Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

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

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.

Ball1.png

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 closure is 30 days (opened on or before 29 April 2015); 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 an RfC opens, unless the outcome is very obvious, so that there is enough time for a full discussion.

Ball2.png

If consensus is unclear, then post a neutral request here for assistance.

Please ensure that your request for a close is brief and neutrally worded. Please include a link to the discussion. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. Be prepared to wait for someone to review the discussion. If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. You can start discussion at the original page or request a Closure review at Administrators' noticeboard with a link to the discussion page and the policy-based reason you believe the closure should be overturned. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Closure review archive for previous closure reviews.

Billiardball3.png

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.

Once a discussion listed on this page has been closed, please add {{Close}} or {{Done}} and a note to the request here, after which the request will be archived.

Contents

Requests for closure

XfD[edit]

ANI proposal to dissolve IBAN between me and Catflap08[edit]

This proposal received no opposition, was supported by one of the subjects and three other users; the other subject was neutral. But the thread got archived no result by a trigger-happy archive bot. It's not really a close request so much as a request to read the discussion and remove the WP:EDR entry accordingly. Hijiri 88 (やや) 10:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#History of the WWE - Long-running edit war[edit]

No comments for a couple of days bar my bump, consensus is pretty clear. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 00:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 11 days ago on 18 May 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 April 23[edit]

There are two open discussions that were open almost a month ago, and nobody has commented on them in over 3 weeks, and to me, the conesus seems pretty clear on both of them. JDDJS (talk) 19:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 36 days ago on 23 April 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Messy RfDs about Ottoman princesses[edit]

There are two expired RfDs on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4 which seem to have arisen from a botched move / fork sequence. I'm not sure I know what the best course of action is - can we have a fresh pair of admin eyes to close this and perform the appropriate remedial actions? Deryck C. 22:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 25 days ago on 4 May 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

CfD backlog[edit]

There are currently many open discussions, including some going all the way back to December. Please see the list at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Discussions_awaiting_closure. - jc37 17:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

As of 12 May, December is done but there are three remaining from January, 9 from February and over 70 from March. – Fayenatic London 07:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 February 21[edit]

There are twelve discussions of Feb 21 still open while it's nearly two months later. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 97 days ago on 21 February 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Down to ten discussions as of now. Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Don't think so, I still count 12. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
OK, but it's now down to 9. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Now down to two. Some of the usual CfD closers can't close these as they have participated in the discussions. – Fayenatic London 16:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_3#Template:2010s_controversial_killings_of_African_Americans[edit]

Please disposition Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_3#Template:2010s_controversial_killings_of_African_Americans, which has been open for over two weeks without relisting. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 26 days ago on 3 May 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 03:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion backlog[edit]

(Initiated 34 days ago on 25 April 2015) WP:TFD now has a backlog stretching back more than one month (April 25, 26, 28; May 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). Could an uninvolved admin please help close some of the discussions? Thanks, Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 13:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Requested moves[edit]

Requested moves backlog

Anyone have a mop? Some of the discussions there are backed up all the way from early February. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 08:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Update: situation is much improved, but there's still a six-week backlog of move requests. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Masjid al-Haram#Requested move 1 May 2015[edit]

The move request was withdrawn about half a month ago (on 8 May 2015), and there have been no more comments since that day. Khestwol (talk) 12:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 28 days ago on 1 May 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Rodney Moore (pornographic actor)#Requested move 27 April 2015[edit]

This discussion has been open for almost a month now. Could someone please close it already? The article is WP:Move protected, making WP:Non-admin closure impossible. (Initiated 32 days ago on 27 April 2015) Rebecca1990 (talk) 06:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cytherea (actress)#Requested move 27 April 2015[edit]

This discussion has been open for over a month now. Could someone please close it already? (Initiated 32 days ago on 27 April 2015) Rebecca1990 (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Requests for comment[edit]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#RfC: Do list items need their own WP article in order to be sourced in list articles?[edit]

This discussion, begun April 27, has reached a point of repeated arguments by the same few editors. It is over 26,000 words long after fewer than 10 days. If it's left without closure for much longer, it will be the size of a small novel and daunt any attempts at closing it. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 32 days ago on 27 April 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • It's two weeks since the initial request, and the time-consuming morass is worse than ever. Respectfully requesting closure, with the acknowledgment that it might be a challenging task. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm the originator of the RfC. I agree, and came here to request formal closure by an uninvolved admin. The issue is contentious and consensus remains unclear; It may also have wiki-wide implications. The RfC discussion is quite lengthy, so a summary of the RfC (i.e. a concise outline of the main points presented by both sides of the issue) is here. Lapadite (talk) 02:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
This RfC's introduction is essentially flawed: It does not propose two (or more) options to choose from, neither does it make a proposal which may me supported or opposed. This led some !voters to support or oppose a large variety of things without being clear how these thing stand in connection with what other !voters support or oppose. Other !voters said yes or no, while the introduction actually presents different positions (for or against) concerning the inclusion of different things, to wit: non-notable, non-sourceable, and/or no-wiki-article-having awards. That makes it even more difficult to know what these !voters actually said yes or no to. For that reason, the usual closers active in this area have so far refrained from tackling this thread. Kraxler (talk) 21:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I've looked through this and attempted to find a conclusion, but unfortunately that is no consensus to do anything due to lack of clarity. Unless someone else finds a better one, it looks like this is the likely close to be implemented. Mdann52 (talk) 19:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mdann52 and Kraxler:, as it states in the "Summary of RfC" section linked above, the RfC asked: "[per WP policies and guidelines] do items in list articles - such as awards in "List of awards and nominations received by (film or person)" articles - need to have their own WP article in order to be sourced in list articles? The RfC was focused on awards in List of awards and nominations articles." It was also clarified in the RfC intro that it was not a proposal but a question to be answered/clarified per current policies & guidelines. Editors responded to various elements of the issue. That summary section, and perhaps the section below it, encapsulates the entire lengthy discussion. As you may gather from the older discussion(s) linked in the RfC intro and in the Summary, this is a long-standing issue, particularly with the wikiproject, and there never has been a proper community consensus to refer to, one way or another. Some editors have insisted on guidelines changes (e.g., objective & restrictive criteria for all list articles) to support an objection to policies & guidelines that allow awards/organizations without WP articles to be reliably sourced in lists articles; but formal proposals of course are outside the scope of the RfC (and a wikiproject). I'm not sure what more can be clarified here. I can only point to the summary section for the outline of points presented in the entire discussion. Lapadite (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


Talk:Bengali people#List of people in the collage[edit]

An RfC and a survey was opened following inconsistency and edit-war for place in the collage at infobox top. After long discussion a list of 30 people and a resulting collage image was made. This process started on March 31. A total of 122 nominations were made, 29 editors voted, 14 editors discussed, 2 filter systems were discussed and merged, 11 editors have agreed to ratify it, 3 editors complained, 1 editor remained apprehensive. This is time for closing this long discussion. An non-involved admin would be the right person to do it. –nafSadh did say 06:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 59 days ago on 31 March 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:MacBook (2015 version)#Merge Discussion: MacBook (2015 version)→MacBook[edit]

Would an uninvolved editor please close this merge request? PaleAqua (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 70 days ago on 20 March 2015) (This was when the section was created, but it has since been renamed.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion[edit]

I would like to have an experienced admin close the RfC at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. The consensus for BLPs is pretty clear, but additional guidance on whether I need to post another RfC for fictional characters, dead people, schools, nations, etc., that contain "religion = None" in the infoboxes would be helpful. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

  • (Initiated 38 days ago on 21 April 2015) Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Damat Ibrahim Pasha#Nomenclature[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Damat Ibrahim Pasha#Nomenclature (Initiated 70 days ago on 20 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Confusion over taxonomy of subtribe Panina and taxon homininae (are chimps hominins)[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Confusion over taxonomy of subtribe Panina and taxon homininae (are chimps hominins) (Initiated 70 days ago on 20 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Meghan Trainor#RFC: Describing Trainor[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Meghan Trainor#RFC: Describing Trainor (Initiated 38 days ago on 21 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:G. Edward Griffin#RfC on admissibility of additional sources[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:G. Edward Griffin#RfC on admissibility of additional sources (Initiated 39 days ago on 20 April 2015)? Please consider Talk:G. Edward Griffin#RfC on sources in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:MyWikiBiz#RfC on possible BLP issues[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:MyWikiBiz#RfC on possible BLP issues (Initiated 50 days ago on 9 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Elizabeth Warren#RfC Native American Ancestry Controversy section[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Elizabeth Warren#RfC Native American Ancestry Controversy section (Initiated 50 days ago on 9 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:History of economic thought#How to improve article navigation, does anything need removing[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:History of economic thought#How to improve article navigation, does anything need removing (Initiated 67 days ago on 23 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Capitalist mode of production (Marxist theory)#How to remove bias[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Capitalist mode of production (Marxist theory)#How to remove bias (Initiated 66 days ago on 24 March 2015)? The opening poster wrote: "Should be article be redirected, or kept and improved?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Advanced capitalism#Redirect to Capitalism section?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Advanced capitalism#Redirect to Capitalism section? (Initiated 66 days ago on 24 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cerne Abbas Giant#RfC: Does WP:MOSUNIT not apply to this article?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cerne Abbas Giant#RfC: Does WP:MOSUNIT not apply to this article? (Initiated 60 days ago on 30 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Minority language#Minority languages ​​in geographical articles[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Minority language#Minority languages ​​in geographical articles (Initiated 55 days ago on 4 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I question if this RFC is in the right place. It probably should have been done at MOS as its asking for more than just the article in question. An admin should probably weigh in on this one. AlbinoFerret 22:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cold War II#Add "Terminology" section?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Cold War II#Add "Terminology" section? (Initiated 29 days ago on 30 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Malta#Which map should we use in main infobox?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Malta#Which map should we use in main infobox? (Initiated 27 days ago on 2 May 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Template talk:World War I infobox#RfC (14 April 2015)[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:World War I infobox#RfC (14 April 2015) (Initiated 45 days ago on 14 April 2015)? The opening poster wrote: "Should the Emirate of Jabal Shammar be included in the infobox as a co-belligerent of the Central Powers?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Places in Bangladesh)#Request for Comments[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Places in Bangladesh)#Request for Comments (Initiated 41 days ago on 18 April 2015)? Please consider Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Proposal for WP:NCGN#Bangladesh in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Proper noun#Merge?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Proper noun#Merge? (Initiated 60 days ago on 30 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cyclone Pam#RfC: Extreme Weather[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Cyclone Pam#RfC: Extreme Weather (Initiated 75 days ago on 15 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Foie gras/Archive 6#RfC[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Foie gras/Archive 6#RfC (Initiated 68 days ago on 22 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Magneto (power generation)#RFC on the Status of This Article[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Magneto (power generation)#RFC on the Status of This Article (Initiated 57 days ago on 2 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Tensor#RFC: is V = V**?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Tensor#RFC: is V = V**? (Initiated 47 days ago on 12 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Broke with Expensive Taste#RfC: Should the ratings template repeat a score discussed in prose?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Broke with Expensive Taste#RfC: Should the ratings template repeat a score discussed in prose? (Initiated 49 days ago on 10 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Jimi Hendrix#RfC: Adding acid rock as a genre in the article's infobox[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jimi Hendrix#RfC: Adding acid rock as a genre in the article's infobox (Initiated 49 days ago on 10 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Jimi Hendrix#Death of Jimi Hendrix article merge[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jimi Hendrix#Death of Jimi Hendrix article merge (Initiated 38 days ago on 21 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Federalist (website)#RfC: Is this content suitable for inclusion?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:The Federalist (website)#RfC: Is this content suitable for inclusion? (Initiated 37 days ago on 22 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Honorific nicknames in popular music#RFC re Paul Whiteman[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Honorific nicknames in popular music#RFC re Paul Whiteman (Initiated 37 days ago on 22 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:List of cities proper by population#RfC best resolution of definition of title and content[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of cities proper by population#RfC best resolution of definition of title and content (Initiated 72 days ago on 18 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Misconduct in the Philadelphia Police Department#RfC: Should this be a list of cases or a discussion of PPD misconduct? If a list, what are the inclusion criteria be?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Misconduct in the Philadelphia Police Department#RfC: Should this be a list of cases or a discussion of PPD misconduct? If a list, what are the inclusion criteria be? (Initiated 59 days ago on 31 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Campus rape#Request for Comments (RFC) on Campus Rape article.[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Campus rape#Request for Comments (RFC) on Campus Rape article. (Initiated 39 days ago on 20 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Barelvi#RfC: Should the definition of Intercession be included?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Barelvi#RfC: Should the definition of Intercession be included? (Initiated 56 days ago on 3 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Soften the notification number[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Soften the notification number (Initiated 44 days ago on 15 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Uniform tables[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Uniform tables (Initiated 34 days ago on 25 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Article titles/Archive 51#RfC: putting more emphasis on description in WP:CONCISE and across WP:AT[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Article titles/Archive 51#RfC: putting more emphasis on description in WP:CONCISE and across WP:AT (Initiated 66 days ago on 24 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Easy Living (1949 film)#Hatnotes (or the equivalents)[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Easy Living (1949 film)#Hatnotes (or the equivalents) (Initiated 59 days ago on 31 March 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: some proper talkin' about station title conventions[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: some proper talkin' about station title conventions (Initiated 52 days ago on 7 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: Should the USSTATION convention be rolled back?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: Should the USSTATION convention be rolled back? (Initiated 44 days ago on 15 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: Should the USSTATION capitalization advice be adhered to, using reliable sources for what is an official station name?[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (US stations)#RfC: Should the USSTATION capitalization advice be adhered to, using reliable sources for what is an official station name? (Initiated 44 days ago on 15 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#Relax duplicate linking rule[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#Relax duplicate linking rule (Initiated 97 days ago on 21 February 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiBullying#Recent changes to the essay[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiBullying#Recent changes to the essay (Initiated 69 days ago on 21 March 2015)? See the subsection Wikipedia talk:WikiBullying#WP:RfC: Should the page be changed back to its previous version, partially or wholly? in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#RfC: Expanding the permissiveness around ethnicity or sexuality[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#RfC: Expanding the permissiveness around ethnicity or sexuality (Initiated 56 days ago on 3 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Siege of Kobanî#RfC: Icons used in prose[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Siege of Kobanî#RfC: Icons used in prose (Initiated 40 days ago on 19 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol#Proposal for a "wait" tag[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol#Proposal for a "wait" tag (Initiated 52 days ago on 7 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Template talk:Freenode#RfC: Template modification[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Freenode#RfC: Template modification (Initiated 53 days ago on 6 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback#Proposed change[edit]

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback#Proposed change (Initiated 36 days ago on 23 April 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)