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 21:51, 30 April 2017 editTenebrae (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users155,424 edits →Talk:RuPaul%27s_Drag_Race#Request_for_comment: indent← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:12, 28 December 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,373,405 editsm Archiving 13 discussions to Misplaced Pages:Closure requests/Archive 39. (BOT) 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{no admin backlog}}
<!-- <!--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
New entries go down at the *BOTTOM* of this page and not up here. New entries go down at the *BOTTOM* of this page and not up here.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-->

{{redirect|WP:CR|text=You may be looking for ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]}}
--><noinclude>
{{redirect|WP:ANC|text=You may be looking for ]}}
{{Noticeboard links | style = border: 2px ridge #CAE1FF; margin: 2px 0; | titlestyle = background-color: #AAD1FF; | groupstyle = background-color: #CAE1FF; }} {{Noticeboard links | style = border: 2px ridge #CAE1FF; margin: 2px 0; | titlestyle = background-color: #AAD1FF; | groupstyle = background-color: #CAE1FF; }}
] ]
{{Archive basics {{Archive basics
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages:Closure requests/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 23 |counter = 37
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |archiveheader = {{Aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 256000 |maxsize = 256000
}}
}}{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive
|archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages:Closure requests/Archive
|format= %%i |format= %%i
|age=7200 |age=4368
|archivenow=<!-- <nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved,{{Resolved,{{done,{{Done,{{DONE,{{already done,{{Already done,{{not done,{{Not done,{{close,{{Close</nowiki> --> |archivenow=<!-- <nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}},{{resolved,{{Resolved,{{done,{{Done,{{DONE,{{already done,{{Already done,{{not done,{{Not done,{{notdone,{{close,{{Close,{{nd,{{tick,{{xXxX</nowiki> -->
|header={{Aan}} |header={{Aan}}
|headerlevel=4 |headerlevel=3
|maxarchsize=256000 |maxarchsize=256000
|minkeepthreads=0 |minkeepthreads=0
|numberstart=16 |numberstart=16
}}{{Archives|search=yes|bot=ClueBot III|age=90}} }}{{Archives|auto=short|search=yes|bot=ClueBot III}}
{{Shortcut|WP:ANRFC|WP:AN/RFC|WP:RfCl}} {{Shortcut|WP:CR|WP:RFCL|WP:ANRFC}}


The '''Requests for closure noticeboard''' is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor ] on Misplaced Pages. Formal closure by an uninvolved editor or administrator should be requested where consensus remains unclear, where the issue is a contentious one, or where there are wiki-wide implications. <section begin=Instructions/>Use the '''closure requests noticeboard''' to ask an uninvolved editor to ]. Do so when ] appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our ]).
]
'''Many discussions do not need formal closure and do not need to be listed here.'''


] '''Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.'''
Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion. The default length of a formal ] is 30 days (opened on or before '''{{#time:j F Y|-30 days}}'''); if consensus becomes clear before that and discussion has slowed, then it may be closed early. However, editors usually wait at least a week after an RfC opens, unless the outcome is ], so that there is enough time for a full discussion.


Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, ] to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.
]
'''If consensus is unclear, then post a neutral request here for assistance.'''


] '''Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.'''
Please ensure that your request for a close is brief and neutrally worded. Please include a link to the discussion. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. Be prepared to wait for someone to review the discussion. If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. You can start discussion at the original page or request a ] at ] with a link to the discussion page and the policy-based reason you believe the closure should be overturned. See ] for previous closure reviews.


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


There is no fixed length for a formal ] (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.
Because requests for closure made here are often those that are the most contentious, closing these discussions can be a significant responsibility. Closers should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion. All closers should be prepared to fully discuss the closure rationale with any editors who have questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that those editors may have.


] '''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'''.
A ] discussed how to appeal closures and whether an administrator can summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus was that closures should not be reverted solely because the closer was not an administrator. However, special considerations apply for ] and ]—see ] and ] for details.


Include a link to the discussion itself and the {{tl|Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A ] can make listing easier. Move discussions go in the 'other types' section.
Once a discussion listed on this page has been closed, please add {{Tl|Close}} or {{Tl|Done}} and a note to the request here, after which the request will be archived.</noinclude>
{{TOC limit|4}}


]
== Requests for closure ==
'''Any ] may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.'''
<includeonly>:''These requests for closure are ] from ].''</includeonly><!--


Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if ]. You should be familiar with all ] that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the ] 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.
Please add new requests to the bottom of the appropriate section! If none of the sections apply, you may need to add one, since the section heading may have been deleted or hidden. Thanks!


'''Non-admins can close ''most'' discussions'''. ] your ] 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 ], or where implementing the closure ]. ] and ] processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.
-->
{{cot|title=Technical instructions for closers}}
{{See also|Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Backlog|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}}
Please append {{tlx|Doing}} to the discussion's entry you are closing so that no one duplicates your effort. When finished, replace it with {{tlx|Close}} or {{tlx|Done}} and an optional note, and consider sending a {{tlx|Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. Where a formal closure is not needed, reply with {{tlx|Not done}}. '''After addressing a request, please mark the {{tlx|Initiated}} template with {{para|done|yes}}.''' ] will ] requests marked with {{tlx|Already done}}, {{tlx|Close}}, {{tlx|Done}} {{tlx|Not done}}, and {{tlx|Resolved}}.
<!--Please add new backlog requests to the appropriate section! Thanks!-->
{{cob}}
===Administrative discussions===
'''If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here'''. Instead follow advice at ].


<section end=Instructions/>
<!-- -------------- Place new discussions above this line
{{TOC limit|4}}
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} -->
]
===RfCs===
====] (2nd request)====
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|27 January 2017|done=no}}? The discussion was listed at and archived from ]. Thanks, ] (]) 05:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
:I've added a part of the overall discussion, ], separately below. Without comment on what the results should be, I believe that the overall discussion will be difficult to close, but that Concrete proposal 1, should be very easy to close, and, as the original proposer, I'd rather not see it get lost in the shuffle. ]<sub>(<font color="cc6600">]</font>)</sub> 18:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
::Link to a request for a three-person close of the RfC: ]. ] (]) 01:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
*Restored from ]. Closer {{user|Primefac}} and , "I reverted the closure because of concerns with the wording, not with the overall result. Another editor (or two) to add to the close discussion will result in a much more polished result. I see no reason to not partake in that discussion." The other closer, {{user|S Marshall}} wrote, "Primefac being uncomfortable with it, I'll accept that the close should be vacated and redone by someone else."<p>I am listing this discussion here since Primefac would like another editor or two to participate in another close.<p>] (]) 07:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


== Other areas tracking old discussions ==
*], ], ], ], and ] need separate closures from uninvolved closer(s). I already closed milieu 1, milieu 2, and milieu 5. ] (]) 23:54, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
* ]
*], ] and ] have been closed by me.]<sup>]</sup> 12:06, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
* ]
*I've been thinking. After closing all the milieus and concrete proposals, I wonder whether closing the remainder of the whole discussion as a ''whole'' is possible. If not, how about separately closing ] (including Break 1), ], and ]? ] (]) 02:52, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]


== Administrative discussions ==
====] ====
<!--
Could an experience and uninvolved editor close the following RFC. It relates to the wording in both ] and ]. {{Initiated|12:01, 7 March 2017 (UTC)}} ] (]) 23:06, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Please place entries ordered by the date the discussion was initiated (oldest at top)
:{{replyto|Casprings}} After just over four days? --] &#x1f339; (]) 00:04, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
::{{replyto|Redrose64}} Yeah, you are right.] (]) 15:15, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
:::{{replyto|Redrose64}} I think now it's time. -- ] (]) 08:53, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I think we have enough time and enough people have taken part in the discussion.] (]) 11:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


Please ensure you add the {{initiated|date here}} template when placing a request here
====]====
Would an experienced editor assess consensus at ] {{Initiated|15 February 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 01:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! &nbsp;Let a bot do it. &nbsp;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 -->
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|6 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 03:16, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


====]==== === ]===
{{initiated|17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)}} challenge of close at AN was archived ''']''' - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|17 February 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 03:16, 26 March 2017 (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===
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}


== Requests for comment ==
====]====
<!--
Requesting uninvolved closer. {{Initiated|7 March 2017|done=no}} --] (]) 23:27, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Please place entries ordered by the date the RFC was initiated (oldest at top)


Please ensure you add the {{initiated|*date here*}} template when placing a request here
====]====
Could an uninvolved user please assess the consensus of this discussion and close it? You'll have to drag it out of the archive in order to do so. Thanks! {{Initiated|5 February 2017}} ] (]) 04:05, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


*** 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. ***
====]====
-->
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|28 February 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 04:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


====]==== === ] ===
{{initiated|22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)}} Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. ] (]) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|8 March 2017|done=yes}}? Thanks, ] (]) 04:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
:{{relisted}} due to low participation. ] (]) 07:33, 16 April 2017 (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)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|6 March 2017|done=yes}}? Thanks, ] (]) 04:58, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
:{{a note}} This is a ] and subject to ]. - ] (]) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{Relisted}}:-<span style="font-size:17px">]<sup>]</sup></span> 06:16, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
:'''] ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)</small>


===]===
====]====
{{Initiated|03:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)}}
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|10 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Discussion is slowing significantly. Likely no consensus, personally. ] (]) 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. <span class="nowrap">] (]) <small>(please ] me on reply)</small></span> 03:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
====]====
:{{Doing}} <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 13:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|22 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
::{{yo|Compassionate727}} Still working on this? — ]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub> 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. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 22:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Taking a pause is fair. Just wanted to double check. — ]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub> 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. ] (]) 16:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
====]====
{{initiated|19:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)}} RfC has elapsed, and uninvolved closure is requested. — <span style="background: linear-gradient(#990000,#660000)">]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub></span> 15:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|24 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


===]===
====]====
{{Initiated|18:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)}} This RfC expired five days ago, has an unclear consensus, I am involved, and discussion has died down. ]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|21 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


=== ] ===
====]====
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|15 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC) {{initiated|16:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)}} ] (]) 17:50, 20 December 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)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|21 March 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


====]==== ===]===
{{Initiated|22:51, 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.] (]) 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at ] {{Initiated|19 January 2017}}? Thanks, ] (]) 05:07, 23 April 2017 (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. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)


=== Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
====]====
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}
Although there is clear consensus, there is also high contention, so would an uninvolved editor, please close this? {{Initiated|01 April 2017|type=rfc|done=}}? Thanks, --] (]) 17:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
<!-- Place this line below the heading:
{{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.
-->


== Deletion discussions ==
====]====
{{XFD backlog|right}}
{{Initiated|17 February 2017|type=rfc|done=}} Would an uninvolved admin please assess the consensus at this RfC and perform a close? Thank you. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">] ]</span> 03:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|00:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)|type=xfd}} ] ] 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|21:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)|type=xfd}} ] ] 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|23:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)|type=xfd}} ] ] 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|16:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)|type=xfd}} If there is consensus to do one of the history splitting operations but the closer needs help implementing it I would be willing to oblige. ] ] 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
=== ] ===
{{initiated|12:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)|type=xfd}} ] ] 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
=== Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}


== Other types of closing requests ==
====]====
<!--
Needs uninvolved closer. {{Initiated|26 March 2017|type=rfc|done=no}} ] (]) 07:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Please place entries ordered by the date the discussion was initiated (oldest at top).


Please ensure you add the {{initiated|*date here*}} template when placing a request here.
====]====
Needs uninvolved closer. {{Initiated|15 April 2017|type=rfc|done=no}} --] (]) 23:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
:As the person who started the RfC, I endorse this request for closure. Could a neutral admin please close it? Thanks. ] (]) 18:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


*** 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. ***
====]====
-->
I know this was just opened, but this was opened after a community consensus was reached and the user who disagreed with it didn't want to honor the community's thoughts. I would like a speedy closure as the user is being disruptive and preventing the community's decision from being enforced. The consensus is also nearly ]. (I expect the disruptive editor to show up here and say I personally attacked him by pointing out his disruption.) {{Initiated|28 April 2017|type=rfc|done=no}} <small>''']''' (])</small> 13:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
:Just wanted to clarify that the RfC was opened with the question '''''"Can editors make subjective claims based on the primary-source episodes without providing a cite (timestamp and quote) as to what exactly was said?"''''', this is hardly going against the consensus as the editor {{ping|Tenebrae}} who opened the RfC has concerns about the consensus decision not being correctly sourced. ] (]) 15:58, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
::Concur. No consensus was reached to allow editors to insert their own POV interpretations of vague statements. As for personal attacks, I can point to several by ] at the RfC and an uncivil, off-topic and unnecessarily personal post on my talk page, so as the saying goes, consider the source. --] (]) 20:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
:::And like clockwork, the two disruptive editors have shown up to disrupt more because they failed to get their way originally. Regarding the "personal attack" I supposedly made, I will point out the . <small>''']''' (])</small> 21:31, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
::::Not sure why editing one's user page is suddenly a bone of contention. And, really, did he count my individual edits over several years? That's amazing and a little worrisome. Regardless, my user page has nothing whatsoever to do with the RfC, so "I recommend you worry less about your edit count" was a needlessly personal, completely tangential comment that was designed to be nothing except an attack. It certainly doesn't involve the issue at the RfC. --] (]) 21:44, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


===]===
::::And actually, except for ] and other other editor, every one of the multiple other editors at the RfC are treating it responsibly and maturely, and no one except Nihlus Kryik and the other are making any "disruption" claims. -=-] (]) 21:46, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
{{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)


=== ] ===
:::::::And I guess if he's going to bring up edit counts, I'd note that Nihlus Kryik is a newbie who began editing in late 2016, when he made exactly eight edits. and then suddenly this month showed up solely on the ''RuPaul's Drag Race'' pages to insist on violating OR and to insult and denigrate longtime editors who have contributed for years to Misplaced Pages. I'm not sure why he feels an expert on Misplaced Pages policy and guidelines, when he certainly doesn't under ], at least --] (]) 21:50, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
{{initiated|11:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)}} Experienced closer requested. &#8213;]&nbsp;] 13:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)


===]===
:::::And your only argument at this point what other editors are doing. So keep disrupting the wiki. Your behavior will be brought to ] in time. <small>''']''' (])</small> 21:48, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
{{initiated|14:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)}} This needs formal closure by someone uninvolved. ] (]) 03:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
<!-- -------------- Place new discussions above this line
: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. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 14:15, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} -->


===]===
=== Deletion discussions ===
{{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)
==== ] ====
Several entries are open despite the discussion having concluded. {{Initiated|26 March 2017}} ] (]) 00:12, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


===] ===
==== ] ====
Discussion has been open almost four weeks. --] (]) 17:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC) {{initiated| 21:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC) |type=rm}} RM that has been open for over a month. ] (]) 02:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)


===]===
<!-- -------------- Place new discussions above this line
{{initiated|11:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion seems to have stopped. As the proposal is not uncontroversial, and I, as the initiator, am involved, I am requesting an uninvolved editor to close the discussion. ] (] • ]) 11:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} -->


===]===
===Other types of closing requests===
{{initiated|00:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)|type=drv}} ] ] 19:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
====]====
=== Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading ===
{{initiated|07:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)|type=mrv|done=yes}} Started in March with the last comment being on April 3rd. Well over the seven day listing period. ] (]) 17:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}
:: {{done}}. ] (]) 15:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
====]====
: {{Initiated|17 January 2017|type=merge}} Stale discussion, needs someone to put it out of its misery please. ]] 08:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
:: {{relisted}} for RFC to increase participation. --] (]) 09:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 06:12, 28 December 2024

"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 and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

    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 14 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 12 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 81 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 60 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)

    Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Grey_Literature

    (Initiated 48 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)

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

    (Initiated 44 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: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 42 days ago on 15 November 2024) This RfC expired five days ago, has an unclear consensus, I am involved, and discussion has died down. JJPMaster (she/they) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

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

    (Initiated 37 days ago on 20 November 2024) TompaDompa (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Israel#RfC

    (Initiated 35 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)

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

    (Initiated 19 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)

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

    Deletion discussions

    XFD backlog
    V Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
    CfD 0 0 0 44 44
    TfD 0 0 0 3 3
    MfD 0 0 0 1 1
    FfD 0 0 1 1 2
    RfD 0 0 4 50 54
    AfD 0 0 0 0 0

    Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#List of Neverwinter Nights characters

    (Initiated 59 days ago on 30 October 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2024 November 27#File:The Musician (Erling Blöndal Bengtsson) by Ólöf Pálsdóttir.jpg

    (Initiated 30 days ago on 27 November 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2024 December 2#File:Batman superman.PNG

    (Initiated 25 days ago on 2 December 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Est. 2021/sandbox/CURRENT

    (Initiated 22 days ago on 5 December 2024) If there is consensus to do one of the history splitting operations but the closer needs help implementing it I would be willing to oblige. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2024 December 9#File:Golden Lion size.jpg

    (Initiated 18 days ago on 9 December 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 20:02, 26 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 94 days ago on 25 September 2024) Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. Andre🚐 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

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

    (Initiated 72 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 70 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:Winter fuel payment abolition backlash#Merge proposal

    (Initiated 60 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:Stadion Miejski (Białystok)#Requested move 5 November 2024

    (Initiated 52 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:Shiv Sena#Merge proposal

    (Initiated 30 days ago on 27 November 2024) Discussion seems to have stopped. As the proposal is not uncontroversial, and I, as the initiator, am involved, I am requesting an uninvolved editor to close the discussion. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 11:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2024 December 2#Rafael de Orleans e Bragança

    (Initiated 26 days ago on 2 December 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 19:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

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

    Categories: