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. 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.

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 16 April 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 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.

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. A helper script is available to make listing easier.

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.

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 {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry here. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note. A request where a close is deemed unnecessary can be marked with {{Not done}}. After addressing a request, 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

Administrative discussions

Talk:Pentagon_UFO_videos#Request_for_comment_regarding_WP:UNDUE_regarding_UFO_analysis

I am the editor who opened this RfC, due to feedback from multiple editors,I was told I should make a new more clearer RfC. I agreed.Bigbaby23 (talk)

RfCs

Talk:Pontius Pilate#ERA RFC

(Initiated 1272 days ago on 21 November 2020) Abeyant era style debate which could be closed at this point. Avilich (talk) 20:11, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Parga#RfC about the history section

(Initiated 1263 days ago on 30 November 2020) A contested topic which needs a formal close, but the close looks easy. The last non-bot edit was 19 December 2020. Johnuniq (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Germans#Rfc_for_due_weight_regarding_the_ethnic_vs._nationality_meaning_of_"Germans"

(Initiated 1258 days ago on 5 December 2020) This Rfc ended a few days ago and followed lengthy discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups and Talk:Germans. Because of the divisiveness of the issue and the polarized (and at times tense) nature of the discussion, the Rfc would probably be best closed by an administrator. --Tserton (talk) 03:41, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RFC:_"Jihad_Watch",_should_it_be_deprecated_as_a_source?

(Initiated 1251 days ago on 12 December 2020) Opened to determine status of source, because a previous discussion had not been an "official" RFC and thus could not officially deprecate. It has not run a full 30 days but I am ok with someone looking at it for closure. IHateAccounts (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_What_to_do_with_category_links_to_Commons?

(Initiated 1251 days ago on 12 December 2020) Controversial topic, will need a proper closing when the time comes. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Mike_DeWine#RFC_for_the_Impeachment_Resolution_Section

(Initiated 1248 days ago on 15 December 2020) Not a difficult one, but probably needs a formal close for other reasons. —valereee (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussions

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	19	12	31
TfD	0	0	0	0	0
MfD	0	0	1	3	4
FfD	0	0	0	3	3
RfD	0	0	18	46	64
AfD	0	0	0	0	0

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 October 5#File:The Terror of War.jpg

(Initiated 1483 days ago on 24 April 2020) Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 October 5#File:The Terror of War.jpg There has been inconclusive discussion of the copyright status of this image at least since April 2020, current FFD on 5 October 2020 Robert McClenon (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

This FFD was not opened on 5 October 2020 but on 24 April 2020, it has been relisted twice. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:16, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Community_Regional_Medical_Center

(Initiated 1270 days ago on 22 November 2020) I believe this discussion has run its course and there is rough consensus. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Other types of closing requests

Talk:Sha Tin New Town#Merger proposal

(Initiated 2583 days ago on 20 April 2017) It would be helpful if an uninvolved editor could assess the merge/rewrite proposal at Talk:Sha Tin New Town#Merger proposal. Matthew hk (talk) 08:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:NRC Handelsblad#Proposed merge with Algemeen Handelsblad and Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant

(Initiated 1652 days ago on 7 November 2019) It would be helpful if an uninvolved editor could assess the merge proposal for some Dutch newspapers at Talk:NRC Handelsblad#Proposed merge with Algemeen Handelsblad and Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant. Klbrain (talk) 01:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Kanthapuram A. P. Aboobacker Musliyar#Merging of Page

(Initiated 1538 days ago on 29 February 2020) It would be helpful if an experienced editor could assess the merge proposal for Fatwa of Sheikh Abubakr Ahmad on ISIS into Kanthapuram A. P. Aboobacker Musliyar. Klbrain (talk) 10:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Sha Tin#Parallel article - Sha Tin - Sha Tin New Town - Sha Tin District

(Initiated 1534 days ago on 4 March 2020) It would be helpful if an uninvolved editor could assess the merge/rewrite proposal at Talk:Sha Tin#Parallel article - Sha Tin - Sha Tin New Town - Sha Tin District. Matthew hk (talk) 08:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Scriptural texts (WP:RSPSCRIPTURE)

(Initiated 1453 days ago on 24 May 2020) Vigorous discussion, closing would be good for future reference. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Now at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 297#Scriptural texts (WP:RSPSCRIPTURE). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:03, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Human uses of living things/1

(Initiated 1338 days ago on 16 September 2020) Need a decision at this reassessment. Completing the close can be a little bit complicated so I can do that part if needed. AIRcorn (talk) 09:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:LNU Lightning Complex fires#Proposal to merge Hennessey Fire into LNU Lightning Complex fires

(Initiated 1320 days ago on 3 October 2020) This discussion has essentially died out. There appears to be some level of consensus for merging Hennessey Fire into LNU Lightning Complex fires, in keeping with the standard practice on the Wildfires WikiProject. See the talk page discussion for more details. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 174#Move good/featured article topicons next to article name

(Initiated 1318 days ago on 6 October 2020) Would an experienced editor please assess the consensus at this usability-related discussion? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:51, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Replace hyphen with en-dash in Wikipedia browser tab name – MediaWiki:Pagetitle

(Initiated 1290 days ago on 3 November 2020) requesting a closure on a discussion which affects all browser tabs of English Wikipedia. —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:20, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2020 November#John Boyd (footballer, born 1929)

(Initiated 1278 days ago on 15 November 2020) – ask that this be closed as soon as possible. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 16:09, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 321#The Canary

(Initiated 1275 days ago on 18 November 2020) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 321#The Canary? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 23:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2020 November#Telephone (game)

(Initiated 1274 days ago on 19 November 2020) – ask that this be closed as soon as possible. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 16:09, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Turks_in_Germany#Revising_Demographic_stats_in_the_infobox

(Initiated 1263 days ago on 30 November 2020) Hi, requesting an experienced editor/moderator to review this very contentious and accusational discussion. Will Tyson for real (talk) 20:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

This seems to mostly be a discussion between 2 people. Not much a closer can do here, suggest WP:DR. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Tibetan_Political_Review

(Initiated 1243 days ago on 20 December 2020) Consensus seems clear that the source can't be considered reliable, but a formal closure would be helpful in this case as to whether that means we also have consensus that it's therefore not reliable for anything other than its own opinions, attributed. I know that seems like splitting hairs, sorry. —valereee (talk) 00:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2019–20_Hong_Kong_protests#End_date

(Initiated 1235 days ago on 28 December 2020) Could an experienced editor please review this discussion? --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)