Misplaced Pages:Closure requests: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 19:00, 23 May 2012 editHasteur (talk \| contribs)31,857 edits →Requests for closure: Request close on an RfC/U so that we can move on and close down a venue for soapboxing.← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:03, 23 May 2012 edit undoJohn J. Bulten (talk \| contribs)12,763 edits Move request to prior request that duplicated itNext edit →
Line 80:		Line 80:
	:<small>Moved from AN. ] (]) 19:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)</small>		:<small>Moved from AN. ] (]) 19:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)</small>
	I would like someone to look at ]; there is a "view" subscribed to by a large enough number of editors at ] and a move to close at ]. Editor in question has had ample opportunity to show a dedication to cease disruptive editing (in this case, filibustering and stalling) and has not seized that opportunity. This has been running since 12 May. Thank you in advance. ] (]) 15:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)		I would like someone to look at ]; there is a "view" subscribed to by a large enough number of editors at ] and a move to close at ]. Editor in question has had ample opportunity to show a dedication to cease disruptive editing (in this case, filibustering and stalling) and has not seized that opportunity. This has been running since 12 May. Thank you in advance. ] (]) 15:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

		⚫	==== ] ====
			:<small>Moved from later on this board. ] 19:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)</small>
		⚫	After attempting multiple times to get some sort of acknowledgment of the issues at hand we see a widining circle of disruption on multiple pages (Now at WP:SPI) therefore I request an uninvolved admin to step in and close down the soapbox. In no way am I advocating for any action to be taken in response to the contents of the RfC/U. I am simply asking for the closure as it is obvious to me that there will be no negotiated agreement between the certifiers and the respondant. ] (]) 19:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

	=== Request close of quadruple RM ===		=== Request close of quadruple RM ===
Line 131:		Line 135:
	#]		#]
	After reviewing an entry, please post a comment on the requester's talk page because the requester may no longer be watching the page after such a lengthy period of time. ] may be useful. Thank you, ] (]) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)		After reviewing an entry, please post a comment on the requester's talk page because the requester may no longer be watching the page after such a lengthy period of time. ] may be useful. Thank you, ] (]) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

⚫	=== ] ===
⚫	After attempting multiple times to get some sort of acknowledgment of the issues at hand we see a widining circle of disruption on multiple pages (Now at WP:SPI) therefore I request an uninvolved admin to step in and close down the soapbox. In no way am I advocating for any action to be taken in response to the contents of the RfC/U. I am simply asking for the closure as it is obvious to me that there will be no negotiated agreement between the certifiers and the respondant. ] (]) 19:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:03, 23 May 2012

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.

Shortcuts

Archives

1, 2

Requests for closure

Talk:Anti-Pakistan_sentiment#Request_for_comment

Would someone be so kind as to close out this RFC? Darkness Shines (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User's archive of deleted articles and other MfDs

Would an admin (or admins) close:

~~Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)~~ closed. Jafeluv (talk) 06:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wtshymanski/Griping
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:PuppyOnTheRadio/score thing2
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Wimpy Kid (2nd nomination) - closed by TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs). Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 23:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Chemical ASCII-art - closed by Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 12:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User's archive of deleted articles - closed by Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 12:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Big Bang#RfC: Which draft should be selected?

Please close Talk:Big Bang#RfC: Which draft should be selected?, thanks!! – Lionel 08:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

N Not done, thirty days have not yet elapsed, and the latest comment is only four days old. Sandstein 09:06, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Comment The 30 days of RFC will elapse will be reached on 23 May 2012. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 18:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Nation of Islam RfC

Could an uninvolved administrator close the RfC at Talk:Nation of Islam#RfC. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 13:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2012 April 30#The Queen's Award for Enterprise: International Trade (Export) (1966)

This is archived but there is still one DRV open. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Reposting this as it was removed under the mistaken assumption that it was the same DRV from another post. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:39, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Jennifer Hudson#Splitting "Family murders"?

It's been eight days since the original post. What is the result of this discussion? --George Ho (talk) 09:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Fæ

Would an admin summarize Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Fæ? A close was requested at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 1#Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Fæ, and the RfC was delisted due to inactivity but was not summarized. A summary will allow the subject and participants to have a third-party list the RfC's findings.

When I saw http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=493621214#User:Fae at WP:AN, I reviewed the RfC/U and found that unlike the most recent RfC/Us at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive it had not been summarized.

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Philip Baird Shearer#Summary and Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/GoodDay are two excellent examples of how complex RfC/Us are summarized. Cunard (talk) 07:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Discussion originally closed by Nobody Ent (talk · contribs). Left a note for him. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 10:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

No consensus was reached. I closed it per iar as no one else seemed willing to it. My more personal summary may be found here. Nobody Ent 20:27, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Added a note to the top of the page pointing to the summary of the RFC/U , and I think this can be marked as {{done}}. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 21:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Your close was (correctly) reverted by another editor because the close merely linked to WT:Requests for comment/Fæ#summary which is a very sarcastic (but accurate) summary of the situation. Johnuniq (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Umm, no, it's not correct to revert in such a situation. It's fine to disagree but not to unilaterally overturn it. Prioryman (talk) 07:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

BTW it's not even my close, I just linked to the closer's summary. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 08:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Whether it was meant to be sarcastic or serious or a mixture of both, a comment that refers to other editors as "a bunch of homophobes" should have been stricken from the RfC's talk page entirely, not propped up as an honest evaluation of the matter. Tarc (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

In that case, the RFC/U still needs a proper summary. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 15:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I would have thought it obvious that "a bunch of homophobes" was Nobody Ent's (admittedly sarcastic) summary of one of the arguments put forward in the RfC/U. It's very obvious from the context and tone of his summary that he's attempting to reflect the various arguments in a relatively lighthearted fashion. I'm sure that some will be upset that he's declined to take the outcome of the RfC/U seriously, which is quite understandable given what a circus it was and what a thorough mess it ended up being. Prioryman (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding "reading comprehension needed?", I would say that our comprehension is working just fine, thanks. I addressed the possibility of sarcasm in my comment here earlier, but wil note again that even if it was intended was sarcasm, it was still inappropriate. It would be preferable if someone else provided a mature and serious summation of the RfC. Tarc (talk) 19:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Super_Tuesday,_2012#Merge

Discussion was open for more than one month is inactive since 26 April 2012. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 15:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Another request for closure

Moved from AN. Jafeluv (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I would like someone to look at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Agent00f; there is a "view" subscribed to by a large enough number of editors at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Agent00f#View_by_Drmies and a move to close at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Agent00f#Move_to_close. Editor in question has had ample opportunity to show a dedication to cease disruptive editing (in this case, filibustering and stalling) and has not seized that opportunity. This has been running since 12 May. Thank you in advance. Drmies (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/Agent00f#Move to close

Moved from later on this board. JJB 19:03, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

After attempting multiple times to get some sort of acknowledgment of the issues at hand we see a widining circle of disruption on multiple pages (Now at WP:SPI) therefore I request an uninvolved admin to step in and close down the soapbox. In no way am I advocating for any action to be taken in response to the contents of the RfC/U. I am simply asking for the closure as it is obvious to me that there will be no negotiated agreement between the certifiers and the respondant. Hasteur (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Request close of quadruple RM

Moved from AN. Jafeluv (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

(I hope this is the right place to make a request of this type. If not, please let me know.)

Namely:

Books of Chronicles → Book of Chronicles
Books of Samuel → Book of Samuel
Books of Kings → Book of Kings
Book of Kings → Book of Kings (disambiguation)

It's been at the backlog for nearly a month and is quite stale at this point, I believe. Both sides had good points, and I wish we could have gotten a wider range of input. There is no clear consensus at the moment, however, and it doesn't look as though one is going to develop any time soon. Evanh2008 (talk) (contribs) 18:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The actual discussion can be found at Talk:Books_of_Chronicles#Requested_move. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 21:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

closed - jc37 12:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

RfC on Deaths in 2012

An RfC concerning reference style that was opened on April 12. Danger! 22:44, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#Site xuarez.comoj.com and other requests

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist has a severe backlog; the oldest entries date from January. Would an admin (or admins) review:

After reviewing an entry, please post a comment on the requester's talk page because the requester may no longer be watching the page after such a lengthy period of time. MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist/Indicators may be useful. Thank you, Cunard (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:

Administrative backlog