Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure
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 20 October 2018); 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 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.
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
- 1 Requests for closure
- 1.1 Administrative discussions
- 1.2 RfCs
- 1.2.1 Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Revisiting the perennial US/U.S. debate
- 1.2.2 Talk:Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington#RFC on first sentence of article
- 1.2.3 Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations)#RfC on promoting this page to a guideline
- 1.2.4 Talk:Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation#Request for comments on the opening sentence
- 1.2.5 Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Year range for two consecutive years
- 1.2.6 Talk:Adam Milstein#RfC on Al Jazeera Documentary
- 1.2.7 Talk:Sport in Australia#RFC on Population-Wide Metrics
- 1.2.8 Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche#Activity in Slovenia section
- 1.2.9 Talk:Monsanto#RfC: Coverage of Roundup Cancer Case
- 1.2.10 Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party#RfC: Inclusion of expert opinions, views of pundits, activist groups, tweets, etc.
- 1.2.11 Talk:Oscar López Rivera#Request for comment: lead sentence
- 1.2.12 Talk:Jeremy Corbyn/Archive 17#RfC about a letter from Orthodox Rabbis
- 1.2.13 Talk:Alan Walker discography#RFC
- 1.2.14 Talk:Charles K. Kao#Request for comments on nationality
- 1.2.15 Talk:Ben Shapiro#RfC: Abortion and LGBT rights
- 1.2.16 Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Centralized discussion on the notability of political candidates
- 1.2.17 Talk:The Man in the High Castle (TV series)#Third season reconsideration
- 1.2.18 Talk:George Soros#American conservatives have repeated conspiracy theories about Soros
- 1.2.19 Talk:Sci-Hub#Request for comment on opening paragraph
- 1.2.20 Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Request for comment: DIFFCAPS
- 1.2.21 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Proposals regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht
- 1.2.22 Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal - Allow non-admins to close deletion discussions as "delete" at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
- 1.2.23 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC on use of CoinDesk
- 1.2.24 Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line
- 1.3 Deletion discussions
- 1.4 Other types of closing requests
- 1.4.1 Talk:Natalya Meklin#Awards
- 1.4.2 Talk:Iran and weapons of mass destruction#Merger proposal
- 1.4.3 Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#How to/should we add a Wikidata item link to Authority control
- 1.4.4 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 250#Electronic Intifada (Again)
- 1.4.5 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is an article in World Net Daily reliable source?
- 1.4.6 Talk:Thousand Oaks shooting#Names of the dead
Requests for closure[edit]
Administrative discussions[edit]
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured quality source review RfC[edit]
(Initiated 33 days ago on 16 October 2018) Would an uninvolved admin or other experienced editor please close this multi-question RfC when the time is up? The issue is whether to introduce a new way of approaching source reviewing at FAC. Many thanks, SarahSV (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- This does not need to be closed at 30 days (some late feedback has occurred due to some notification spamming) and WBOG has already volunteered, for anyone reviewing. So, I object to "close this RFC when the time is up?". --Izno (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- Izno and Mike Christie, we need someone entirely uninvolved to close this. WBOG was suggested by one of the supporters, and I have reservations for other reasons too. I posted here asking for someone uninvolved. Whoever decides to close can decide when it should be done. SarahSV (talk) 23:43, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- Izno, I've just seen your edit summary "that's really obnoxious". [1] Does that refer to my request here? If yes, what's obnoxious about it? SarahSV (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- I have moved the close request from the "RfCs" section to the "Administrative discussions" section. Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Survey[edit]
(Initiated 30 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced administrator please assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Survey? The RfC was initially initiated 6 September 2018, but was reopened 20 October. No one has commented since 8 November 2018 (~8 days at the time of posting). --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- I have moved the close request from the "RfCs" section to the "Administrative discussions" section. Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
ANI thread about James500[edit]
(Initiated 8 days ago on 11 November 2018)
There seems to be a general feeling that this has played out and should close, but with an actual close (due to observations of previous promises by the subject to stop various unconstructive behaviors which then resumed after scrutiny dissipated). I opened the report, and am semi-mollified by the subject's responses (am no longer seeking a T-ban, though several others are). However, an actual administrative warning is probably in order, at the minimum. This shouldn't just archive without action, or we have every indication that the problems would resume. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 15:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- It is not apparent to me that there have been any broken promises. In the one instance that I can find in this very lengthy (almost unreadable) thread, I think there may have been a serious misunderstanding as to what was being promised, as I did not expect my words to be construed by reading them one sentence at a time, in an entirely literal fashion, that ignores the context in which that sentence appears, the circumstances under which it was written, and whether the literal meaning is likely to be the intended one. I am not sure whether I should say anything else in the ANI thread. James500 (talk) 11:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Place new administrative discussions above this line[edit]
RfCs[edit]
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Revisiting the perennial US/U.S. debate[edit]
(Initiated 136 days ago on 6 July 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Revisiting the perennial US/U.S. debate? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Archived. Primefac (talk) 20:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 22:34, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington#RFC on first sentence of article[edit]
(Initiated 104 days ago on 6 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington#RFC on first sentence of article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations)#RfC on promoting this page to a guideline[edit]
(Initiated 93 days ago on 17 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations)#RfC on promoting this page to a guideline? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 23:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation#Request for comments on the opening sentence[edit]
(Initiated 91 days ago on 19 August 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation#Request for comments on the opening sentence? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Year range for two consecutive years[edit]
(Initiated 71 days ago on 9 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Year range for two consecutive years? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 23:45, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Adam Milstein#RfC on Al Jazeera Documentary[edit]
(Initiated 68 days ago on 11 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Adam Milstein#RfC on Al Jazeera Documentary? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 00:15, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Sport in Australia#RFC on Population-Wide Metrics[edit]
(Initiated 64 days ago on 15 September 2018) Would an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Sport in Australia#RFC on Population-Wide Metrics? Thanks, Siento (talk) 10:25, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 00:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche#Activity in Slovenia section[edit]
(Initiated 63 days ago on 16 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Shenphen Rinpoche#Activity in Slovenia section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 00:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Monsanto#RfC: Coverage of Roundup Cancer Case[edit]
(Initiated 62 days ago on 17 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Monsanto#RfC: Coverage of Roundup Cancer Case? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Done — Newslinger talk 21:58, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party#RfC: Inclusion of expert opinions, views of pundits, activist groups, tweets, etc.[edit]
(Initiated 62 days ago on 17 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party#RfC: Inclusion of expert opinions, views of pundits, activist groups, tweets, etc.? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Oscar López Rivera#Request for comment: lead sentence[edit]
(Initiated 58 days ago on 21 September 2018). Would an administrator experienced in BLP matters please assess the consensus at Talk:Oscar López Rivera#Request for comment: lead sentence? Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:43, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Jeremy Corbyn/Archive 17#RfC about a letter from Orthodox Rabbis[edit]
(Initiated 59 days ago on 21 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jeremy Corbyn/Archive 17#RfC about a letter from Orthodox Rabbis? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Alan Walker discography#RFC[edit]
(Initiated 58 days ago on 22 September 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Alan Walker discography#RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Charles K. Kao#Request for comments on nationality[edit]
(Initiated 49 days ago on 30 September 2018). Any uninvolved editor is welcome to assess consensus, or proper closing if determinate as no consensus. Matthew hk (talk) 03:32, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Ben Shapiro#RfC: Abortion and LGBT rights[edit]
(Initiated 47 days ago on 3 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ben Shapiro#RfC: Abortion and LGBT rights? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Centralized discussion on the notability of political candidates[edit]
(Initiated 44 days ago on 6 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Centralized discussion on the notability of political candidates? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:The Man in the High Castle (TV series)#Third season reconsideration[edit]
(Initiated 44 days ago on 6 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:The Man in the High Castle (TV series)#Third season reconsideration? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:George Soros#American conservatives have repeated conspiracy theories about Soros[edit]
(Initiated 39 days ago on 11 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:George Soros#American conservatives have repeated conspiracy theories about Soros? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Sci-Hub#Request for comment on opening paragraph[edit]
(Initiated 33 days ago on 16 October 2018) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Sci-Hub#Request for comment on opening paragraph? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 23:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Request for comment: DIFFCAPS[edit]
(Initiated 33 days ago on 17 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Request for comment: DIFFCAPS? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Proposals regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht[edit]
(Initiated 30 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Proposals regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht and formally close it? Discussion seems to have reached a conclusion, with no comments for a week. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:05, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal - Allow non-admins to close deletion discussions as "delete" at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion[edit]
(Initiated 30 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal - Allow non-admins to close deletion discussions as "delete" at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC on use of CoinDesk[edit]
(Initiated 30 days ago on 20 October 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC on use of CoinDesk? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line[edit]
Deletion discussions[edit]
Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line[edit]
Other types of closing requests[edit]
Talk:Natalya Meklin#Awards[edit]
(Initiated 331 days ago on 23 December 2017)
Could an uninvolved Admin assess and close this discussion regarding how awards are dealt with in articles. A summary of the issues is provided at Talk:Natalya Meklin#Resolving?.
The issues have been extensively discussed by two opposing protagonists with comments by other experienced editors (of which I am one). The issue has developed to the status of a dispute between the two protagonists and the article page has been protected. I have specifically requested an Admin close to allow for removal of the page protection.
A close would very likely resolve the dispute and allow a return to normal editing. Alternatively, if no consensus can be identified, a close indicating a further course to resolve the matter would be appropriate.
I believe the two protagonists to be genuine good-faith editors who are simply unable to reconcile their differences without third-party intervention. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 23:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Iran and weapons of mass destruction#Merger proposal[edit]
(Initiated 200 days ago on 2 May 2018) Can an admin assess the consensus of this merger discussion, please? --Mhhossein talk 16:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#How to/should we add a Wikidata item link to Authority control[edit]
(Initiated 166 days ago on 5 June 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#How to/should we add a Wikidata item link to Authority control? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 01:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 250#Electronic Intifada (Again)[edit]
(Initiated 38 days ago on 12 October 2018) Could an uninvolved experienced editor assess and close the discussions regarding the use of Electronic Intifada as a reliable source. Thank you --Andromedean (talk) 10:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- I've corrected the link to actual discussion; original link was to side discussion Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is an article in World Net Daily reliable source?[edit]
(Initiated 17 days ago on 2 November 2018) Could an experienced editor please assess consensus? –dlthewave ☎ 15:15, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- Adding Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Opinions sourced to WorldNetDaily which is closely related –dlthewave ☎ 16:14, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Thousand Oaks shooting#Names of the dead[edit]
(Initiated 9 days ago on 9 November 2018) - Could an experienced editor please assess consensus here? This discussion meets at least one of the criteria stated above for uninvolved close. Some participants feel that "consensus remains unclear", and the raw count is 11–8. There is little question that "the issue is a contentious one". Thanks very much. ―Mandruss ☎ 14:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)