Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by User2004 (talk | contribs) at 09:20, 15 June 2005 (→General user conduct: strike out /Rangerdude). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:20, 15 June 2005 by User2004 (talk | contribs) (→General user conduct: strike out /Rangerdude)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Shortcut
  • ]
For general comments and feedback, use Misplaced Pages:Village pump, and choose the proper subsection.

Ultimately, the content of Misplaced Pages is determined by making progress toward a community consensus. However, the size of Misplaced Pages prevents community members from actively following every development. As a result, sometimes it's useful to request broader opinions from the rest of the community.

This page is a way that anyone can request other Wikipedians to help them resolve difficulties and disputes in articles or talk pages. Anyone may visit any of these articles, to help them reach agreement. A good quality RFC can help contributors resolve differences, add different insights, give comments and opinions on how others might see some wording, and so on. When listing a dispute here, you should also place a notice on the appropriate talk page.

It will help the RFC process if everyone who lists something on this page tries to help out at least one other page listed here.

Dispute resolution
(Requests)
Tips
Content disputes
Conduct disputes

Overview

When to use RFC

RFC is appropriate when you want other wikipedians to visit the page, to allow a consensus or a better quality of decision, to help resolve a dispute or break a deadlock.

Before adding an entry here:

  • Whatever the nature of the dispute, the first resort should always be to discuss the problem with the other user. Try to resolve the dispute on your own first.
  • For disputes over user conduct, before requesting community comment, at least two people should have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and failed to resolve the problem.
  • Don't forget to follow Wikiquette. Wikiquette is more important in resolving a dispute, not less.

Alternatives to RFC

How to use RFC

  • To request other users to comment on an issue, add a link to the Talk page for the article, a brief neutral statement of the issue, and the date.
  • Don't sign it (except with the date), don't list the details, and don't submit arguments or assign blame.
  • On the Talk page of the article, it can help to summarize the dispute.

Responding to RFCs

  • Try not to be confrontational.
  • Mediate where possible - identify common ground, attempt to draw editors together rather than apart.
  • If necessary, educate users by referring to the appropiate Misplaced Pages policies.

Article title disputes

Most recent entries at the top. Please sign entries with the date only. (Use five tildes: ~~~~~)

  • gasoline (petrol) and petrol (gasoline). I tried using Template:car fuel and (better yet, I thought) Template:Carfuel with a paremeter to cure the split, but I think I messed up: I didn't notice till 5 minutes ago that the page was protected, and the log didn't help me resolve this. Have I been working on a protected page all this time, without even knowing it? Or did somebody else just now do a revert and protect? (I say this not to gain advantage in a dispute; that's not my style. Rather, I'm going to leave the whole thing alone until somebody can clue me in.) -- Uncle Ed (talk) 20:10, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
The page was protected against moves a week ago, because of the on-going title debate that you interrupted. Had you bothered to read the talk page (instead of dismissing a formal dispute resolution process as "bickering") you'd have known that. —Lifeisunfair 13:39, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Article content disputes

Please only list links to talk pages where two or more participants cannot reach consensus and are thus stalling progress on the article. Discussions with no new comments in over two weeks old may have dried up, in which case please talk to the people involved to determine whether the problem was resolved. Old disputes are archived in /Article content disputes archive.

Items listed on this page may be removed if you fail to try basic methods of dispute resolution.

List newer entries on top. Please sign entries with the date only. (Use five tildes: ~~~~~)
  • Race and intelligence Appropriateness of repeatedly describing an alleged IQ discrepancy's effects exclusively in racial terms (cause may errantly be assumed). Dispute over whether the article and subject need to disassociate cause and effect to a much greater degree in order to present the subject neutrally. 04:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Talk:Feces needs comment on photo. Feces page is locked and censored. 23:30, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Whistle register - Someone has been adding dubious information about an Artimius Hollins. The info seems to be added to make the poster stick out. Not to repost everything and bloat this list, the info is at Talk:Whistle register 21:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Anarchism - Conflict that has been going on for several weeks. One or two editors insist on writing the article from an obscure perspective, and refuse to make any concessions or respect community opinion. Attempts at reasonable compromise are met only with intransigence and ceaseless POV-pushing. 20:04, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Whites dispute about the genetic type of the Finns 19:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)~
  • John Morton (politician) dispute over the ethnic background 19:55, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)~
  • Country music -- dispute over the origins of country music 17:57, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Weblog -- dispute over whether a weblog should be described as a "web application". See Talk:Weblog#Not_an_application and Talk:Weblog#Not_an_application (cont). 17:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Jacko -- dispute over whether the pointer to Michael Jackson on a disambiguation page needs to mention the nickname Whacko Jacko in addition to Jacko 17:57, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages:Polish Wikipedians' notice board/Black Book -- dispute about whether a group of Wikipedians should be permitted to single out users for perceived offenses against that group and request explanations or apologies in the Misplaced Pages: project space
  • Glengarry Glen Ross -- Dispute over performance and cast information. See edit history and talk page. 23:29, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Talk:Pan Am Flight 103 - dispute about whether the addition of metric conversions is appropriate.
  • Council of Jerusalem this article needs an unbiased person to define the FACTS of the Council of Jerusalem from Acts 15. 18:31, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Roman Empire - Dispute between several users and the user Ephestion about whether the Greek language and culture was central and dominant over Latin. The question becomes much more difficult to answer if the scope of the current article includes the Roman successor Byzantine Empire, which Ephestion also includes in both the edits he makes on the article, and his arguements on the Talk Page. User Masamax believes the scope of the article should only relate to the Roman Empire as it existed until 476 AD. 12:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Dynamic theory of gravity - Dispute about the reality of the thoery: is this version or this version better? Should it be VFD? 10:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC).
  • Criticism of Misplaced Pages - Should it be merged with Misplaced Pages? Has it been appropriately merged already and can it be replaced with a redirect? 22:00, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)
  • Sega Dreamcast - The first image of the console that illustrate the article generate in last days a series of personal attacks, 3RR with a Sockpuppet (User:Marvelvsdc ~ User:24.125.136.245) involved. Doesn't have a consesus in Talk:Sega_Dreamcast page about information and encyclopedic value of the images. The article has been just protected today. --Mateusc 23:07, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Talk:Cigarette - Is it an NPOV violation for an article to claim that tobacco industry studies are "junk science"?
  • Talk:Feces needs comment on poo photo. 07:22, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) Feces - Images were moved to Images of feces. Should this article contain images of human feces?
  • Talk:Vivisection and experimentation debate and Talk:Vivisection - disagreement over whether Circumcision should be classed as Vivisection.
  • Talk:Jewish Task Force - One person thinks JTF is a hate group, the other thinks it's a civil rights organization. Page is locked and we need outside opinion on said article.
  • Talk:Khmer Rouge - Disagreement over whether to treat GRUNK (Royal Government of National Union of Kampuchea) and FUNK (National United Front of Kampuchea) as front organisations which in fact represented the Khmer Rouge, or whether they ought to be treated as genuine and separate organisations.
  • Talk:Terrorism - Descussion about whether text describing three mass-murderers, Eric Robert Rudolph, Timothy McVeigh, Baruch Goldstein, is balanced.
  • Third gender and Talk:Third gender - whether article should be merged with Gender
  • Talk:BitTorrent#Search_engines - Should the BitTorrent article link to bittorrent search engines in the external links section?
  • Time Should article begin with "Definition of Time "Time is that degree of freedom which allows a particle in space to occupy more than one position in space." "? It would be nice with a third opinion, please.
  • Abortion / Talk:Abortion - An anon is insisting a link is objective and neutral. The website adopts the term "preborn human" for all stages of pregnancy and presents facts such as suicide rates with little regard for NPOV; indicating the website is indeed pro-life in its presentation and omission of facts.
  • Talk:Aesthetic Realism - Should the article state that its founder committed suicide, or use a euphemism? Is Aesthetic Realism known for its artistic reflections, or its claim to "change" people from homosexuality?
  • AIDS/Talk:AIDS - is the Bangui definition still used? Is the connection between HIV and diagnosed AIDS cases less strong than is commony supposed? Is medical transmission of AIDS a major factor in Sub-saharan Africa?
  • Human — argument over the accuracy of the summary.

Comment about individual users

This section is for discussing specific users who have allegedly violated Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. In order to request comment about a user, please follow the instructions to create a subpage in the appropriate section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in the Article content disputes section above.

Before listing any user conduct dispute here, at least two people should have tried to resolve the same issue by discussing it with the subject on his or her talk page or the talk pages involved in the dispute. This must involve the same dispute or concern the same disputed type(s) of activity, not different ones.

Once the request for comment is open, these two people must document their individual efforts, provide evidence that those efforts have failed to produce change, and sign the comment page. Requests for comment which do not meet these minimum requirements after 48 hours from creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.

Old discussions are kept in Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct disputes archive.

General user conduct

Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using the following sample listing as a template (anything within {...} are notes):

  • /Example user - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

  • /Rangerdude - Personal attacks. Withdrawn in favor of mediation.
  • /Davenbelle and Stereotek Allegations: removing other people's edits, enforcing rules out of context
  • /Ted Wilkes - personal attacks, repeatedly deleting comments by other users, ignoring several warnings by administrators, but continuing to call another user a liar, accusing same user of "fraud", "deliberate misinformation", "unfounded statements and outright fabrication", "distortions", a "disinformation campaign", etc.
  • /152.163.100.138 - Edit-warring, personal attacks, posting of misinformation

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

  • /211.28.*.* aka "Time Cube Guy" - Allegations: repeatedly inserting contested material, revert warring, not responding to discussion, ignoring the opinions of all other users, using numerous IP addresses which allows for evasion of blocking
  • /Nick Boulevard - POV, personal attacks, persistent copyright violation
  • /68.170.0.238 - the "stop drinking soda" vandal, persistent POV edits, numerous warnings, vandalism
  • /Argyrosargyrou - 3RR rule, POV & nationalism, abuse of VfD process, namecalling
  • /Emico - extreme bias, violation of 3RR rule, user baiting, disregard for Wikiquette
  • /214.13.4.151 - NPOV, failure to discuss
  • /Mlorrey - dispute over NPOV and inclusion of POV, especially in regards to gun control issues
  • /64.62.161.12 - block evasion, sockpuppet, 3RR, incivility, trolling, user-baiting, disruption, disregard for Misplaced Pages policy.
  • /Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 2 - 3RR, personal attacks, bad-faith editing
  • /Zivinbudas - Edit warring, 3RR violations, personal attacks

Use of administrator privileges

This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Misplaced Pages:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

  • /Example admin - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~


As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Choice of username

If you believe someone has chosen an inappropriate username under Misplaced Pages's username policy, you may create a subpage here to discuss whether the user should be forced to change usernames. However, before listing the user here, please first contact the user on his or her talk page and give them an opportunity to change usernames voluntarily.

New listings here, please

User dispute archive

General convention and policy issues

More proposed conventions and policies can be found at Category:Misplaced Pages proposals.

List newer entries on top. Please sign entries with the date only. (Use five tildes: ~~~~~)

Archived convention disputes

Categories: