Misplaced Pages:Closure requests

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cunard (talk | contribs) at 03:16, 1 September 2014 (→Requests for closure: close requests). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 03:16, 1 September 2014 by Cunard (talk | contribs) (→Requests for closure: close requests)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

v t e 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	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24
Archive 25	Archive 26	Archive 27
Archive 28	Archive 29	Archive 30
Archive 31	Archive 32	Archive 33
Archive 34	Archive 35	Archive 36
Archive 37	Archive 38	Archive 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. Formal closure by an uninvolved editor or administrator should be requested where consensus remains unclear, where the issue is a contentious one, or where there are wiki-wide implications.

Many discussions do not need formal closure and do not need to be listed here.

Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion. The default length of a formal request for closure is 30 days (opened on or before 11 December 2024); if consensus becomes clear before that and discussion has slowed, then it may be closed early. However, editors usually wait at least a week after an RfC opens, unless the outcome is very obvious, so that there is enough time for a full discussion.

If consensus is unclear, then post a neutral request here for assistance.

Please ensure that your request for a close is brief and neutrally worded. Please include a link to the discussion. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. Be prepared to wait for someone to review the discussion. If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. You can start discussion at the original page or request a Closure review at Administrators' noticeboard with a link to the discussion page and the policy-based reason you believe the closure should be overturned. See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Closure review archive for previous closure reviews.

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

Because requests for closure made here are often those that are the most contentious, closing these discussions can be a significant responsibility. Closers should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion. All closers should be prepared to fully discuss the closure rationale with any editors who have questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that those editors may have.

A request for comment discussed how to appeal closures and whether an administrator can summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus was that closures should not be reverted solely because the closer was not an administrator. However, special considerations apply for articles for deletion and move discussions—see Misplaced Pages:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions and Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Closing instructions for details.

Requests for closure

Template talk:Citation#RFC: Same rules for CS1 and Citation

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Citation#RFC: Same rules for CS1 and Citation (initiated 30 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

As a side-effect of using Module:Citation/CS1 to render the Citation template, all the warning messages issued for Citation Style 1 will now be issued for Citation. (Many of these warning messages are not turned on by default yet.) This means that editors who use the Citation template will have to consult Help:Citation Style 1 to determine the acceptable parameter values. Does the user community ratify this change?

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

This does not appear to require administration, thus I recommend finding a template-editor to assess and close it. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 02:34, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:USRepSuccessionBox#RfC regarding ceremonial seniority position

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:USRepSuccessionBox#RfC regarding ceremonial seniority position (initiated 27 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Not enough input to close properly. I notified WP:USA for additional participants. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 02:48, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Ireland#RfC North Tipperary and South Tipperary categorical tree structure

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Ireland#RfC North Tipperary and South Tipperary categorical tree structure (initiated 28 June 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment Now archived at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Ireland/Archive 17#RfC North Tipperary and South Tipperary categorical tree structure. Armbrust 06:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Category:Comprehensive schools in London

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Category:Comprehensive schools in London? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 2#Category:Several categories related to women clergy

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 2#Category:Several categories related to women clergy? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 3

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 3 (initiated 26 June 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. In your close, please consider the previous discussions related to archive.is:

Misplaced Pages talk:Link rot#Archive.is (initiated 17 September 2012)
Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 104#Replacing WebCite citations with archive.is citations (initiated 24 July 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Bot owners' noticeboard/Archive 8#RotlinkBot approved? (initiated 18 August 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/RotlinkBot (initiated 18 August 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive812#Mass rollbacks required (initiated 17 September 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC (initiated 20 September 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive813#Sophisticated mass vandalism from IP ranges? (initiated 2 October 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)/Archive 119#Proposal to Reduce the API limits to 1 edit/30 sec. for logged out users (initiated 2 October 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive255#WP:Archive.is RFC request for admin review of closure (initiated 31 October 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2014/03#archive.is/T5OAy (initiated 23 November 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/December 2013#archive.is (initiated 3 December 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Now what to do? and permanent link (initiated 27 February 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive261#Archive.is headache (initiated 8 May 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Archivedotisbot (initiated 10 May 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 2 (initiated 2 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#Archive.is (initiated 25 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive845#Serious BLP violations by Kww, Hasteur, Werieth, and possibly others (initiated 30 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive846#New Account Using AWB to Remove Links to archive.is based "the RFC" (initiated 1 July 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Δ/Werieth#Followup discussion about archive.is links (2 July 2014)

Here are discussions with the Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC closer:

User talk:Hobit#Archive.is RFC closure unclear and permanent link (initiated 31 October 2013)
User talk:Hobit#Question re: Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC and permanent link (initiated 11 November 2013)
User talk:Hobit#Archive.is and permanent link (initiated 12 February 2014)
User talk:Hobit#Archive.is matter and permanent link (initiated 19 May 2014)

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

There is discussion going on, but I think those can be moved to somewhere else.Forbidden User (talk) 08:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it might be best to wait a little bit more for results from Chris's email. I know I'm waiting to update my views based on it as well as the email correspondense link. I imagine I am not the only one. PaleAqua (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

It's been almost a week with no real discussion and no updates. Withdrawing my wait request. PaleAqua (talk) 06:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Creation Museum#accreditation

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Creation Museum#accreditation (initiated 14 July 2014)? The discussion at Talk:Creation Museum#Resolved? indicates that 22 editors participated in the discussion. Because of the discussion's complexity (one editor called it "Longest RfC discussion ever"), I believe a closure would be helpful in determining and recording the consensus. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Autism#Individuals with autism and Talk:Autism#Compromise proposal: "people who are autistic"

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Autism#Individuals with autism (initiated 8 July 2014) and Talk:Autism#Compromise proposal: "people who are autistic" (initiated 4 August 2014)? WP:SNOW may be applicable for the 4 August discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Second was

Closed by Drmies (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust 19:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Cite doi#RfC: Should Template:cite doi cease creating a separate subpage for each DOI?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Cite doi#RfC: Should Template:cite doi cease creating a separate subpage for each DOI? (initiated 9 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:2014 Israeli raids on UNRWA schools#RfC: Should this article contain the section "other UNRWA incidents"?

Can someone close this? Nobody has replied for some days, and the consensus is unclear. This is perhaps because I did not phrase the question precisely. Kingsindian (talk) 11:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Legend (disambiguation)#Merger proposal

This discussion seemed routine at first, but a couple of late comments make it less than obvious that this should be a routine close. I.E., The first seven respondents all gave support, but the last two articulated only partial support for specific reasons that may need consideration. Discussion was opened a full week ago.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (comics)#Merge redundant guideline material

Unopposed (if low-participation) cleanup proposal has run for three months. Way long enough for objections to have been raised. While a non-admin could close this, is probably better if done administratively, due to these being (nominal) guidelines subject to frequent contentious tooth-gnashing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ≼ 15:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Oathkeeper#Proposal

Requesting a formal close. I believe consensus on this is fairly clear-cut, but given the controversial long-term nature of the overall discussion it's probably best to have an uninvolved editor handle the assessment just to keep everything on the up and up. DonIago (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Review of Admin RFC Closure (removal of book by Koenraad Elst in Further reading section of an article)

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Review of Admin RFC Closure (removal of book by Koenraad Elst in Further reading section of an article) (initiated 26 August 2014) after there has been sufficient participation and sufficient time has passed? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 22:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Jennifer Rubin (journalist)#RfC: Should Fred Hiatt's quotes in this article be given special prominence over quotes from Rubin's critics?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jennifer Rubin (journalist)#RfC: Should Fred Hiatt's quotes in this article be given special prominence over quotes from Rubin's critics? (initiated 28 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Public opinion on climate change#Request for comment (initiated 20 July 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should this Rasmussen poll be included in the article?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Arranged marriage#RFC - Lede, timeframe, use of historical terms

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Arranged marriage#RFC - Lede, timeframe, use of historical terms (initiated 25 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:War of the Pacific#RfC: Which are the relevant facts for the LEDE regarding the 14 February 1879?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:War of the Pacific#RfC: Which are the relevant facts for the LEDE regarding the 14 February 1879? (initiated 27 July 2014)? See the related discussion Talk:War of the Pacific#Request to close the discussion where Mr. Stradivarius (talk · contribs) wrote:

This RfC looks a bit contentious, so it should probably be closed by an uninvolved editor before any edit requests are carried out. (Edit requests are only for edits that already have consensus.) If it doesn't look like there will be any more discussion in the RfC, I would list it for closure at WP:ANRFC (although it seems to be a bit backlogged at the moment). Also, Keysanger, Darkness Shines has a point about the walls-o'-text; you'll probably find that you can persuade more people if you keep your posts shorter. Best — Mr. Stradivarius 14:15, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:West End Avenue#RfC: Merger with Eleventh Avenue (Manhattan)?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:West End Avenue#RfC: Merger with Eleventh Avenue (Manhattan)? (initiated 31 July 2014)? Please consider the related discussion Talk:West End Avenue#Merger with 11th Avenue (Manhattan) in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:The Edge#The Edge should be capital "T" or lower-case "t" in running prose?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:The Edge#The Edge should be capital "T" or lower-case "t" in running prose? (initiated 26 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Chinese/Chinese#RfC: How to display the characters

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Infobox Chinese/Chinese#RfC: How to display the characters (initiated 27 July 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should this template display simplified Chinese characters first or traditional Chinese characters first?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2013 IRS controversy#"we need to be cautious about what we say in emails" (initiated 10 July 2014)? See the subsection Talk:2013 IRS controversy#RFC. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada#RFC on official names versus common names

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada#RFC on official names versus common names (initiated 21 July 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should WP:PPAP continue to require the usage of official names rather than common names as the titles for Canadian political parties?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie#RFC: Should material about the New Jersey Public School system be included in the article?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Governorship of Chris Christie#RFC: Should material about the New Jersey Public School system be included in the article? (initiated 27 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump#"people associated with the Tea Party movement"

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Donald Trump#"people associated with the Tea Party movement" (initiated 28 July 2014)? Please consider Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 7#Category:People associated with the Tea Party movement in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Ralph Drollinger#RfC: How much emphasis to place on Capitol Ministries?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ralph Drollinger#RfC: How much emphasis to place on Capitol Ministries? (initiated 2 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

This article has been subject to disputed editing over how much space to devote to Capitol Ministries - see this revision vs the current. We need to gain consensus on how much detail to include, so all comments invited. I won't structure this yet as I have no idea..am only trying to admin this.

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 7#Category:People associated with the Tea Party movement

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 7#Category:People associated with the Tea Party movement? Please consider Talk:Donald Trump#"people associated with the Tea Party movement" in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Jesus#RfC: Should the term "Jesus of Galilee" be included in the lead?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jesus#RfC: Should the term "Jesus of Galilee" be included in the lead? (initiated 25 August 2014)? WP:SNOW may be applicable. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:LeBron James#Should the List of 40-plus point games by LeBron James be included in the "see also" section, or should it not?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:LeBron James#Should the List of 40-plus point games by LeBron James be included in the "see also" section, or should it not? (initiated 20 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Deletion process#Question about WP:NACD

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Deletion process#Question about WP:NACD (initiated 4 August 2014)? See the subsection Misplaced Pages talk:Deletion process#RfC: Should non-admins reopen deletion discussions after an NAC? (initiated 6 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Talk page guidelines#RFC on word choice and cross-cultural sensitivity

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Talk page guidelines#RFC on word choice and cross-cultural sensitivity (initiated 29 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Identifying reliable sources#Add something about never using headlines as sources?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:Identifying reliable sources#Add something about never using headlines as sources? (initiated 29 July 2014)? See the subsection Misplaced Pages talk:Identifying reliable sources#RfC, where the proposal is:

Are headlines for newspaper articles ever usable as a reliable source for any claim where the headline claim is not found in the body of the newspaper article?
Should this content guideline state:

Newspaper headlines are not a reliable source and should not be used

Please consider Misplaced Pages talk:Identifying reliable sources/Archive 43#RfC - are newspaper headlines a reliable source per se? (initiated 12 June 2014) in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Retrospective diagnoses of autism#WikiProject Autism banners on biographical article talk pages

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Retrospective diagnoses of autism#WikiProject Autism banners on biographical article talk pages (initiated 1 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should Persondata template be removed from articles?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should Persondata template be removed from articles? (initiated 20 July 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should the hidden navbar be removed from the base Stub and WikiProject banner templates?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should the hidden navbar be removed from the base Stub and WikiProject banner templates? (initiated 30 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 113#Should the MediaWiki software be modified to include an option for specialized (such as blacklist / whitelist) blocks?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 113#Should the MediaWiki software be modified to include an option for specialized (such as blacklist / whitelist) blocks? (initiated 24 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: Should the wording of CSD A7 be changed?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: Should the wording of CSD A7 be changed? (initiated 7 August 2014)? The last comment was made 13 August 2014. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: Should the R3 criterion (Implausible typos) be broadened?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: Should the R3 criterion (Implausible typos) be broadened? (initiated 8 August 2014)? Other than one comment made 22 August 2014 and and another made 29 August 2014, there has been little participation since 19 August 2014. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 15#Category:All Misplaced Pages vital articles in Biology and health sciences

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 15#Category:All Misplaced Pages vital articles in Biology and health sciences? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Move review/Log/2014 August#Oriya language (initiated 28 August 2014)? Although the discussion has not gone on for seven days, participants have called for a speedy close as wrong venue. Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)