and ] '']''<sup>]</sup> 04:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
I propose the following text be added to WP:SUSPECT: |
|
|
:''Given the legal presumption of innocence, criminal proceedings including those against prominent public persons, should not be mentioned on the ] of the encyclopdia until the cases are resolved either by conviction or acquittal. Any appellate proceedings shall have no bearing on whether or not to post the initial findings of a duly constituted court of law." |
|
|
I have decided to post this as an RfC as this would involve a non-trivial amendment to ] and the issue has become a contentious point of debate involving several nominations at ]. -] (]) 17:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |