Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:29, 13 August 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.

• WP:ANRFC
• WP:AN/RFC

Archives

1, 2, 3

Thank you to closing admins

Thank you, Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), The Blade of the Northern Lights (talk · contribs), Drmies (talk · contribs), and other admins for your considered closures of the RfCs mentioned on this board. I am deeply grateful for your help in assessing the consensuses in these discussions. Thank you, Armbrust (talk · contribs), for keeping this board cleared of fulfilled requests. Cunard (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, ThaddeusB (talk · contribs), Armbrust (talk · contribs), and other closers for your thoughtful closures. Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Requests for closure

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Expansion of Ban Appeals Subcommittee

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Expansion of Ban Appeals Subcommittee? Initiated 27 May 2012, the discussion was listed and archived from Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The RfC was initiated by an arbitrator. I am not sure that the ArbCom intends it to be closed by a random administrator.  Sandstein  18:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I have asked Arbitrator SilkTork (talk · contribs) to take a look. Cunard (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

The Committee are in discussion on the matter, but the RfC was not an ArbCom initiative, it was started by a Committee member, but acting as a community member, as was made clear by one of the clerks - ]; as such any uninvolved admin may close the RfC with a summary of the discussion that the Committee will take on board. I took part in the discussion, so it would be inappropriate for me to close it. SilkTork 19:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment#Israel

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment#Israel (see the subsection at Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment#RFC: the inclusion/exclusion of various incidents of discrimination and intolerance against Christians in Israel)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Lamia (Dungeons & Dragons)#Pathfinder reference and Talk:Lamia (Dungeons & Dragons)#Kenzer reference

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Lamia (Dungeons & Dragons)#Pathfinder reference and Talk:Lamia (Dungeons & Dragons)#Kenzer reference (initiated 25 June 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Jared Lee Loughner#RFC: To atheist or not to atheist

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Jared Lee Loughner#RFC: To atheist or not to atheist (initiated 29 June 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Now archived at Talk:Jared_Lee_Loughner/Archive_3#RFC:_To_atheist_or_not_to_atheist. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 07:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Now un-archived. Please close the discussion. Could someone determine if this edit by another user forced the archiving of an RfC awaiting a close? Viriditas (talk) 09:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that edit has made the bot archive the section. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 09:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Note that the RFC Bot had removed the RFC notice automatically, as RFC's expire automatically at 30 days of age. This occurred PRIOR to my edit. Safiel (talk) 16:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I will place a Do Not Archive template on that thread to prevent it from rearchiving prior to admin closure. Safiel (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 89#Reference Tooltips

At Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure/Archive 3#Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Reference Tooltips, David1217 (talk · contribs) wrote that "Closure is no longer necessary. A VPM discussion closed as (rough) support for enabling ReferenceTooltips by default, and the relevant MediaWiki gadgets page has been modified to make the tooltips default." I cannot find the VPM discussion that was closed with rough support for enabling Reference Tooltips by default. Would David1217 or another user who knows the location of the discussion close Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 89#Reference Tooltips with a pointer to the VPM discussion to provide documentation? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The VPM discussion is already archived at Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_38#ReferenceTooltips. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 07:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the link, Armbrust, but I don't see how the discussion was "closed as (rough) support for enabling ReferenceTooltips by default", as stated by David1217 (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 00:35, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Well I don't know, but Reference Tooltips were enabled as defeault, as I have to opt-out. Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 05:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Would someone summarize the discussion's consensus for documentation purposes and link to any Bugzilla request (if there is any) that implemented Reference Tooltips? Cunard (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Abortion#Usually back in lead?

Would an admin summarize the consensus at Talk:Abortion#Usually back in lead? (initiated 25 June 2012)? I have placed a new RfC tag at Talk:Abortion#New Proposal (initiated 30 July 2012) to attract more participants. The RfC was closed by RoyBoy (talk · contribs) at Talk:Abortion#Close as having consensus to add "primarily" to the lead, but the close was contested by Parent5446 (talk · contribs) who advanced a new proposal at Talk:Abortion#New Proposal. Does the first discussion have consensus to implement RoyBoy's change, or should the RfC closure be delayed until there has been a 30-day discussion of the new proposal? I will let the closing admin decide. Cunard (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Shrimp#Request for comment

The discussion at Talk:Shrimp#Request for comment has been at times contentious, with users contesting closer John (talk · contribs)'s neutrality. Would a completely uninvolved admin assess the consensus at Talk:Shrimp#Request for comment, taking into account this comment by John (talk · contribs) and this comment by Dennis Brown (talk · contribs), two admins who were asked to review the discussion? Cunard (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Offender9000

Would an admin summarize the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Offender9000 (initiated 25 June 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 90#suppressredirect

Would an admin summarize the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 90#suppressredirect (initiated 22 June 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Darrell Issa#Sandra Fluke (revisited)

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Darrell Issa#Sandra Fluke (revisited) (initiated 1 July 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Macclesfield Bank#China and Taiwan

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Macclesfield Bank#China and Taiwan (initiated 11 June 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#RfC - Handling promotional usernames

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#RfC - Handling promotional usernames (initiated 2 July 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Informing new creators of article guidelines

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Informing new creators of article guidelines (initiated 5 July 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Activate section 0 edit link for everyone

Would an admin assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Activate section 0 edit link for everyone (initiated 12 July 2012)? If the consensus is to activate the section 0 edit link, would the closing admin or a user with a bugzilla account file a report there? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#User page redirects to article space and Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#Recent change

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#User page redirects to article space and Misplaced Pages talk:User pages#Recent change? Because the sections discuss the same topic, I recommend that the closer make the latter link a subsection of the first one and then assess the consensus in the overall discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

1st  Closed by The Blade of the Northern Lights (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust, B.Ed. _{The Undertaker 20–0} 08:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Template talk:FoP-USonly#RFC: Does US FoP apply to foreign works?

Would an admin assess the consensus at Template talk:FoP-USonly#RFC: Does US FoP apply to foreign works? (initiated 12 July 2012)? The RfC is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Political activities of the Koch brothers#RfC: Should the article include funding college programs promoting free enterprise?

Would an admin assess the consensus at Talk:Political activities of the Koch brothers#RfC: Should the article include funding college programs promoting free enterprise? (initiated 13 July 2012)? The last comment was on 4 August 2012. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:25, 11 August 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)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Mullans and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Suntribe

A non-involved neutral admin is needed to assess the consensus for these two discussions. The Suntribe discussion has been open for more than a week and made need to be closed soon but some allegations of cavassing have been raised by a user. The Mullans AfD article is in need of some assessment of its consensus as well. Bleubeatle (talk) 12:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Note to admin - the canvassing allegations have been resolved as there was a misunderstanding by the accuser which has now been cleared up. The user above mustn't be aware of this. It may be necessary that ARBCOM action is required as the situation regarding Eurovision-related material being nominated for deletion is causing much confusion between the nominators and project members of WP:EURO. Wesley Mouse 12:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Also I just have to say that Bleubeatle is grasping for Straws here by using a false/resolved accusation of canvassing to try to influence an AfD. Peace.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Administrative backlog