Misplaced Pages

:Closure requests: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:51, 3 September 2024 editGråbergs Gråa Sång (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers57,993 edits →Other types of closing requests: adding← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:33, 13 January 2025 edit undoGoodDay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers495,116 edits →Requests for comment 
(967 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 75: Line 75:
Please ensure you add the {{initiated|date here}} template when placing a request here Please ensure you add the {{initiated|date here}} template when placing a request here


*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself!  Let a bot do it.  Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. *** *** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself!  Let a bot do it.  Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
Place new administrative discussions below this line using a level 3 heading --> Place new administrative discussions below this line using a level 3 heading -->
=== ANI thread concerning ] ===
{{initiated|18:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)}} {{slink|Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1162#Talk:_Yasuke_has_on-going_issues}} has continued to grow, including significant portions of content discussion (especially since ] was ec-protected) and accusations of BLP violations, among other problems. Could probably be handled one sub-discussion at a time. --] (]) 17:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


=== ]===
{{initiated|17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)}} challenge of close at AN was archived ''']''' - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|18:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)}} ] (]/]) 00:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
===Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading=== ===Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading===
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}
Line 90: Line 92:


*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. *** *** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
--> -->


=== ] ===
=== RFA2024, Phase II discussions ===
{{initiated|22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)}} Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. ] (]) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi! Closers are requested for the following three discussion:
* {{Initiated|15:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)}} ''']'''
* {{Initiated|08:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)|done=yes}} ''']'''
* {{Initiated|10:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)|done=yes}} ''']'''
Many thanks in advance! ] (] • she/her) 04:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{Doing}} reminder of civility norms. ] (]/]) 00:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
::{{partly done}} reminder of civility norms. ] (]/]) 00:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


===] ===
If re-requesting closure at ] isn't necessary, then how about different various closers for cerain section(s)? I don't mind one or two closers for one part or another or more. --] (]) 17:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
{{Initiated|11:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)}} Participation/discussion has mostly stopped & is unlikely to pick back up again. - ] (]) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{a note}} This is a ] and subject to ]. - ] (]) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:'''] ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)</small>
:would like to see what close is. seems like it was option 1 in general, possibly 1/2 for IP area. ] (]) 05:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


=== ] ===
:During ] of RFA2024, we had ended up having multiple closers for different RFCs, even the non-obvious ones. I think different people closing subparts of this should be acceptable ] (]) 09:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
{{Initiated|19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)}} RfC expired on 6 December 2024 . No new comments in over a week. ] (]) 15:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
:Bumping this as an important discussion very much in need of and very much overdue for a formal closure. ] (]) 18:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
{{Initiated|16:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)|done=yes}}
:{{Doing}} designated RfA monitors (at least in part). ] (]/]) 16:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Clear consensus that the proposed edit (and its amended version) violate ]. However, the owning editor is engaging in ] behavior, repeatedly arguing against the consensus and dismissing others' rationale as not fitting his personal definition of synthesis; and is persistently assuming bad-faith, including . When finally challenged to give a direct quote from the source that supports the proposed edit, it was dismissed with "" and then The discussion is being driven into a ground by an editor who does not (nor wish to) understand consensus and can't be ] with any opposing argument supported by Misplaced Pages policy or guidelines. --] (]) 22:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{partly done}} designated RfA monitors. ] (]/]) 17:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
:{{done}} {{u|ThomasO1989}}; please note that any future closing requests on this page should be neutrally worded. ] (]) 20:11, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


=== ] ===
:For recall, {{ping|Sirdog}} had attempted a close of one section, and . Just in case a future closer finds this helpful. ] (]) 07:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
{{initiated|22:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)}} Legobot has removed the RFC notice. Can we please get an interdependent close. '']''<sup>]</sup> 23:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Thank you for the ping. For what it's worth, I think that close was an accurate assessment of that single section's consensus, so hopefully I make someone's day easier down the line. Happy to answer questions from any editor about it. {{smiley}} —](]) 07:38, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
:{{a note}} Ongoing discussion, please wait a week or two. ] (]) 14:08, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I agree. I also think closing some sections at a time is pretty acceptable, especially given we have only been waiting 2+ months for them. I also have strong opinions on 'involved experienced editors' narrowing down a closer's scope just because they speak strongly enough on how they think it should be closed. But I am Capital-I involved too, so shall wait until someone takes these up. ] (]) 08:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
::::I tend to agree. Not many people agreed with the concerns expressed on article talk about closing section by section. If a closer can't find consensus because the discussion is FUBAR, they can make that determination. ] (]/]) 12:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
=== ] ===
{{Initiated| 08:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)|done=yes}} Participation mostly slowed, should have an independent close. ] (]) 10:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
{{initiated|01:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)}}
:{{Done}} {{Ping|User:Happily888}} ] (]) 14:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Initial close has been overturned at review. A new close is required. -- <small>LCU</small> ''']''' <small>''«]» °]°''</small> 16:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
{{Initiated|02:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)}} ''']''' - 17:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC) {{Initiated| 00:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)|done=no}}, RFC expired weeks ago. ] (]) 21:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|22:06, 22 June 2024 (UTC)}} - I thank the Misplaced Pages community for being so willing to discuss this topic very extensively. Because 30 days have passed and ] <small>(For reference, a )</small>, I would encourage an uninvolved editor to determine if this discussion is ready for closure. '''''] (]) (])''''' 22:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:<small>(Also, apologies if I have done something incorrectly. This is my first time filing such a request.) '''''] (]) (])''''' 22:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)</small>
::There is ongoing discussion ] as to whether a closer for that discussion is necessary or desirable. I would suggest to wait and see how that plays out.--] (]) 14:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
:::This is dragging on ad nauseam. I suggest an admin closes this, possibly with the conclusion that there is no consensus to change. ] (]) 17:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
::::Indeed. Also a discussion at ], but that dates back to April. – ] (]) 15:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|20:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion has already died down and the 30 days have elapsed. Uninvolved closure is requested. Thanks a lot! ] (] · ]) 21:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

:@] I was reviewing this for a close, but I wonder if reopening the RFC and reducing the number of options would help find a consensus. It seems like a consensus could be found between options A or D. ] (]) 12:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
::That could definitely work! ] (] · ]) 12:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|00:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)}}. Ready for closing, last !vote was 12 July by looks of it. ] (]) 16:27, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|12:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)}} ] (]) 15:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

:There have been only 5 !votes since end July (out of 50+) so this could be closed now. ] (]) 10:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
:+1 please close it thanks. ] (]) 13:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===

{{Initiated|02:47, 17 July 2024}} Any brave soul willing to close this? The participants fall about 50-50 on both sides (across both RfCs too), and views are entrenched. ] (]) 05:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===

{{Initiated|13:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)|done=yes}} ] -] (]) 18:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
*{{done}}.—]&nbsp;<small>]/]</small> 16:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|02:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)}} RFC tax has expired and last comment was 5 days ago. '']''<sup>]</sup> 04:51, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|21:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)}} – This discussion is a month old and consensus is very clear. Could an uninvolved editor please summarize and close it so that the foot-draggers will finally let the article be updated? ] (]) 14:52, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|23:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion has slowed. Last comment 23/08/2027. '']''<sup>]</sup> 04:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|01:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)}} Another infobox image RFC winding down. ] (]) 13:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|13:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion has slowed. Last comment 24/08/2024. '']''<sup>]</sup> 04:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|01:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)}}
Requesting '''immediate procedural close''' for ], because it is blocked on a ] that no one at the Rfc is qualified to comment on, namely U.S. copyright law about an image. At a minimum, it will require action at Commons about whether to delete an image, and likely they will have to consult Wikimedia legal for an interpretation in order to resolve the issue. Under current circumstances, it is a waste of editor time to leave the Rfc open, and is impossible to reliably evaluate by a closer, and therefore should be procedurally closed without assessment, the sooner the better. Thanks, ] (]) 20:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
*It's not appropriate to make an immediate procedural close in those circumstances. Wikipedians routinely make decisions about copyright, even those Wikipedians who aren't US attorneys. This is not a high-drama situation. However I'm starting to wonder if the RFC nominator might be on a crusade about our lede images for prominent WW2 figures, and if so, whether they might benefit from a sysop's advice and guidance about overusing our RFC process.—]&nbsp;<small>]/]</small> 09:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)


=== Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading === === Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
Line 177: Line 127:
{{Initiated|<date and time when RfC was opened, in the format as would be produced by ~~~~~>}} {{Initiated|<date and time when RfC was opened, in the format as would be produced by ~~~~~>}}
If the discussion is not an RfC (which is the default), add a |type=xxx code for the discussion type, e.g. |type=drv for deletion review; see Template:Initiated/doc for a list of codes. If the discussion is not an RfC (which is the default), add a |type=xxx code for the discussion type, e.g. |type=drv for deletion review; see Template:Initiated/doc for a list of codes.

--> -->


== Deletion discussions == == Deletion discussions ==
{{XFD backlog|right}} {{XFD backlog|right}}
=== ] ===
{{initiated|00:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 23:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
{{initiated|10:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 17:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|23:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 20:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
{{initiated|13:48, 10 August 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 03:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|02:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 20:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|05:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 03:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|05:13, 20 August 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 03:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|12:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 03:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)


=== Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading === === Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
Line 209: Line 153:
--> -->


===]=== ===]===
{{initiated|25 September 2024}} Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
{{initiated|12:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)}} a merge discussion related to ] and ] now without comments for 4 weeks; requestion a close by any uninvolved editor. ] (]) 07:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)


=== ] === ===]===
{{initiated|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. ]] 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
{{initiated|23:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion went on for 3 months and seems to have stalled. ] (]) 16:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)


===]===
=== ] ===
{{initiated|12:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)}} 34 comments, 17 people in discussion. Discussion has mostly died down. Not the most monumental of issues, but closure would be good. ] (]) 05:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|7 November 2024}} Looking for uninvolved close in CTOP please, only a few !votes in past month. I realise this doesn't require closing, but it is preferred in such case due to controversial nature of topic. ] (]) 10:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


* {{a note}} I'm happy to perform the merge if required, as have summarised other sections of this article already with consensus. I realise it's usually expected to perform splits or merges when closing discussions, but in this case it wouldn't be needed. ] (]) 20:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
===]===
{{initiated|02:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)}} Latest comment: 3 days ago, 79 comments, 37 people in discussion. Closing statement may be helpful for future discussions. ] (]) 10:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{Doing}}<span id="Frostly:1721255743178:WikipediaFTTCLNClosure_requests" class="FTTCmt">—&nbsp;] (]) 22:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)</span>
::@] Are you still planning on doing this? ] (]) 16:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:::], yes - have drafted close and will post by the end of today. Thanks!<span id="Frostly:1721757387356:WikipediaFTTCLNClosure_requests" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;] (]) 17:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)</span>
::::I wanted to note that this is taking slightly longer than expected, but it is at the top of my priority and will be completed soon.<span id="Frostly:1722057271796:WikipediaFTTCLNClosure_requests" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;] (]) 05:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)</span>
:::::@] Just checking, would you like someone else to help with this? ] (]) 07:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
::{{outdent|3}} @]: also checking in. ] (]/]) 00:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Hi ] and ], thanks for the pings! I've unfortunately been in the hospital for the past week but am now feeling better. I apologize for the long delay in putting out the close and appreciate your messages! Best,<span id="Frostly:1724299181662:WikipediaFTTCLNClosure_requests" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;] (]) 03:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)</span>
::::I'm sorry to hear that; a week-long hospitalization is not fun. But, I'm glad that you're feeling better. Best, ] (]/]) 19:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
:''']'''. ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>13:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)</small>


===]=== ===]===
{{initiated|01:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)}} Contentious merge discussion requiring uninvolved closer. ] (]/]) 01:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|23:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} Proposed merge discussion originally opened on 30 May 2024, closed on 27 October 2024, and reopened on 27 December 2024 following the closure being overturned at AN. ] (]/]) 00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

=== ]===
{{initiated|20:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)}} Since much of the discussion centers on the title of the article rather than its content, the closer should also take into account the requested move immediately below on the talk page. ] (]) 15:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

:If the closer finds "no consensus", I have proposed ] in which a discussion on merger and RM can happen simultaneously to give clearer consensus.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 20:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|14:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)}} Proposal to split RS/PS. Discussion has died down. ] (]/]) 21:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|02:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)}} – Editors would feel more comfortable if an uninvolved closer provided a clear statement about whether a consensus to ] exists, and (if so) whether to split this list into two or three lists. ] (]) 03:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|17:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)|type=rm}} - I believe consensus is relatively clear, but given the contentious overarching topic I also believe an uninvolved closer would be appreciated. Thanks in advance! ] (]) <small>19:05, 18 August 2024 (UTC)</small>

=== ] ===
{{Initiated|05:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)}} I'd like a closure of this discussion, which was preceded by this discussion:] ] (]) 16:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
{{Initiated}} I planned to move this to ]. However, that's been reverted as "an undiscussed move" and discussion has died down and I have withdrawn the plan to move it to that name. I am also requesting for it to be moved back to ] because it was moved to ] in Feb 2024 for no apparent reason and given the number of moves, its safe to say it needs to be moved back to the stable title per ] and ]. Same applies to ] ] (]) 12:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
=== Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading === === Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading ===
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}

Latest revision as of 21:33, 13 January 2025

This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators.
Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.
"WP:CR" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Cleanup resources, Misplaced Pages:Categorizing redirects, Misplaced Pages:Copyrights, Misplaced Pages:Competence is required, Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution, Misplaced Pages:Content removal and WP:Criteria for redaction. "WP:ANC" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Assume no clue.
Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Archiving icon
    Archives

    Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
    11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
    21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
    31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39


    This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.
    Shortcuts

    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.

    Technical instructions for closers

    Please append {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry you are closing so that no one duplicates your effort. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note, and consider sending a {{Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. Where a formal closure is not needed, reply with {{Not done}}. After addressing a request, please mark the {{Initiated}} template with |done=yes. ClueBot III will automatically archive requests marked with {{Already done}}, {{Close}}, {{Done}} {{Not done}}, and {{Resolved}}.

    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

    Administrative discussions

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

    (Initiated 31 days ago on 13 December 2024) challenge of close at AN was archived nableezy - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Sander.v.Ginkel unblock request

    (Initiated 29 days ago on 15 December 2024) voorts (talk/contributions) 00:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

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

    Requests for comment

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

    (Initiated 97 days ago on 7 October 2024) Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

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

    (Initiated 77 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)

    information 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)
    would like to see what close is. seems like it was option 1 in general, possibly 1/2 for IP area. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Genocide#RfC: History section, adding native American and Australian genocides as examples

    (Initiated 68 days ago on 6 November 2024) RfC expired on 6 December 2024 . No new comments in over a week. Bogazicili (talk) 15:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Team Seas#Re: the ocean pollution additions

    (Initiated 59 days ago on 15 November 2024) Clear consensus that the proposed edit (and its amended version) violate WP:SYNTH. However, the owning editor is engaging in sealioning behavior, repeatedly arguing against the consensus and dismissing others' rationale as not fitting his personal definition of synthesis; and is persistently assuming bad-faith, including opening an ANI accusing another editor of WP:STONEWALLING. When finally challenged to give a direct quote from the source that supports the proposed edit, it was dismissed with "I provided the source, read it yourself" and then further accused that editor with bad-faith. The discussion is being driven into a ground by an editor who does not (nor wish to) understand consensus and can't be satisfied with any opposing argument supported by Misplaced Pages policy or guidelines. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

     Done ThomasO1989; please note that any future closing requests on this page should be neutrally worded. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:11, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Israel#RfC

    (Initiated 51 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)

    information Note: Ongoing discussion, please wait a week or two. Bogazicili (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Wicked (2024 film)#RfC on whether credited name or common name should be used

    (Initiated 33 days ago on 11 December 2024) Participation mostly slowed, should have an independent close. Happily888 (talk) 10:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

     Done @Happily888: guninvalid (talk) 14:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Australia#RFC: Should the article state that Indigenous Australians were victims of genocide?

    (Initiated 66 days ago on 8 November 2024), RFC expired weeks ago. GoodDay (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

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

    Deletion discussions

    XFD backlog
    V Oct Nov Dec Jan Total
    CfD 0 0 3 39 42
    TfD 0 0 0 4 4
    MfD 0 0 0 0 0
    FfD 0 0 5 6 11
    RfD 0 0 28 35 63
    AfD 0 0 0 0 0

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 20#Category:Belarusian saints

    (Initiated 24 days ago on 20 December 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 31#Category:Disambig-Class Star Trek pages

    (Initiated 12 days ago on 31 December 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 1#Category:Category-Class 20th Century Studios pages of NA-importance

    (Initiated 12 days ago on 1 January 2025) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:50, 10 January 2025 (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 110 days ago on 25 September 2024) Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. Andre🚐 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Winter fuel payment abolition backlash#Merge proposal

    (Initiated 76 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)

    Talk:Israel–Hamas war#Survey

    (Initiated 67 days ago on 7 November 2024) Looking for uninvolved close in CTOP please, only a few !votes in past month. I realise this doesn't require closing, but it is preferred in such case due to controversial nature of topic. CNC (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

    • information Note: I'm happy to perform the merge if required, as have summarised other sections of this article already with consensus. I realise it's usually expected to perform splits or merges when closing discussions, but in this case it wouldn't be needed. CNC (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:You Like It Darker#Proposed merge of Finn (short story) into You Like It Darker

    (Initiated 16 days ago on 27 December 2024) Proposed merge discussion originally opened on 30 May 2024, closed on 27 October 2024, and reopened on 27 December 2024 following the closure being overturned at AN. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

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

    Categories: