Wikipedia:Closure requests

"WP:CR" redirects here. You may be looking for Wikipedia:Cleanup resources, Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects, Wikipedia:Copyrights, or Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

The Closure requests 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 appears 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.

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 14 April 2024); if consensus becomes clear before that and discussion has slowed, then it may be closed earlier. 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 a discussion has ended to get a formal closure from an uninvolved editor. When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting closure and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.

If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here; be sure to include a link to the discussion itself. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. A helper script is available to make listing discussions easier.

If you disagree with a particular closure, please discuss matters on the closer's talk page, 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.

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 from February of 2013 discussed the process for appealing a closure and whether or not an administrator could summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus of that discussion 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#Non-admin closure for details.

To reduce editing conflicts and an undesirable duplication of effort when closing a discussion listed on this page, please append {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry here. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note, and consider sending a {{Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. A request where a close is deemed unnecessary can be marked 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}}.

Requests for closure

See also: Wikipedia:Requested moves § Elapsed listings, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Awaiting closure, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion § Old discussions, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion § Old business

Requests for comment

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Baltic states-related articles#RFC: Revisiting the birthplace infobox question

(Initiated 1065 days ago on 14 June 2021) Requesting long overdue closure, please. GoodDay (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Government bio infoboxes, should they be decapitalized or not.

(Initiated 1025 days ago on 23 July 2021) Requesting a panel of 3-4 uninvolved editors to evaluate and close this discussion. What began as an RfC (linked in the header), proceeded with discussion at the closing admin's user talk, and generated a close challenge at WP:AN. Chetsford, the closing admin, recently unclosed and recommended a panel close. I agree. I have linked all the pertinent discussions for context on the need for solid closure, not to suggest that the new closers should evaluate or consider arguments presented outside of the original RfC. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 03:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure if this is common practice, so I don't know if there's any established way to build a panel. Perhaps interested, uninvolved editors could indicate so below, and we wait until there's 3? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll throw my name in the hat. Colin M (talk) 23:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers and Colin M: I'd be interested to join. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Keith_Urban#RFC_on_nationality_in_the_lead

(Initiated 1017 days ago on 1 August 2021) Started well over a month ago, there has been a ton of discussion, but 25 days since the last comment (not counting an edit to my original comment). I think it's time for an uninvolved editor to access the consensus. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:45, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#RfC on non-notable pre-transition names of deceased trans people

(Initiated 1013 days ago on 4 August 2021) This high-profile discussion will reach the 30-day mark tomorrow and requires an experienced, uninvolved closer. It's been listed at WP:CENT for a while, and has therefore attracted a great number of editors. Consensus is certainly unclear. Ganesha811 (talk) 16:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

It looks like Valereee, RoySmith, and Ymblanter are in the process of  Doing... this. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, we are working on the closing statement.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics#RFC: Are Australian state governors, heads of state?

(Initiated 1005 days ago on 12 August 2021) The RFC template has now expired. Would appreciate a review & decision on said-RFC :) GoodDay (talk) 02:09, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#RFC: Incumbent section of 'Year in place' articles.

(Initiated 1003 days ago on 14 August 2021)

• The template has expired. Would appreciate a closure & decision on this RFC. GoodDay (talk) 20:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Austria-Hungary#RfC:_National_Flags_vs_Civil_Ensign

(Initiated 990 days ago on 27 August 2021)

• After a flurry of initial activity, this has stalled out in the past week or so (with no new comment since the 2nd), so an uninvolved editor is invited to take a look and close this discussion, which appears to have run its natural course. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk:BTS#RfC:_inclusion_of_content

(Initiated 989 days ago on 28 August 2021)

• The discussion has slowed down so I was hoping an uninvolved editor could close it. Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 21:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RFC:_Newsblaze

(Initiated 982 days ago on 4 September 2021)

• This RFC is a unanimous WP:SNOWBALL. It's been over a week since the last edit, if there's someone who agrees it's a SNOWBALL then a close would be most helpful, thank you! - David Gerard (talk) 16:00, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussions

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	19	21	40
TfD	0	0	0	2	2
MfD	0	0	2	1	3
FfD	0	0	2	3	5
RfD	0	0	24	49	73
AfD	0	0	0	11	11