Misplaced Pages

:Closure requests: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:47, 24 December 2024 editKowal2701 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,027 edits →Requests for comment: AddTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:44, 20 January 2025 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,385,722 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to Misplaced Pages:Closure requests/Archive 39. (BOT) 
(193 intermediate revisions by 46 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{no admin backlog}} {{admin backlog}}
<!-- <!--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Line 77: Line 77:
*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! &nbsp;Let a bot do it. &nbsp;Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. *** *** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! &nbsp;Let a bot do it. &nbsp;Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
Place new administrative discussions below this line using a level 3 heading --> Place new administrative discussions below this line using a level 3 heading -->
===]===


⚫ === ]===
⚫ {{initiated|17:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)}} - ] (]) 07:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
⚫ {{initiated|17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)}} challenge of close at AN was archived ''']''' - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
===Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading=== ===Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading===
{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}}
Line 91: Line 91:
*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. *** *** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
--> -->

=== ] ===
{{initiated|19:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion died down quite a long time ago. I do not believe anything is actionable but a formal closure will help. ] (]) 04:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
{{initiated|22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)}} Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. ] (]) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|22:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)}} Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. ] (]) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
⚫ {{Initiated|17:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)}} Expired tag, no new comments in more than a week. ] (]) 21:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{a note}} This is a ] and subject to ]. Also see: ]. ] (]) 17:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{a note}} Not sure if anyone is looking into this, but might be a good idea to wait for a few weeks since there is ongoing discussion. ] (]) 16:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|22:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)}} Discussion seems to have petered out a month ago. Consensus seems unclear. ] (]) 02:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{a note}} Needs admin closure imho, due to its importance (guideline page), length (101kb), and questions about neutrality of the Rfc question and what it meant. ] (]) 21:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
:: <small>And in true ] fashion, this discussion, quiescent for six weeks, has some more responses again. ] (]) 01:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)</small>


===] === ===] ===
Line 114: Line 99:
:{{a note}} This is a ] and subject to ]. - ] (]) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC) :{{a note}} This is a ] and subject to ]. - ] (]) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:'''] ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)</small> :'''] ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)</small>
⚫ :would like to see what close is. seems like it was option 1 in general, possibly 1/2 for IP area. ] (]) 05:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


=== ] ===
===]===
{{Initiated|19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)}} RfC expired on 6 December 2024 . No new comments in over a week. ] (]) 15:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Initiated|03:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)}}
⚫ Discussion is slowing significantly. Likely no consensus, personally. ] (]) 03:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
:Option 2 was very clearly rejected. The closer should try to see what specific principles people in the discussion agreed upon if going with a no consensus close, because there should be a follow-up RfC after some of the details are hammered out. <span class="nowrap">] (]) <small>(please ] me on reply)</small></span> 03:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
⚫ {{Initiated|00:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)|done=no}}, RFC expired weeks ago. ] (]) 21:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Doing}} <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 13:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{yo|Compassionate727}} Still working on this? — ]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub> 17:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Ugh… in practice, no. I'm still willing to do it, but it's in hiatus because of the three(!) pending challenges of my closures at AN, while I evaluate to what extent I need to change how I approach closures. If somebody else wants to take over this, they should feel free. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 22:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Taking a pause is fair. Just wanted to double check. — ]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub> 00:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:asking for an update if possible. I think this RFC and previous RFCBEFORE convos were several TOMATS long at this point, so I get that this might take time. ] (]) 16:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] ===
=== ] ===
{{Initiated|18:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)}} - probably gonna stay status quo, but would like a closure to point to ] (]) 06:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|08:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC}} Requesting closure from uninvolved impartial third party to close a discussion that has not seen a novel argument for a bit. ~ ] (]) 18:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|19:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)}} RfC has elapsed, and uninvolved closure is requested. — <span style="background: linear-gradient(#990000,#660000)">]&nbsp;<sub>]</sub></span> 15:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|16:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)}} Very wide impact, not much heat. ] (]) 15:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

=== ] ===
{{initiated|16:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)}} ] (]) 17:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
{{Initiated|22:51, 8 December 2024}} No further participation in the last 7 days. Consensus is clear but I am the opener of the RfC and am not comfortable closing something I am so closely involved in, so would like somebody uninvolved to close it if they believe it to be appropriate.] (]) 16:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:I'm not comfortable closing a discussion on a guideline change this early. In any case, if the discussion continues as it has been, a formal closure won't be necessary. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">—]&nbsp;<sup>(]·])</sup></span> 13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
{{Initiated|18:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)}} This RfC expired five days ago, has an unclear consensus, I am involved, and discussion has died down. ]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
{{Initiated|19:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)}} RFC is only 5 days old as of time of this posting, but overwhelming consensus approves of status quo, except for a single COI editor. ] (]) 21:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
:The CoI editor has now accepted that consensus is for the status quo, but I think a formal close from an uninvolved editor, summarizing the consensus would be helpful, since the issue has been coming up for a while and many editors were involved. — ] 🚀 <sup>(] • ])</sup> 16:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
:yes, despite multiple posts to ], ], ], several talk page discussions, and now an RFC, I doubt the pressure to remove word oligarch from the lede of that page will stop. An appropriate close could be a useful thing to point at in the future though. ] (]) 16:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

===]:
{{Initiated|11:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)}}
Lots of considered debate with good points made. See the nom's closing statement. ] (]) 09:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)


=== Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading === === Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
Line 159: Line 115:
{{Initiated|<date and time when RfC was opened, in the format as would be produced by ~~~~~>}} {{Initiated|<date and time when RfC was opened, in the format as would be produced by ~~~~~>}}
If the discussion is not an RfC (which is the default), add a |type=xxx code for the discussion type, e.g. |type=drv for deletion review; see Template:Initiated/doc for a list of codes. If the discussion is not an RfC (which is the default), add a |type=xxx code for the discussion type, e.g. |type=drv for deletion review; see Template:Initiated/doc for a list of codes.

--> -->


== Deletion discussions == == Deletion discussions ==
{{XFD backlog|right}} {{XFD backlog|right}}
⚫ === ] ===
⚫ {{initiated|00:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 23:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
⚫ {{initiated|03:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 05:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Please review ]. --] (]) 17:29, 21 December 2024 (UTC)


⚫ === ] ===
⚫ :The discussion has now been relisted thrice. --] (]) 00:42, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
⚫ {{initiated|15:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)|type=cfd}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 05:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

⚫ === ] ===
⚫ {{initiated|type=cfd|2 December 2024}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 03:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

⚫ === ] ===
⚫ {{initiated|type=cfd|14 December 2024}} <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 05:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)


=== Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading === === Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading ===
Line 186: Line 140:
*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. *** *** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
--> -->

===]===
{{initiated|16:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)}} Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at {{slink|Talk:Free and open-source software#Proposed merge of Open-source software and Free software into Free and open-source software}}? Thank you. —&nbsp;''''']'''&nbsp;<small>]</small>'' 01:53, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


===]=== ===]===
{{initiated|25 September 2024}} Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|25 September 2024}} Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)


⚫ ===]===
=== ] ===
{{initiated|01:40, 07 October 2024 (UTC)}} A merge + move request with RM banners that needs closure. No new comments in 20 days. <span class="nowrap">&#8212;''']'''</span> <sup class="nowrap">(] • {]•]})</sup> 20:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|29 October 2024}} There are voices on both sides (ie it is not uncontroversial) so a non-involved editor is needed to evaluate consensus and close this. Thanks. ]] 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)


===]===
=== ] ===
{{initiated|7 November 2024}} Looking for uninvolved close in CTOP please, only a few !votes in past month. I realise this doesn't require closing, but it is preferred in such case due to controversial nature of topic. ] (]) 10:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
{{initiated|11:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)}} Experienced closer requested. &#8213;]&nbsp;] 13:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)


* {{a note}} I'm happy to perform the merge if required, as have summarised other sections of this article already with consensus. I realise it's usually expected to perform splits or merges when closing discussions, but in this case it wouldn't be needed. ] (]) 20:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
===]===
{{initiated|14:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)}} This needs formal closure by someone uninvolved. ] (]) 03:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)


===] === ===]===
{{initiated| 21:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC) |type=rm}} RM that has been open for over a month. ] (]) 02:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|23:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} Proposed merge discussion originally opened on 30 May 2024, closed on 27 October 2024, and reopened on 27 December 2024 following the closure being overturned at AN. ] (]/]) 00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)


===]===
===]===
{{initiated|22:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)}} Pretty simple RM that just needs an uninvolved editor to close. &#8213;] <sub>]</sub> 17:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|15:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} Seeking uninvolved closure; proposal is blocking GA closure <span style="background:#F3F3F3; color:inherit; padding:3px 9px 4px">]</span> 11:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)


===]=== ===]===
{{initiated|15:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)}} Only two editors—the nominator and myself—have participated. That was two weeks ago. Just needs an uninvolved third party for closure. ~ ] (]) 18:37, 13 December 2024 (UTC) {{initiated|16:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)}} Seeking uninvolved closure; its degenerated into silly sniping and has clearly run its course. ] (]) 16:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Doing}} ] (]) 20:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)


⚫ Yup, the discussion does need to be closed. ] (]) 18:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
⚫ ===]===
{{initiated|29 October 2024}} There are voices on both sides (ie it is not uncontroversial) so a non-involved editor is needed to evaluate consensus and close this. Thanks. ]] 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

⚫ === ]===
⚫ {{initiated|17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)}} challenge of close at AN was archived ''']''' - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)


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

Latest revision as of 21:44, 20 January 2025

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:CR" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Cleanup resources, Misplaced Pages:Categorizing redirects, Misplaced Pages:Copyrights, Misplaced Pages:Competence is required, Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution, Misplaced Pages:Content removal and WP:Criteria for redaction. "WP:ANC" redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Assume no clue.
Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Archiving icon
    Archives

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


    This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.
    Shortcuts

    Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close a Misplaced Pages discussion. Do so when consensus appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our policies or guidelines).

    Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.

    Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, it is appropriate to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.

    Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.

    On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.

    There is no fixed length for a formal request for comment (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.

    When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.

    Include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing easier. Move discussions go in the 'other types' section.

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

    Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if the area is contentious. You should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the discussions for discussion page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.

    Non-admins can close most discussions. Admins may not overturn your non-admin closures just because you are not an admin, and this is not normally in itself a problem at reviews. Still, there are caveats. You may not close discussions as an unregistered user, or where implementing the closure would need tools or edit permissions you do not have access to. Articles for deletion and move discussion processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.

    Technical instructions for closers

    Please append {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry you are closing so that no one duplicates your effort. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note, and consider sending a {{Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. Where a formal closure is not needed, reply with {{Not done}}. After addressing a request, please mark the {{Initiated}} template with |done=yes. ClueBot III will automatically archive requests marked with {{Already done}}, {{Close}}, {{Done}} {{Not done}}, and {{Resolved}}.

    If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.


    Other areas tracking old discussions

    Administrative discussions

    Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive367#Close challenge for Talk:1948 Arab–Israeli War#RFC for Jewish exodus

    (Initiated 38 days ago on 13 December 2024) challenge of close at AN was archived nableezy - 05:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

    Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading

    Requests for comment

    Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/In the news criteria amendments

    (Initiated 105 days ago on 7 October 2024) Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 459#RFC_Jerusalem_Post

    (Initiated 84 days ago on 28 October 2024) Participation/discussion has mostly stopped & is unlikely to pick back up again. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

    information Note: This is a contentious topic and subject to general sanctions. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
    Archived. P.I. Ellsworth , ed.  22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
    would like to see what close is. seems like it was option 1 in general, possibly 1/2 for IP area. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Genocide#RfC: History section, adding native American and Australian genocides as examples

    (Initiated 75 days ago on 6 November 2024) RfC expired on 6 December 2024 . No new comments in over a week. Bogazicili (talk) 15:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Australia#RFC: Should the article state that Indigenous Australians were victims of genocide?

    (Initiated 73 days ago on 8 November 2024), RFC expired weeks ago. GoodDay (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Catholic Church#RfC: Establishing an independent Catholicism article

    (Initiated 25 days ago on 26 December 2024) Requesting closure from uninvolved impartial third party to close a discussion that has not seen a novel argument for a bit. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

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

    Deletion discussions

    XFD backlog
    V Oct Nov Dec Jan Total
    CfD 0 0 1 113 114
    TfD 0 0 0 5 5
    MfD 0 0 0 3 3
    FfD 0 0 2 22 24
    RfD 0 0 1 64 65
    AfD 0 0 0 0 0

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 18#Category:Belarusian saints

    (Initiated 31 days ago on 20 December 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 6#Category:Misplaced Pages oversighters

    (Initiated 31 days ago on 20 December 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:38, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 6#Redundant WPANIMATION categories

    (Initiated 14 days ago on 6 January 2025) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

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

    Other types of closing requests

    Talk:Free and open-source software#Proposed merge of Open-source software and Free software into Free and open-source software

    (Initiated 248 days ago on 17 May 2024) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Free and open-source software § Proposed merge of Open-source software and Free software into Free and open-source software? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 01:53, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Arab migrations to the Levant#Merger Proposal

    (Initiated 118 days ago on 25 September 2024) Open for a while, requesting uninvolved closure. Andre🚐 22:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Winter fuel payment abolition backlash#Merge proposal

    (Initiated 84 days ago on 29 October 2024) There are voices on both sides (ie it is not uncontroversial) so a non-involved editor is needed to evaluate consensus and close this. Thanks. PamD 09:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

    Talk:Israel–Hamas war#Survey

    (Initiated 75 days ago on 7 November 2024) Looking for uninvolved close in CTOP please, only a few !votes in past month. I realise this doesn't require closing, but it is preferred in such case due to controversial nature of topic. CNC (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

    • information Note: I'm happy to perform the merge if required, as have summarised other sections of this article already with consensus. I realise it's usually expected to perform splits or merges when closing discussions, but in this case it wouldn't be needed. CNC (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:You Like It Darker#Proposed merge of Finn (short story) into You Like It Darker

    (Initiated 24 days ago on 27 December 2024) Proposed merge discussion originally opened on 30 May 2024, closed on 27 October 2024, and reopened on 27 December 2024 following the closure being overturned at AN. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Selected Ambient Works Volume II#Proposed merge of Stone in Focus into Selected Ambient Works Volume II

    (Initiated 14 days ago on 6 January 2025) Seeking uninvolved closure; proposal is blocking GA closure czar 11:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Donald Trump#Proposal to supersede consensus #50

    (Initiated 10 days ago on 10 January 2025) Seeking uninvolved closure; its degenerated into silly sniping and has clearly run its course. Slatersteven (talk) 16:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

    Yup, the discussion does need to be closed. GoodDay (talk) 18:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

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

    Categories:
    Misplaced Pages:Closure requests: Difference between revisions Add topic