Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Requests for closure noticeboard is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close a discussion on Wikipedia. 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, such as when the discussion is about creating, abolishing or changing a policy or guideline.

Billiardball1.png

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 comment is 30 days (opened on or before 15 October 2019); 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 a discussion opens, unless the outcome is very obvious, so that there is enough time for a full discussion.

On average, it takes two or three weeks after the discussion ended to get a formal closure from an uninvolved editor. When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.

Billiardball2.png

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

Please ensure that your request for closure is brief and neutrally worded, and also ensure that a link to the discussion itself is included as well. Be prepared to wait for someone to act on your request and do not use this board to continue the discussion in question.

If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. Please discuss matters on the closer's talk page instead, and, if necessary, request a closure review at the administrators' noticeboard. Include links to the closure being challenged and the discussion on the closer's talk page, and also include a policy-based rationale supporting your request for the closure to be overturned.

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Closure review archive for previous closure reviews.

Billiardball3.png

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 Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions and Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for details.

To reduce editing conflicts and an undesirable duplication of effort when closing a discussion listed on this page, please append {{Closing}} or {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry here. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note which allows archiving of the completed request.

Contents

Requests for closure[edit]

Administrative discussions[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive314#Request for reclosure of RfC on Tulsi Gabbard's BLP (Assad/Modi)[edit]

(Initiated 113 days ago on 24 July 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive314#Request for reclosure of RfC on Tulsi Gabbard's BLP (Assad/Modi)? This is an RfC close review that was archived without closure on 6 October 2019. Like deletion reviews, RfC close reviews should be formally assessed to determine whether the RfC close was correct or incorrect. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:36, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

RfCs[edit]

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 176#Suppress rendering of Template:Wikipedia books[edit]

(Initiated 99 days ago on 6 August 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Suppress rendering of Template:Wikipedia books? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 161#RFC: Block edits that contain a VisualEditor bug[edit]

(Initiated 71 days ago on 3 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RFC: Block edits that contain a VisualEditor bug? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:04, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Since the RfC is about the creation of an edit filter, I'm leaving a note at the edit filter noticeboard requesting that it be closed by an edit filter manager; it seems pretty clear that the consensus is for the creation of a filter, but such a decision could only be enacted by an efm. --DannyS712 (talk) 01:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Andy Ngo#RfC: Do sources support calling Ngo's statements on the hammer attack "false"?[edit]

(Initiated 66 days ago on 9 September 2019) RfC requesting an admin closing.  Thanks, Springee (talk) 02:13, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Marvin Minsky#RfC on Giuffre/Epstein issue[edit]

(Initiated 66 days ago on 9 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Marvin Minsky#RfC on Giuffre/Epstein issue? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos#RFC - Improving the lede[edit]

(Initiated 63 days ago on 12 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos#RFC - Improving the lede? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Super Audio CD#Rfc: Meyer-Moran paper from 2007 in lead section[edit]

(Initiated 56 days ago on 18 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Super Audio CD#Rfc: Meyer-Moran paper from 2007 in lead section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 162#Proposal to delete Portal space[edit]

(Initiated 56 days ago on 19 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 162#Proposal to delete Portal space? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about rivers#RfC about the examples of local names[edit]

(Initiated 53 days ago on 22 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about rivers#RfC about the examples of local names? The RfC initiator wrote, "I stand by my decision to start this discussion until it is legitimately closed (preferably by an admin)" in response to an RfC participant writing, "This Rfc is not an Rfc; rather, it is a free-ranging discussion about how to improve a proposed new project subpage recommendation." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease#RfC: Redirects of "chronic bronchitis" and "emphysema"[edit]

(Initiated 51 days ago on 23 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease#RfC: Redirects of "chronic bronchitis" and "emphysema"? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Veridia#RfC regarding genre[edit]

(Initiated 51 days ago on 23 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Veridia#RfC regarding genre? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Siouxsie Sioux#Request for comments 2019[edit]

(Initiated 50 days ago on 25 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Siouxsie Sioux#Request for comments 2019? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Singapore/Archive 13#RFC regarding the inclusion of Rankings[edit]

(Initiated 49 days ago on 26 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Singapore/Archive 13#RFC regarding the inclusion of Rankings? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict#RFC[edit]

(Initiated 48 days ago on 27 September 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Fred Hampton#RFC on Murder terminology[edit]

(Initiated 42 days ago on 3 October 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Fred Hampton#RFC on Murder terminology? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Liliputing[edit]

(Initiated 42 days ago on 3 October 2019) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Liliputing? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 09:54, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Catholic Church and homosexuality#Request for Comment: Claims of historian John Boswell[edit]

(Initiated 41 days ago on 4 October 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Catholic Church and homosexuality#Request for Comment: Claims of historian John Boswell? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: The Epoch Times[edit]

(Initiated 38 days ago on 7 October 2019) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: The Epoch Times? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 01:30, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Bell Media Radio#Streaming radio network affiliation?[edit]

(Initiated 36 days ago on 9 October 2019)

Would a non-involved editor/administrator please assess the consensus for this expired RfC, which Legobot dropped? There seems to be no opposition, but it would be nice to have this assessed, possibly wrapped in the optional RfC closure tags of your choice. Alternatively, if you know of a way to restart the RfC, that would be fine as well. Thanks. --Doug Mehus (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

Deletion discussions[edit]

XFD backlog
  Aug Sep Oct Nov TOTAL
CfD 0 6 8 20 34
TfD 0 0 5 6 11
MfD 0 0 0 1 1
FfD 0 2 4 4 10
AfD 0 0 0 2 2

Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_November_9#Template:Rfl[edit]

(Initiated 22 days ago on 23 October 2019) It seems that all the active RfD closers have expressed an opinion in this discussion, so we need a fresh pair of eyes to come in and close the discussion. Deryck C. 12:31, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted P. I. Ellsworthed. put'r there 00:18, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

Other types of closing requests[edit]

Talk:2019 World Rally Championship[edit]

(Initiated 202 days ago on 26 April 2019) Would an experienced editor or administrator please review this discussion? An older discussion on the subject exists and might need to be considered as well.Tvx1 11:23, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Autism#How should those with the condition be referred?[edit]

(Initiated 127 days ago on 10 July 2019) Would an uninvolved editor or administrator please review this discussion? Thank you. Note: This discussion started as an RFC, but the RCF was malformed, so it is not an RFC. Just a regular discussion. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 05:21, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2019 August#General American English[edit]

(Initiated 80 days ago on 26 August 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2019 August#General American English? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:54, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:BFR (rocket)#A small step forward, given SpaceX new (once again) renaming of the vehicles[edit]

(Initiated 44 days ago on 1 October 2019) Would an uninvolved editor please assess the consensus in this discussion. Thank you. --Soumyabrata (talksubpages) 17:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:ITS launch vehicle#Merger proposal[edit]

(Initiated 41 days ago on 4 October 2019) Could an experienced and uninvolved editor please review this merger proposal. Thank you.  N2e (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Review, please. Rowan Forest (talk) 14:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]