| Revision as of 23:30, 16 June 2010 editRFC bot (talk | contribs)216,124 edits Updating RFC list← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 23:01, 26 December 2024 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,803 edits Added: Talk:Squad (U.S. Congress). |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
<noinclude> |
|
<noinclude>'''The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:''' |
|
|
|
{{rfclistintro}} |
|
|
</noinclude> |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
<nowiki>Should the Squad be described in the article as "far left?" ~~~~</nowiki> ] (]) 22:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
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)}} |
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
|
What should the infobox indicate as the location of the hostilities? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*'''Option 1''' - ] and ], ] |
|
</noinclude>''']''' |
|
|
|
*'''Option 2''' - ] |
|
:==RfC question== |
|
|
|
|
|
:*Should the primary description of the localities Israel has built in the territories occupied in 1967 be "Israeli settlement" or "town" or "village" or some other description? |
|
|
|
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)}} |
|
:===Statement by Nableezy=== |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:The overwhelming majority of high quality sources consistently use the terminology "Israeli settlement" before, and often to the exclusion of, any other description. There is no reason that Misplaced Pages should place terminology used by a fringe sized minority ahead of internationally used phrases. International organizations such as the UN and each if its agencies, the ICRC, and the EU almost without exception call these places Israeli settlements almost exclusively. Human rights organizations such as AI, HRW, and B'tselem almost without exception call these places Israeli settlements almost exclusively. News organizations such as BBC, Reuters, AFP, and AP all call these places Israeli settlements almost exclusively. Even Israeli news organizations such as Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post often call these places settlements, though on occasion they do use "city" or "town", the JPost more so than Haaretz. There is no compelling reason why what the super-majority of sources call these places should be placed after the municipal status given by the occupying power. |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:====Editors endorsing this proposal==== |
|
|
|
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)}} |
|
:# <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 23:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
''']''' |
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:Is it original research to make this statement? |
|
|
|
Should the Riverina chapter of the NSN be included in the infobox? ] (]) 16:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
:"The Tokyo Two are suspects in Japan. They have accused the police of harshly interrogating them. AI has complained about the harsh interrogation methods used by the Japanese police." In the article, the line that corresponds to the third line has been deleted as original research. Here is the diff of the deletion: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Tokyo_Two&diff=368089559&oldid=368087727 ] (]) 02:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
''']''' |
|
''']''' |
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:I have been trying to fix the ] article after one ], check . I think the user in question may now be the subject of a sock puppet investigation. Anyway, I've since then been trying to clean up and improve the spaminated law articles (mostly the ] article), with varying degrees of success. Another user, ] has objected to my changes, and has deleted material I wrote which he found "controversial," on grounds that controversial material should not be in the lead. Some time later, after reading ] which states that: "The lead should ... define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—'''including any notable controversies'''," I reinserted this material (fourth paragraph of the ]), and he has again started to redelete, this time claiming that the material is uncited, poorly cited, misleading, misrepresentation of sources, etc. (along with some ] about how I had perpetrated a "detestable hack job" etc.) I've asked him repeatedly to quote and point out specifically what is wrong with the sources on the talk page, and he has not yet done so, though I specifically used publicly available sources just for this reason, and have addressed his objections as much as was possible on the talk page. |
|
|
|
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? |
|
:Aquib has also objected to my removing the material found problematic as per the foregoing RFC for Jagged 85; which he believes is ] |
|
|
|
|
|
:To put it more succinctly, the issue at hand is whether "controversial" material should be put in the lead, and whether the material is supported by the citations used. |
|
|
|
] (]) 15:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
:The contested paragraph is the as Aqiib has deleted it again, |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:I'm not really interested in protecting the page or blocking users (including getting myself blocked) but the constant reverts are a distraction. |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:] (]) 02:37, 14 June 2010 (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)}} |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:Discussions regarding the content of this note seem to be unresolvable. (The note is intended as an NPOV status description for inclusion in all Kosovo-related articles.) One IP user has strong opinions about the content (e.g. inclusion of information about non-UN member states).<br>A vote was held on the note's content which indicated an opposition to the IP user's position (although perhaps the vote was closed too soon). Accusations of bias in the vote's questions have since been made.<br>Was the first vote biased, and is a second vote necessary?<br>Everything on the talk page from ] onwards is of relevance (a lot to read I'm afraid). |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:] (]) 18:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
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)}} |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:Does it violate ] to say that the Nazis were anti-American? ] (]) 03:16, 12 June 2010 (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)}} |
|
:Those in favor of removal say that the Brady Campaign is an anti-gun group and that including the map constitutes advocacy of the group's position and that it violates ]. They argue that the Brady Scorecard shows the opinion of the Brady campaign, while the information from pro-gun sources is factual. |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:Those in favor of retention say that the map reasonably summarizes the state of gun laws in the states and provides a useful summary that is badly needed in the article. They also argue that the sources in the article are overwhelmingly from pro-gun groups, so inclusion of the Brady source provides balance. |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:— ] (]) 14:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Is the Syrian civil war over? ] (]) 00:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)}} |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:Should the reference to the number of Prime Ministers of various countries who have attended Eton (an issue which a previous RfC established to be complex and in need of detail) be placed in the article lede without detail, replicated in the body with detail, or simply placed in the body with detail? 09:07, 10 June 2010 (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)}} |
|
:This RFC is in regard to changing the name of this article from "United States Army Rangers" (plural) to "United States Army Ranger" (singular) in accordance with ]. |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:There are numerous threads with people arguing against including anyone not from the 75th Ranger Regiment in this page (such as graduates from Ranger School)—preferring to restrict it only to those serving or who have served in the 75th Ranger Regiment. Since there is already a page for the ], there is no need for a second page that is restricted to that topic. However, those who argue that other individuals should be included have not provided any sources that fit the plural title of this article. Changing the name to the singular is in accordance with Misplaced Pages's policies, makes sourcing the inclusion of those outside of the 75th possible (in fact very easy), and allows a lot of duplicate material to be summarized here with links to the 75th article. There are other benefits. The section, ] can be changed to "Notable United States Army Rangers" within the expanded scope of this article. |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
:Alternatively, this article could be merged into the 75th Ranger Regiment article and retained as a redirect. There is information on "other" Army Rangers in the article, but it is unsourced. Since no source has been provided for some time, it can be deleted. However, changing the name to singular is more in the spirit of ] and will allow editors more time to obtain ]. --] (]) 17:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Debate is ongoing as to whether content should be included in this article. This RfC covers two questions: |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:Requesting comment on the inclusion of this map, which tries to create a visual representation of the international reaction to the ]. There has been a serious debate on the talk pages of two separate articles and we don't seem to be able to reach a consensus. We would appreciate the input of the community to help us resolve this issue. In addition the this section there are additional discussions here: |
|
|
|
*'''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)}} |
|
:*] |
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
:] (]) 09:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{rfcquote|text= |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
Does this sentence violate NPOV and should it be removed from the lead and the body? |
|
:There is a dispute over whether the use of the term "vandal" in the article is NPOV or not. (See above for a lengthy discussion that has already taken place.) ] (]) 17:48, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
:How should allegations of genocide against Ceausescu be described? Should we use the numbers in the indictment or those accepted by historians? Should we give equal weight to both? ] (]) 15:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC) |
|
"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= |
|
:The above RFC covers this section (see initial question) as well as the following 2 sections. These are three related questions about Bucklin's compliance with mathematical criteria desirable for voting systems. ] (]) 17:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Should Masha Amini be referred to as Kurdish-Iranian in the first sentence of the lead? |
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:Should the article link to the ] article or should it link directly to a section there titled "humor"?]] (]) 23:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
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)}} |
|
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |
|
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |