Wikipedia:Closure requests

The Requests for closure noticeboard is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close a discussion on Wikipedia. Most discussions do not need to follow a formal process for closing and summarizing the result.

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

Requests for closure

Article namespace

Talk:Richard Tylman#RfC: Should information sourced to research in genealogical websites be included?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Richard Tylman#RfC: Should information sourced to research in genealogical websites be included? (initiated 18 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_132#Genealogy_databases should be considered at the closure. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 09:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Caste/Archive 4#RfC: Does the article minimize the centrality of India to the notion of caste?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Caste/Archive 4#RfC: Does the article minimize the centrality of India to the notion of caste? (initiated 4 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Chetniks#RfC: Is there WP:RSN consensus that Philip Cohen's 'Serbia's Secret War is reliable source

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Chetniks#RfC: Is there WP:RSN consensus that Philip Cohen's 'Serbia's Secret War is reliable source (initiated 23 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything to assess really? The editors there seem to have come to an agreement and moved on. NW (Talk) 22:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

A definitive closure would be good. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 22:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Douglas Tait (stuntman)#RfC Biography posting

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Douglas Tait (stuntman)#RfC Biography posting (initiated 27 September 2012)? The discussion is about whether the material removed in this edit should be restored. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Marvel Studios#Distributor for The Avengers

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Marvel Studios#Distributor for The Avengers (initiated 13 March 2012, see the RfC at Talk:Marvel Studios#Request for comment that was initiated 12 October 2012)? Please review the entire thread beginning from Talk:Marvel Studios#Distributor for The Avengers and consider enclosing the entire discussion in archive templates when closing the debate. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Derek_McCulloch#RfC: Should the article refer to the recent allegations?

Requesting that an uninvolved editor close this RfC about whether to include allegations of involvement in child abuse (indirectly related to the Jimmy Savile situation). The article is not a BLP; the subject died in 1967. The disputed section is currently included here. I have already archived the RfC and summed up who supports and opposes, but we need an uninvolved editor to determine consensus. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia namespace

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Trademarks#Request for Comment: Capitalization

The RfC expired its 30 day limit without formal closure and without clear consensus.--129.22.167.83 (talk) 09:37, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I can close this as I have a strong opinion - it was started on 12 September. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the issue but would close it as no consensus. The MOS folks would not view a non-admin closure very kindly though. I would also ask that the question be more clearly stated, and addressed at specific articles before attempting to summarize in the MOS. My copy of New Hart's Rules (a style guide, and not "our style guide"), simply says to follow a trademark with TM to make sure that recognition is given that it is a trademark. Apteva (talk) 22:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Categorization of persons

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Categorization of persons? Please also consider John Carter (talk · contribs)'s comment at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Categorization of persons#Possible wrapup:

I think that it would make sense, sometime in the future, to have the request for comment here be gone over by someone, possibly uninvolved, who could "boil down" the various comments into clear proposals.

This could facilitate a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Categorization of persons 2, which would have a clearer scope and outcome. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#New RfC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia 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 ^{The Homonculus} 09:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations#Request for Comment: Notability of TV station subchannel articles

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations#Request for Comment: Notability of TV station subchannel articles (initiated 26 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Would like this RfC to closed or some instruction on how to proceed. The RfC had vary few editors waying in one way or the other. It has about the same number as a previous discussion that an administrator declared to have a "weak consensus" that WikiProject Television Stations has been force to repeatedly flog by a single editor. So if this isn't more than "weak consensus" can the responding administrator give us some direction (besides starting the discussion over) on what to do. Spshu (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/City population templates

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/City population templates (initiated 16 September 2012)? The questions posed were:

1. Does a largest cities template/city population template add value to the articles (esp. featured ones) about nations?
2. If your answer is "yes" to the question above, should such a template contain images of top 2-4 cities in them?

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The RFC wasn't closed, only placed between {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}}. There is no closing statement. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 09:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:File mover#Guideline status for the What files should be renamed section

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:File mover#Guideline status for the What files should be renamed section (initiated 24 September 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:did you know#Let's extend the 5 day viability period to 10 days

Needs an appropiate closure. Eraserhead1's closures on DYK caused spark, so any other administrator is recommended. --George Ho (talk) 04:52, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

 Comment: Discussion is now archived at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 86#Let's extend the 5 day viability period to 10 days. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 04:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know why anyone would close anything at DYK to be honest. You guys will just complain regardless and the behaviour was so bad in the last closure that you guys couldn't agree sensible conditions for a review of the last closure.

Additionally, you, the requester, made no effort to defend either the closure or the review. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

To be clear there is no particular problem with challenging my closure - we all make mistakes. However at the end of the day you guys were responsible for the review request. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 14:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lego#Request for comment on creating omnibus articles for sets and themes

Unfortunately particpation was fairly light. Woild like an uninvolved closer as this would effect 60+ articles. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Genetics/GMO articles

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

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Three corrections

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Three corrections (initiated 7 October 2012)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia 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)

Other namespaces

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Romances

We need a third party to review the comments here and decide if consensus has been reached. This is in regards to proposed changes for Template:Infobox_soap_character which is why I wasn't sure if it belongs up in the Wikipedia namespace section. Other subsections in this conversation have been "closed" by myself, simply for organizational purposes of seeing what is currently left to discuss; any can be "unclosed" if in error. However, the "Romances" section is the section of request here. Thank you! Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 22:35, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to add the link to a recent but prior related discussion: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Removal_of_.22Romances.22_on_template. I do believe myself that the requested discussion has reached rough consensus, but if someone has the time to take a look that would still be helpful to have an unbiased opinion. Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Premature close requests

Talk:2008–2012 global recession#Requested move

Consensus to move the article to "Great Recession" after a long debate. Requesting someone to close the discussion and move the article. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 04:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

You really shouldn't be pre-empting the outcome. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Moved to premature requests. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 14:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Moved it back. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 09:21, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Discussion is still ongoing, and there is no consensus yet. Archive this and bring it back when the discussion has wound down? NW (Talk) 22:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Or move it back to premature requests. Armbrust ^{The Homonculus} 22:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to closers

Thank you, Drmies (talk · contribs), Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), TParis (talk · contribs), and Jafeluv (talk · contribs), for your RfC closes. Although the previous section was moved to Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard#Comments from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure main page, I'd rather place the thank you note here so it will be more visible to RfC closers. Cunard (talk) 07:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Drmies (talk · contribs), Dennis Brown (talk · contribs), TParis (talk · contribs), Hobit (talk · contribs), Joe Decker (talk · contribs), Sven Manguard (talk · contribs), Sandstein (talk · contribs), Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), NULL (talk · contribs), Jafeluv (talk · contribs), Tijfo098 (talk · contribs), Nathan Johnson (talk · contribs), BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs), Electriccatfish2 (talk · contribs), and Moe Epsilon (talk · contribs), for your closes. Cunard (talk) 00:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to Eraserhead1 (talk · contribs) for closing the discussion on WT:ITN and finally resolving this issue. - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 20:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Moe Epsilon (talk · contribs), Nathan Johnson (talk · contribs), Churn and change (talk · contribs), Jafeluv (talk · contribs), MBisanz (talk · contribs), Thine Antique Pen (talk · contribs), DrKiernan (talk · contribs), Beeblebrox (talk · contribs), Eraserhead1 (talk · contribs), Futuretrillionaire (talk · contribs), Drmies (talk · contribs), Dr.K. (talk · contribs), Armbrust (talk · contribs), Philosopher (talk · contribs), Samsara (talk · contribs), Basalisk (talk · contribs), Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs), Mike Selinker (talk · contribs), MER-C (talk · contribs), I Jethrobot (talk · contribs), and TParis (talk · contribs) for your closes. I am grateful to you all. Cunard (talk) 02:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks to editors User:Churn and change and User:Eraserhead1 for their help in closing the RfC at Monty Hall problem. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 02:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Armbrust (talk · contribs), Jc37 (talk · contribs), Σ (talk · contribs), Nathan Johnson (talk · contribs), SilkTork (talk · contribs), MSGJ (talk · contribs), Callanecc (talk · contribs), Alanscottwalker (talk · contribs), TParis (talk · contribs), and Eraserhead1 (talk · contribs), for your closes. Cunard (talk) 02:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to 28bytes (talk · contribs) for closing two very long ban discussions. NE Ent 23:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)