User:Centrx/Sandbox/Request for comment
Wikipedia:Requests for comment (RfC) is the open part of the dispute resolution process, by which editors can seek broader input regarding disputes over article content, user conduct, and Wikipedia policy and guidelines.
All editors are welcome to help resolve disputes by responding to RfCs. It will help the RfC process if everyone who lists an RfC tries to help out at least one other page listed.
| Contents: |
|---|
| Provide comment:
Request comment on: |
Request comment on articles
[edit]An RfC on article content is for helping to develop consensus or for gaining an outside perspective to help settle a deadlocked disagreement or make a better decision. Note that all Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view and must include only verifiable information, and no original research.
Before adding an entry here:
- Do not post an RfC before working towards a resolution with other article contributors first. Whatever the disagreement, the first step in resolving a dispute is to talk to the other parties involved. Be civil, and assume good faith in other editors' actions.
- Consider gauging consensus on a proposed revision or specific issue by straw poll at Wikipedia:Current surveys, or getting a third opinion on a controversy that involves only two editors.
- If you want general help in improving an article, such as to Featured status, then list it at Peer review. Peer review is not for content disputes.
- Consider consulting the relevant WikiProject, especially for expert subjects like at WikiProject Mathematics. For disputes over implementing Wikipedia policy, consider consulting the relevant policy, guideline, or style page.
Instructions
- Create a section for the RfC on the article Talk page with a brief, neutral statement of the issue. Example
- In the relevant topic area, listed below, link to that section on the Talk page.
- Sign entries with the date only. Use five tildes: ~~~~~.
All issues related to a topic area, even if about the article title or inclusion of images, go in the section for that topic area. If an issue is miscategorized, please move it to the appropriate section. If you are not certain in which area an issue belongs, you can put it in two places if you want, but do not crosspost more than that. For requesting comment on style issues, consider posting at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Style issues.
| Issues by topic area | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on the topic pages | ||
| Economy and trade | (watch) | (add entry) |
| History and geography | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Language and linguistics | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Maths, science, and technology | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Media, art and literature | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Politics | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Religion and philosophy | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Society, law, and sex | (watch) | (add entry) |
Request comment on users
[edit]To report an offensive or confusing user name in violation of Wikipedia's username policy, see subpage User names.
To report spam, page blanking, and other blatant vandalism, see Wikipedia:Vandalism.
A user-conduct RfC is for discussing specific users who have violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Carefully read the following before filing an RfC.
- Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours. The evidence, preferably in the form of diffs, should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it.
- RfCs brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary are not permitted. Repetitive, burdensome, or unwarranted filing of meritless RfCs is an abuse of the dispute resolution process. RfC is not a venue for personal attack.
- An RfC may bring close scrutiny on all involved editors, and can lead to binding arbitration. Filing an RfC is therefore not a step to be taken lightly or in haste.
- Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the neutral point of view policy, belong in an Article RfC.
- For a mild-to-moderate conflict, you might try Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, a quick, simple way to get an outside view.
| User-related issues | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on each page | ||
| User conduct | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Offensive or confusing user names | (watch) | (add entry) |
Request comment on policy and conventions
[edit]A policy or guideline RfC is for requesting comment on proposed policies and guidelines or proposed revisions to existing policies and guidelines. A style RfC is for requesting comment on style issues in articles, or for proposals on new or revised recommendation in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Policy matters are also discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy).
With such proposals, remember the Five pillars that fundamentally define Wikipedia's character. Remember the three content policies whose principles are absolute and non-negotiable: Neutral point of view, Verifiability, and No original research. Also, remember what Wikipedia is not.
| General policy and convention issues | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on each page | ||
| Wikipedia style, referencing, layout and WikiProjects | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Wikipedia policies, guidelines and proposals | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Current Surveys | (watch) | (add entry) |
Responding to RfCs
[edit]All editors are welcome to provide comment to assist in reaching agreements or to provide their opinions. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; all articles and policies must follow Neutral point of view, Verifiability, and No original research. This is not a vote.
- Try not to be confrontational. Be friendly and civil, and assume good faith in other editors' actions.
- Mediate where possible - identify common ground, attempt to draw editors together rather than push them apart.
- If necessary, educate users by referring to the appropriate Wikipedia policies.
- On user conduct RfCs, do not create "disendorsement" sections on RfCs. If you disagree with something someone else has said, you may add your own separate statement explaining why you disagree. Do not create a "Users who do not agree with this summary" section, or the equivalent. This tends be a confrontational act that is not productive.
Article, policy, and user RfCs are listed below. To view all of these on one page, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All.
| Article issues by topic area | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on the topic pages | ||
| Economy and trade | (watch) | (add entry) |
| History and geography | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Language and linguistics | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Maths, science, and technology | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Media, art and literature | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Politics | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Religion and philosophy | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Society, law, and sex | (watch) | (add entry) |
| General policy and convention issues | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on each page | ||
| Wikipedia style, referencing, layout and WikiProjects | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Wikipedia policies, guidelines and proposals | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Current Surveys | (watch) | (add entry) |
| User-related issues | ||
|---|---|---|
| Further instructions are on each page | ||
| User conduct | (watch) | (add entry) |
| Offensive or confusing user names | (watch) | (add entry) |
See also
[edit]- Archives of user conduct disputes
- Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Requests for comment, lists subpages of this page
[[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution|{{PAGENAME}}]] [[Category:Wikipedia editorial validation|{{PAGENAME}}]]