Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests/RfC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dispute resolution requests provides a central compilation of and an easy-access overview for Wikipedia:Dispute resolution (WP:DR), and details the various different methods used at each of the Wikipedia WP:DR requests pages

Dispute Resolution Requests (article content)

Third opinion

Noticeboards

Requests for comment

Third opinion Specialised noticeboards Requests for comment
Request an outside opinion when there is a content dispute between two users. Ask questions and request assistance from users familiar with the content policies and guidelines relevant to that notice board. Request input on a specific content issue from a broad number of uninvolved users.

Dispute resolution noticeboard

Formal mediation

Dispute resolution noticeboard Formal mediation
File a request for a moderated discussion regarding an ongoing content dispute that can't be resolved through discussion on the article talk page. Apply for formal mediation in an attempt to resolve a protracted content dispute that remains unresolved despite other attempts at dispute resolution.
Unsure which one to use? Check out our guide to dispute resolution, or ask at the talk page.


Please read before requesting for comments
Requests for comment (RfC) is an informal, lightweight process for requesting outside input, and dispute resolution, with respect to article content, user conduct, and Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Please note that there are other dispute resolution alternatives, notably the third opinion for disputes involving two editors as well as the reliable sources noticeboard and the neutral point of view noticeboard.



Requests for comments

* If your RFC pertains to a Wikipedia user, see Request comment on users. For everything else, see Request comment through talk pages. But first:
  • Before asking outside opinion here, it generally helps to simply discuss the matter on the talk page first. Whatever the disagreement, the first step in resolving a dispute is to talk to the other parties involved.
  • If the article is complex or technical, it may be worthwhile to ask for help at the relevant WikiProject.
  • If the issue is just between two editors, you can simply and quickly ask a third opinion on the Wikipedia:Third opinion page.
  • If you want general help in improving an article, such as to Featured status, then list it at Peer review.
Issues by topic area
Articles (main namespace)
Biographies (watch) {{rfc|bio}}
Economy, trade, and companies (watch) {{rfc|econ}}
History and geography (watch) {{rfc|hist}}
Language and linguistics (watch) {{rfc|lang}}
Maths, science, and technology (watch) {{rfc|sci}}
Media, the arts, and architecture (watch) {{rfc|media}}
Politics, government, and law (watch) {{rfc|pol}}
Religion and philosophy (watch) {{rfc|reli}}
Society, sports, and culture (watch) {{rfc|soc}}
Non-article pages
(Do not use these on article talk pages)
Wikipedia style and naming (watch) {{rfc|style}}
Wikipedia policies and guidelines (watch) {{rfc|policy}}
WikiProjects and collaborations (watch) {{rfc|proj}}
Wikipedia technical issues and templates (watch) {{rfc|tech}}
Wikipedia proposals (watch) {{rfc|prop}}
Unsorted
Unsorted RFCs (watch) {{rfc}}

You could use the RfC posting tool[dead link], or:

  1. Place one of the templates shown in the table on the right at the beginning of the talk page section which you would like to promote. Do not use subst:.
    • To add an additional category, do it like this: {{rfc|category1|category2}}.
    • Note that the "policy" category is for discussing changes to the policies and guidelines themselves, not for discussing how to apply the existing policies and guidelines to a specific article. The same approach also applies to "style" and "WikiProject" (the other non-article categories).
    • If you spell this category abbreviation incorrectly, use one that doesn't exist, or you leave it blank, then it will be added to the "Unsorted" list.
  2. Include a brief, neutral statement of the issue below the template, and sign it with ~~~~ (name and date) or ~~~~~ (just the date).

    If possible, keep your statement or question simple and succinct, so that the RfC attracts a clear and actionable response. For example: "Should this article say in the lead that John Smith was a contender for the Pulitzer Prize?" The longer and more complicated your question or statement, the more diverse the responses will be, and the harder it becomes for the closing admin to interpret the consensus.

    Consider creating a separate section ===Threaded discussion=== for threaded replies, so the initial comments section does not become bogged down. (For your question to be displayed correctly, the first date stamp must precede any such sub-section headings or tables.)

  3. Now you're done. A bot will take care of the rest, so be patient.

As an alternative to request comment through talk pages, you may do so through Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board. Follow the directions on that page, and your request will be transferred to an appropriate location.