Misplaced Pages

:Closure requests - 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 StAnselm (talk | contribs) at 22:29, 18 April 2013 (Undid revision 550989535 by SlimVirgin (talk) - restored archived discussions, many of which still need to be closed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:29, 18 April 2013 by StAnselm (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 550989535 by SlimVirgin (talk) - restored archived discussions, many of which still need to be closed)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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
    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.

    Archives
    Index
    Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
    Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
    Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
    Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
    Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
    Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
    Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21
    Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24
    Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27
    Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30
    Archive 31Archive 32Archive 33
    Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36
    Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39

    This page has archives. Sections older than 40 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
    Shortcuts


    The Requests for closure noticeboard is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close a discussion on Misplaced Pages. Most discussions do not need formal closure.

    The RfC Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/Archive 12#Review discussed how to appeal RfC closures and whether an administrator should summarily overturn a non-administrator's RfC closure.


    Please post new requests at the end of the appropriate section(s).

    Requests for closure

    Article namespace

    Talk:Frank L. VanderSloot#Synthesis and sources and Talk:Frank L. VanderSloot#Request for Comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Frank L. VanderSloot#Synthesis and sources (initiated 19 October 2012 and a subsection of which is Talk:Frank L. VanderSloot#Request for Comment) and Talk:Frank L. VanderSloot#Request for Comment 2 (initiated 15 November 2012). I have not read the two discussions, though both may be related to the same issue and should likely be considered by the same closer. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

     Comment: First discussion is now archived at Talk:Frank_L._VanderSloot/Archive_4#Synthesis_and_sources. Armbrust 13:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

    Talk:Meša Selimović#Ethnicity and understanding of "nacionalnost" in former Yugoslavia

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Meša Selimović#Ethnicity and understanding of "nacionalnost" in former Yugoslavia (initiated 13 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Comment Discussion now archived at Talk:Meša Selimović/Archives/2012/November. Armbrust 13:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of indigenous peoples#RfC: Should the Palestinians be included on the list on the basis of tacit UN recognition since at least 2009?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of indigenous peoples#RfC: Should the Palestinians be included on the list on the basis of tacit UN recognition since at least 2009? (initiated 14 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Turkish people#RFC: Related ethnic groups

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Turkish people#RFC: Related ethnic groups (initiated 4 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Chiropractic#RfC perspective from new set of eyes

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Chiropractic#RfC perspective from new set of eyes (initiated 7 January 2013)? The RfC tag was removed, and tempers seem to be running high; see Talk:Chiropractic#What else do you suggest?. Feel free to move this to the premature requests section if a close at this time would be premature. Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Trouble (Leona Lewis song)#How is iTunes messed up

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Trouble (Leona Lewis song)#How is iTunes messed up (initiated 1 December 2012)? There is disagreement over whether iTunes is an acceptable source to use for the song's release date? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations#RfC:Is the discussed GetEducated.com article credible to be used as a Reliable Source?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations#RfC:Is the discussed GetEducated.com article credible to be used as a Reliable Source? (initiated 17 October 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    I commented there, but it still needs another pair of eyes and hands. Chutznik (talk) 05:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Nayirah (testimony)#RfC: Nayirah (testimony) and Citizens for a Free Kuwait

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Nayirah (testimony)#RfC: Nayirah (testimony) and Citizens for a Free Kuwait (initiated 16 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:La Luz del Mundo#RfC: Should the Controversies section be merged into the History section?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:La Luz del Mundo#RfC: Should the Controversies section be merged into the History section? (initiated 20 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Rape culture#Request for comment: Rape culture and incidents by nation

    There is a great deal of material that has primarily been edited by User:Media-hound- thethird, probably a political activist who has now been indef-banned for POV-pushing and WP:BATTLE. The consensus is clear. Mr T 06:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

    From Proposed Mergers noticeboard

    Copied here by GenQuest 20:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC) without comment:

    A merge request between Wuffa of East Anglia and Wuffingas was proposed, without the normal procedure being followed. Several editors have opposed or commented on the proposed merge. I have closed the discussion as nothing has been added to it for several weeks. Please can an experienced administrator help reach a consensus? Hel-hama (talk) 09:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Ethiopia#Pictures

    There is even consesus on closure. — አቤል ዳዊት(Janweh64) (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Heart_and_Soul_(1938_song)#Merge

    Would an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close the discussion at Talk:Heart_and_Soul_(1938_song)#Merge per this suggestion? Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)/Archive 1

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)/Archive 1#Request for comment (initiated 30 December 2012). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

     Done Chutznik (talk) 18:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of Puerto Ricans/Archives/2013/January#Splitting this article into multiple articles

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of Puerto Ricans/Archives/2013/January#Splitting this article into multiple articles (initiated 3 January 2013). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:John Calvin#RfC: Including Anglican sainthood / Lutheran commemoration

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:John Calvin#RfC: Including Anglican sainthood / Lutheran commemoration (initiated 1 February 2013)? The question posed was: "There are two questions here. (1) Should the categories that are currently in the article (Category:Anglican saints, Category:Renewers of the church) be retained? (2) Should this information be presented in the article (which it currently isn't)?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Juan Manuel de Rosas#RfC: Use of Nationalist/Revisionist sources on Juan Manuel de Rosas

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Juan Manuel de Rosas#RfC: Use of Nationalist/Revisionist sources on Juan Manuel de Rosas (initiated 4 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Jared Diamond#RfC - Is BLP violated by mentioning dropped lawsuit against Diamond?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jared Diamond#RfC - Is BLP violated by mentioning dropped lawsuit against Diamond? (initiated 11 February 2013)? The question posed was: "Can the 2009 libel lawsuit against Diamond be mentioned in the article without violating the WP:BLP policy? If so, how much detail should be included?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#RfC on the lead

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#RfC on the lead (initiated 18 February 2013)? See also the close request at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Closing above discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Blanking of content verified by multiple reliable sources

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Blanking of content verified by multiple reliable sources (initiated 27 February 2013)? The discussion is about this edit to the article. Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Public Relations Society of America#RFC Take 2

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Public Relations Society of America#RFC Take 2 (initiated 30 December 2012)? The questions posed were:

    1. What is the preferred location for the Controversy section?
    2. Is the current controversy section neutral? If not, how can it be improved?

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Pi Kappa Alpha#RfC: Weight and treatment of controversial incidents

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Pi Kappa Alpha#RfC: Weight and treatment of controversial incidents (initiated 7 January 2013)?

    Please also consider the RfC closure of Talk:Pi Kappa Alpha#Request for Comment: Butt-chugging incident, which was mentioned in the "Weight and treatment of controversial incidents" RfC.

    The question posed was: "Should controversial incidents at individual chapters of an organization with over 200 local chapters be included while the article is so short?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam International Airport#RFC: Destination map and airport images

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam International Airport#RFC: Destination map and airport images (initiated 1 February 2013)? The question posed was: " Is the Destination Map and the Image of the Airport (Image 1, Image 2) not per Misplaced Pages:AIRPORT-CONTENT and should be removed?" Please note: The images linked in the opening post are red links, but I cannot find entries in the deletion log for them. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Marseille#RfC: Is mention of unrest relevant to this article?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Marseille#RfC: Is mention of unrest relevant to this article? (initiated 21 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles#Use Mapping L.A. as reliable source?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles#Use Mapping L.A. as reliable source? (initiated 29 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Aćif Hadžiahmetović#RfC: Iron Cross claim

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Aćif Hadžiahmetović#RfC: Iron Cross claim (initiated 11 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Rape culture#Request for comment: Rape culture and incidents by nation

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Rape culture#Request for comment: Rape culture and incidents by nation (initiated 28 January 2013)? Please see also Talk:Rape culture#Proposal : Wrap-Up. There are also two other RfCs on the page Talk:Rape culture#Request for comment II and Talk:Rape culture#Request for comment III. "Request for comment III" is ongoing, but I do not know how these two RfCs will factor into closing the first one. Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Shark Island Extermination Camp#Request for comment: what is the common name of the historical camp at Shark Island?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Shark Island Extermination Camp#Request for comment: what is the common name of the historical camp at Shark Island? (initiated 23 February 2013)? Please consider Talk:Shark Island Extermination Camp#Requested move in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Buchenwald Trial#Removing of external links

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Buchenwald Trial#Removing of external links (initiated 12 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Al-Ahbash#RfC

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Al-Ahbash#RfC (initiated 16 February 2013)? The RfC discusses merging (among other topics); see the 17:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC) comment by BoogaLouie (talk · contribs) who said "I'm a randomly-selected-to-comment editor". Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Look in the talk page archive at . Chutznik (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming#RFC: Is the lead currently sufficiently neutrally written?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming#RFC: Is the lead currently sufficiently neutrally written? (initiated 20 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming#RfC: Propose to move Second Paragraph to Scientific Evaluation Section

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming#RfC: Propose to move Second Paragraph to Scientific Evaluation Section (initiated 8 February 2013)? One commenter wrote on 12 February 2013 "I guess it's up to an uninvolved editor to close the RfC". Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of common misconceptions/Archive 18#RfC on Glass is a liquid misconception

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of common misconceptions/Archive 18#RfC on Glass is a liquid misconception (initiated 6 January 2013 )? The opening poster wrote: "Recently, the repeated claims that glas is a 'highly-viscous liquid' have been inserted in the article. Is this claim justified, per a consensus of the sources cited in the article and the discussion above?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Cloud computing#RfC: Limitations on list of cloud services

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cloud computing#RfC: Limitations on list of cloud services (initiated 18 January 2013)? The questions posed were: "Is there value in listing every reliably sourced cloud service in the introduction on this page? If so, should we require sources for new additions?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Cannabis (drug)#Safety section: coming to a resolution

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cannabis (drug)#Safety section: coming to a resolution (initiated 4 February 2013)? The opening poster wrote:

    We have this section tagged, and still the unresolved RfC about what good science says regarding cannabis and its effects on the heart remains. Can we bring this to a closure?

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    User talk:Tazerdadog/Tau (Proposed mathematical constant)#RFC:Article Notability

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at User talk:Tazerdadog/Tau (Proposed mathematical constant)#RFC:Article Notability (initiated 22 February 2013)? The question posed was: "Is tau notable enough for an article in mainspace under any name? If yes, a second RFC will determine the name to be used." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Nobel Prize controversies#RfC: Should the 2000 Chemistry section be removed?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Nobel Prize controversies#RfC: Should the 2000 Chemistry section be removed? (initiated 5 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Norwegian Scientific Index#RFC: inclusion of long lists of journal and publisher names

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Norwegian Scientific Index#RFC: inclusion of long lists of journal and publisher names (initiated 7 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Tornado preparedness#Merger

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Tornado preparedness#Merger (initiated 7 February 2013)? The discussion is about the merging of tornado drill into tornado preparedness. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey#RFC: Is it necessary to mention if reviews were mixed, positive, etc. in the opening of the Critical response?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey#RFC: Is it necessary to mention if reviews were mixed, positive, etc. in the opening of the Critical response? (initiated 4 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Marvel Studios#RfC: Is Disney's ownership relevant?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Marvel Studios#RfC: Is Disney's ownership relevant? (initiated 2 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Sanjuro#Sequel to Yojimbo

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Sanjuro#Sequel to Yojimbo; see the subsection Talk:Sanjuro#RFC (initiated 6 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Kyuss#Alternative metal

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Kyuss#Alternative metal (initiated 7 January 2013)? There is disagreement over whether the band Kyuss should be classified as an alternative metal. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Joseph Kony#Request for comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Joseph Kony#Request for comment (initiated 5 February 2013)? The question posed was: "Is it appropriate to use this source "Invisible Children's "Kony 2012" viral video stirs emotion and controversy". CBS News. 8 March 2012. to describe the film Kony 2012 as " controversial" in Misplaced Pages's voice in this article?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Mario Kart#Request For Comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Mario Kart#Request For Comment (initiated 6 February 2013)? The opening poster wrote:

    i am requesting comments of whether the Mario Kart article's Characters section should keep the all-inclusive but very large table it currently has, or use a proposed streamlined version separated in three sections: recurrent characters (who appear in all games, except for two characters absent from the Super game and one of these unconfirmed to appear in Arcade GP DX), console-only characters (only found in some, but not all, console games) and arcade-only characters.

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Yo, Blair#Request for Comment: "Yeah, Blair" or "Yo, Blair"

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Yo, Blair#Request for Comment: "Yeah, Blair" or "Yo, Blair" (initiated 6 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Derby sex gang#RFC on WP:BLP policy

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Derby sex gang#RFC on WP:BLP policy (initiated 20 January 2013)? The question posed was: "Do you support describing all nine people convicted as part of the sex gang?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Northern Ireland#RfC: Should the ccTLD field in this 'Infobox Country' be shown at all when it describes a part of a state; if so what should it contain.

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at:

    1. Talk:Northern Ireland#RfC: Should the ccTLD field in this 'Infobox Country' be shown at all when it describes a part of a state; if so what should it contain. (initiated 22 January 2013)
    2. Talk:Northern Ireland#Demonym (initiated 22 February 2013)

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Progressive Utilization Theory#Proposal to integrate the secondary material collected by Location into the current article

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Progressive Utilization Theory#Proposal to integrate the secondary material collected by Location into the current article (initiated 22 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)\\

    Talk:Syrian civil war#RfC: Third row for Kurdish forces

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Syrian civil war#RfC: Third row for Kurdish forces (initiated 7 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Nuclear option#RfC: How should the term "nuclear option" be defined in the lede?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Nuclear option#RfC: How should the term "nuclear option" be defined in the lede? (initiated 13 February 2013 (UTC))? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:United States National Health Care Act#Does "single payer" refer to this bill?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:United States National Health Care Act#Does "single payer" refer to this bill? (see Talk:United States National Health Care Act#RFC on Opinion polling section; initiated 20 February 2013). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Swiss Guard#Split

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Swiss Guard#Split (initiated 19 December 2012)? The opening poster wrote: "I believe that the content on the Pontifical Swiss Guard deserves to be a separate article." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:La Luz del Mundo#RfC: Is Jorge Erdely Graham a reliable source?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:La Luz del Mundo#RfC: Is Jorge Erdely Graham a reliable source? (initiated 19 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Physical determinism#RfC on two usages of 'physical determinism'

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Physical determinism#RfC on two usages of 'physical determinism' (initiated 8 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:List of Internet chess servers#RfC to resolve whether Chess.com may be included in article list

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of Internet chess servers#RfC to resolve whether Chess.com may be included in article list (initiated 22 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Will.i.am#Correction of naming error

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Will.i.am#Correction of naming error (initiated 25 September 2012)? Please also consider the related discussion Talk:Will.i.am#How did we get to this point? (middle name situation) in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Death of Reeva Steenkamp

    The consensus has already reached. --George Ho (talk) 13:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Adamsville (Atlanta)#Proposed move

    This RM about moving Atlanta neighborhoods to comma disambiguation, rather than parenthetical, seems to have narrow support. Discussion has been complicated by a few of the neighborhoods having other issues involved. Either way, the RM has run for over a month, and it's been almost a week since anyone commented there. I think it's time for a close. --BDD (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Ahmed_Ziauddin#Merger_proposal

    We would appreciate it if someone could please make a decision about this merger.Crtew (talk) 09:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Rape_and_pregnancy_controversies_in_United_States_elections,_2012#RfC_on_other_Comments_Section

    Issues of WP:SYN and WP:OR have been highly controversial in this article. I am requesting closure for that reason, even though I think consensus is rather clear.Casprings (talk) 16:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Hindutva#Merger proposal

    The merger proposal has become obsolete, as one of the articles has been deleted after an AfD discussion. Still, someone uninvolved should formally close it, as the issue is a bit politically/ethno/religiously loaded. --RJFF (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes#RfC: Should this article include other disputes involving Ugg boots?

    Would an experienced admininstrator assess the consensus and close as resolved or abandoned the RfC at Talk:Ugg boots trademark disputes. This may be a difficult closure due to the editor issues involved and advice regarding the behavior of the two main editors, User:Wayne and User:Phoenix and Winslow, would be appreciated.
    This RfC has been somewhat compromised by a supporting editor canvassing a large number of editors and asking them to vote in Support. This editor was warned not to canvass but continued, justifying it as a request to vote per WP:FRS with no knowledge on his part as to how they would vote. This editor has also posted a competing RfC with the question reframed to encourage a "support" vote. Three editors (two supporters and one who voted to abandon) want the RfC abandoned due to the above issues rather than have it closed as resolved. However, despite these problems only two of the canvassed editors voted (both in support) which has not significantly impacted on the survey result which is currently seven votes for oppose, three votes for support and one vote for abandon with no further votes made in the last seven days. Closure will require significant patience on the part of the closing admin as the discussion currently runs to 25 pages. Wayne (talk) 19:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages namespace

    Misplaced Pages talk:In the news/Recurring items#Proposal: Decommission ITN/R

    Last comment was c. one week ago, and was a question on whether the discussion should be closed. 88.88.165.222 (talk) 12:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

     Done Chutznik (talk) 22:01, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Icons

    A two part discussion on flag use in sports related articles found here and here. 88.88.165.222 (talk) 12:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs#More moderate proposal - limit number of Gibraltar-related DYKs per month

    Could someone please close this discussion — it has been running for a month and is completely deadlocked with no chance of consensus. Prioryman (talk) 21:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Simple English at top of languages

    Requesting a review of the closure and the level of consensus determined. Inconsistencies with the closing statement are detailed at the bottom. Spoke to the closing user on his talk page, but didn't get much of a response. Osiris (talk) 06:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

     Not done WP:Closure review happens thataway, not on the talk page. VanIsaacWS Vex 03:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
    What talk page? The user's talk page? Your link suggests otherwise. And this is transcluded at the top of WP:AN. As the closing user suggested, I posted here. You know, it's been about a month now anyway. I think I'll just chalk this one up as a botched NAC and walk away. Osiris (talk) 06:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
    Start a new thread on WP:AN called something like "Closure review of Simple English proposal at Village Pump". Provide a link to the previous discussion (which is in the archive now), and a neutrally worded assessment of why you think the closure was incorrect. Administrators, not the original participants, need to be able to look it over and comment on whether the closure should be changed. A review needs to happen at WP:Administrators' Noticeboard, not where the original RfC was posted (ie, the talk page mentioned above). Is that clear? PS, I had completely forgotten that this board gets transcluded to the top of WP:AN when we get backlogged. VanIsaacWS Vex 23:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Airports#New RfC

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Airports#New RfC (initiated 22 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

    The discussion is now archived at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_12#New_RfC. Armbrust 09:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Genetics/GMO articles

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Genetics/GMO articles (initiated 3 October 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

    I think this is pretty stale. I was involved in the RFC so can't close it, but we appear to have reached a general agreement on most of the issues raised. AIRcorn (talk) 20:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Eurovision#RfC on the article layout of Eurovision Song Contest by country articles

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Eurovision#RfC on the article layout of Eurovision Song Contest by country articles (initiated 13 October 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)#Actresses categorization

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)#Actresses categorization (initiated 17 October 2012)? The opening poster wrote: "I propose this motion to drop the restriction on actresses in WP:CATGRS so that we could restore Category:Actresses and foster all relevant subcats, like Category:Actresses by country." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject History#inclusion of prehistoric terms in history of country templates and vice versa

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject History#inclusion of prehistoric terms in history of country templates and vice versa (initiated 14 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#RfC on era style (BC/AD and BCE/CE)

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#RfC on era style (BC/AD and BCE/CE) (initiated 28 October 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Comment Now archived at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers/Archive_139#RfC on era style (BC/AD and BCE/CE). Armbrust 10:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Formatting of URLs in Infoboxes

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Formatting of URLs in Infoboxes (initiated 14 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Microformats#Proposal: citation microformat

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Microformats#Proposal: citation microformat (initiated 5 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 15:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#RfC: Section headings for horizontal navigation templates

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#RfC: Section headings for horizontal navigation templates (initiated 10 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Misplaced Pages "Merge" like WP:RM or WP:AFD

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Misplaced Pages "Merge" like WP:RM or WP:AFD (initiated 26 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Archived to WP:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 98#Misplaced Pages "Merge" like WP:RM or WP:AFD. Flatscan (talk) 04:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
    That link has been archived, is it now too late to close it? See also:
    —Wbm1058 (talk) 13:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
    • I second this request for a closing.  Are the technical people still working on this?  This is an ongoing point of contention at AfD, because AfD gets discussions for which there is no theoretical case for deletion.  It would help for someone to close this discussion, or at least summarize the opinion and clarify the current technical status of implementation.  Unscintillating (talk) 15:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles#Request for Comment: Regarding WP:NC-TW

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles#Request for Comment: Regarding WP:NC-TW (initiated 18 November 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content/Archive 57#RFC: Soundtrack covers in articles about other media (films, video games, etc.)

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Non-free content/Archive 57#RFC: Soundtrack covers in articles about other media (films, video games, etc.) (initiated 7 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:The Core Contest#Request for Comment: Future runnings of the Core Contest

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:The Core Contest#Request for Comment: Future runnings of the Core Contest (initiated 2 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

    The Core Contest is open; no need to close the preliminary RFC. Chutznik (talk) 03:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive781#GarnetAndBlack: Incivility, gaming the system, ownership, bad faith bias in edits, retaliatory editing

    Would an administrator assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive781#GarnetAndBlack: Incivility, gaming the system, ownership, bad faith bias in edits, retaliatory editing?

    If there is a consensus for an editing restriction, please log it at Misplaced Pages:Editing restrictions.

    Because the discussion has been archived, there are two methods to implement the close: (i) Move the discussion back to the talk page and close it and (ii) Close the discussion, keeping it in the talk page archive, and announce the result on the main page. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:25, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Administrator's noticeboard/PC2 for Mangoeater targets

    It was moved to this location from AN because inactivity had led to repeated archiving. Seems the discussion has largely ceased and should be resolved with some finding of consensus.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 18:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

    Worth noting that there were quite a few comments after the first archival. Close if you must, but I, biased as I am, think it'd be a shame to give up just yet on all the well-thought-out support rationales we've seen so far. (Unless the reviewing admin thinks the support votes win out, in which case I'm all for closure.) — PinkAmpers& 06:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages Talk:Administrators#Proposal for discussion regarding admin action by other admins who disagree

    Would an administrator or an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages Talk:Administrators#Proposal for discussion regarding admin action by other admins who disagree (initiated early January 2013)? Thanks, Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions

    RfC open since November 2009. A recent MfD closed as "Wrong venue" is also relevant: Misplaced Pages:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Songs_Cover-versions_and_multiple-renditions. Underlying question is whether cover versions of songs ever deserve their own articles. Secondary issue is whether the Wikproject section Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Songs#Cover-versions.2Fmultiple-renditions should be moved to WP:NM, since it looks like the Wikiproject guideline is being observed with the force of content policy. Redirects WP:SONGCOVER and WP:COVERDISCUSS will also need to be tidied up. --Surturz (talk) 04:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

    UPDATE: recent discussion here found consensus to add a line to WP:NSONGS to indicate that normally separate renditions are all merged into a single article about the song. That probably trumps everything that has gone before. --Surturz (talk) 05:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Maafa 21

    A request was made for neutral editors to provide an opinion on two sentences of text in Maafa 21. As assessment of the text and a recommendation for altering it has been given. Interpersonal conflicts that started elsewhere are now clogging the forum and further progress on this is unlikely to be made at this time. Thanks! Location (talk) 02:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#the God of Israel or the god of Israel

    This discussion has been dormant for over a month. Would an uninvolved admin please assess the consensus in the discussion? StAnselm (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

    CLosed by JzG. Chutznik (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Move review/Log/2013 February#riksdag

    Discussion started more than a month ago with no contributions for over two weeks. I'm involved, but someone should put it out of its misery. Favonian (talk) 20:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 137#Proposal to prevent recurrent editwarring and confusion by adjusting "Era style" section in MOS:NUM

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 137#Proposal to prevent recurrent editwarring and confusion by adjusting "Era style" section in MOS:NUM (initiated 5 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 137#Translation of patronymics

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 137#Translation of patronymics (initiated 20 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles#RfC: Is it desirable to consider that the Baltic states have existed continually since 1918?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles#RfC: Is it desirable to consider that the Baltic states have existed continually since 1918? (initiated 20 March 2013)? Please see also Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles#Closure, where an editor said he asked at Misplaced Pages:Administrator's noticeboard for an uninvolved admin to close the discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Without noticing this section, I posted a comment below (at 08:53, 23 March 2013) which I now fold into this section: "Could an uninvolved administrator close this RFC? It's more than a month old. It's also—fair warning—really long." I see that an admin has now review the RFC. Thanks! -sche (talk) 18:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Pronunciation#Propose: Where multiple pronunciation of a name exist...

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Pronunciation#Propose: Where multiple pronunciation of a name exist... (initiated 15 January 2013)? The opening poster wrote:

    Propose: that WP:PRONOUNCE be changed for articles about people for whom there are both an Anglicized(i.e. Bastardized) and Native pronunciation of a PERSON'S NAME (also applies to living people); that the Native IPA be the only pronunciation given in the lead and all other pronunciations starting with the Anglicized be listed in a footnote attached to the Native IPA. Or at least that the native IPA be listed first.

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Numbers#RfC: How much trivia belongs in number articles?

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Numbers#RfC: How much trivia belongs in number articles? (initiated 31 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Categorization#RfC - Alumni

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Categorization#RfC - Alumni (initiated 26 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    I'll take care of this. Chutznik (talk) 03:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2013/February#Request for comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)/Archives/2013/February#Request for comment (initiated 8 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 40#RfC on COMMONSTYLE proposal

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 40#RfC on COMMONSTYLE proposal (initiated 9 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Ships/Archive 36#Requesting further review of pronoun usage

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Ships/Archive 36#Requesting further review of pronoun usage (initiated 4 March 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:File names#RFC: Criterion 1

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:File names#RFC: Criterion 1 (initiated 1 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 66#RFC

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion/Archive 66#RFC (initiated 7 January 2013)? The question posed was: "Should we have a time limit for relisting debates (especially ones that have not closed yet." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship#RfC: Proposal for RfA conduct clarification (amendments to editnotice and addition to Template:RfA)

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship#RfC: Proposal for RfA conduct clarification (amendments to editnotice and addition to Template:RfA) (initiated 26 February 2013)? There have eben no comments for two weeks; the essay Misplaced Pages:Silence and consensus may be relevant. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    But there's now further opposition, so it'll perhaps depend whether there's silence regarding that too! Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 09:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for removal of adminship/Straw poll

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for removal of adminship/Straw poll (initiated 8 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Moderators/Straw poll

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Moderators/Straw poll (initiated 8 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

     Done Chutznik (talk) 03:58, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Administrators#Proposal for discussion regarding admin action by other admins who disagree

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Administrators#Proposal for discussion regarding admin action by other admins who disagree (initiated 31 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#RfC on shared accounts for use by minors

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#RfC on shared accounts for use by minors (initiated 3 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:In the news/Recurring items#Proposal: Decommission ITN/R

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:In the news/Recurring items#Proposal: Decommission ITN/R (initiated 11 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Tea Party movement; looking for community input

    Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Tea Party movement; looking for community input? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 104#Proposal:Create a capability and process to expunge a block from someone's record when all agree that it was an error

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 104#Proposal:Create a capability and process to expunge a block from someone's record when all agree that it was an error (initiated 11 January 2013)? The subsection at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 104#My premature summary, overreaching interpretation and suggested next step / revised proposal is strongly supported. Please mention https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44759 in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship/Clerks

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship/Clerks (initiated 17 January 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship#RfC: Proposal for RfA conduct clarification (amendments to editnotice and addition to Template:RfA)

    This was recently archived to Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 222. I've restored it because the discussion wasn't closed. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 07:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

    Various MfDs

    Can these be closed as keep per consensus and moved to a subpage of Misplaced Pages:April fools/April Fools' Day 2013? FrigidNinja 00:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Non-free content review#File:2012 Braves Cardinals Wild Card Game Debris.jpg

    Can someone assess the discussion and make an appropriate closing decision? -- Toshio Yamaguchi 15:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

     Done -- Dianna (talk) 19:10, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive792#User G-Zay and BLP concerns

    Can an uninvolved administrator assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive792#User G-Zay and BLP concerns? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

    Other namespaces

    Template talk:Infobox musical artist/Archive 11#Spouse, partner, and children support

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Template talk:Infobox musical artist/Archive 11#Spouse, partner, and children support (initiated 26 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Template talk:Infobox musical artist#Associated acts

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Infobox musical artist#Associated acts (initiated 27 January 2013)? The discussion is about the removal of the "Associated acts" parameter. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Template talk:COI editnotice#Request for Comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:COI editnotice#Request for Comment (initiated 5 February 2013)? The opening poster wrote:

    There are two issues that appear to need more discussion:

    1. Should this be an edit-notice for company articles or a Talk page template?

    2. Should it be added to all company articles or just those that show problematic COI behavior?

    3. Amendment: Should it be added to the Talk page AND as an editnotice?

    Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Category talk:French novels#RfC: French novels categorized as French-language novels

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Category talk:French novels#RfC: French novels categorized as French-language novels (initiated 3 February 2013)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Portal talk:Judaism#Request for Comment

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Portal talk:Judaism#Request for Comment (initiated 17 December 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

     Done Chutznik (talk) 18:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Bittergrey

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Bittergrey (initiated 28 July 2012)?

    After closing the RfC, please add the RfC to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Apostle12

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Apostle12 (initiated 21 December 2012)?

    After closing the RfC, please add the RfC to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Bluerim

    Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Bluerim (initiated 29 November 2012)? The discussion was enclosed in archive templates but was not summarized.

    After closing the RfC, please add the RfC to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 March 16#Template:Rozz Williams

    now open for over three weeks. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

    User:Jmh649/Will Beback

    It would be appreciated if an uninvolved editor would close this informal RfC (opened 23 March) regarding whether Will Beback's indefinite ban should be lifted. The arbitration committee imposed the ban in February 2012, and last month rejected Will's appeal against it. The issue may proceed to a formal request to the committee, so it would be helpful to have a summary of the RfC's consensus on the various issues. Many thanks, SlimVirgin 16:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

    I read part of the page with a thought toward closing it, but what's the point? The discussion has already moved on to so closing the RFC in the userspace page will not help. Chutznik (talk) 04:06, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
    As I said, there might be a formal approach to the arbcom, so it would help if someone completely uninvolved in past disputes with Will, BASC, or any of the individual arbs, would close and sum up the RfC. SlimVirgin 19:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

    Premature close requests

    WT:DYK#Proposed minor wording change to Gibraltarpedia restrictions

    Moved from AN. Jafeluv (talk) 12:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

    I'd be grateful if an uninvolved admin could close and summarise the discussion at WT:DYK#Proposed minor wording change to Gibraltarpedia restrictions. Prioryman (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

    This has ongoing discussion. Move to premature requests? -Nathan Johnson (talk) 15:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


    Thank you to closers

    Thank you, Laurascudder (talk · contribs), Vanisaac (talk · contribs), Salvidrim (talk · contribs), Drmies (talk · contribs), Nathan Johnson (talk · contribs), Trevj (talk · contribs), Philosopher (talk · contribs), Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), Plastikspork (talk · contribs), Joe Decker (talk · contribs), DeltaQuad (talk · contribs), Hahc21 (talk · contribs), BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs), Jenks24 (talk · contribs), MSGJ (talk · contribs), Black Kite (talk · contribs), Geni (talk · contribs), Fayenatic london (talk · contribs), Salix (talk · contribs), Ruslik0 (talk · contribs), Mike Selinker (talk · contribs), and Mark Arsten (talk · contribs). I am very grateful to you for taking the time to review the close requests and close the discussions. Cunard (talk) 05:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


    Category: