Added: Talk:Involuntary commitment. |
Added: Talk:French Revolution. |
||
Line 140: | Line 140: | ||
*'''Option 4:''' Publishes false or fabricated information, and should be [[WP:DEPS|deprecated]] as in the [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 220#Daily Mail RfC|2017 RfC]] of the ''[[Daily Mail]]''? |
*'''Option 4:''' Publishes false or fabricated information, and should be [[WP:DEPS|deprecated]] as in the [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 220#Daily Mail RfC|2017 RfC]] of the ''[[Daily Mail]]''? |
||
([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 22:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)}} |
([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 22:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)}} |
||
'''[[Talk:French Revolution#rfc_6A81332|Talk:French Revolution]]''' |
|||
{{rfcquote|text= |
|||
}} |
|||
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |
Revision as of 18:01, 6 September 2020
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Should the Commitment (mental health) article be merged into the Involuntary commitment article? Should it be vice versa? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:47, 6 September 2020 (UTC) |
If a news media outlet refers to a parties ideological position as say "radical-left" in dozens of articles covering the subject, would it be appropriate to then give a contrary description of the party as "centre-left" based on a single article from the exact same outlet? Is that cherry picking or misrepresenting the outlets broader reporting on the subject? Thanks in advance. Bacondrum (talk) 23:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
What is the reliability of the HuffPost?
|
Should the lede section more closely reflect this version or the current version? Ergo Sum 15:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should we additionally describe xi jinping as an "authoritarian leader" besides dictator? (see the discussion above)
|
There is a discussion going on regarding whether or not Muhammad Iqbal should be labeled an "Indian" in the lead section. 2 Editors have already displayed agreement that it should, however User:Idell, who is a Pakistani national with a manifest and obvious bias towards this topic, disagrees and thinks he wasn’t an Indian, and should rather be identified otherwise. The insistence on his identification as a "British Indian" makes little sense, as the specific type of state that existed at the time makes little difference to the national identity as "Indian", an identity which has existed for millennia. Furthermore, there is specific and explicit self-identification by the individual in question himself, which utilises "Indian", nothing more or less:
“Rumi is Sir Muhammad Iqbal’s great master ... he names himself as Mureed-i-Hindi (the Indian disciple)". [1] It is evident that bias caused by nationalism is causing the display of post hoc fallacies on a public encyclopedia which is supposed to embody freedom of information and bias-free impartiality. شاه عباس (talk) 11:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
Following on from the discussion started here:
Talk:Donald Trump#What happened to the succession boxes? How does the community feel about succession boxes and their inclusion in the articles about US Presidents specifically? The following three options were presented on the talk page above:
I genuinely believe they help navigation between articles, though they could often be trimmed down to avoid trivial items, and if they are too large, they can be collapsed into the Offices and distinctions box. That way if you are looking for them, they are there, but if not they are not taking up a lot of space at the bottom of the article. ScottishNardualElf (talk) 08:55, 1 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Joe Biden sexual assault allegation
Certain of Tara Reade's political leanings are, indeed, sourced, widely reported and RS discuss it as relevant to her "Joe Biden sexual assault allegation." I propose something be included in its WP article in this regard.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 14:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC) |
This RfC is based on two questions:
1. Should the first sentence, whether supported by a dictionary source (as it currently is) or other sources, limit the definition of violence to physical force? 2. Should the second sentence continue to place the definitions of violence that extend beyond physical force in the context of "less conventional definitions"...even while unsourced? For those viewing this RfC from an RfC listing, see above for more commentary on the matter. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 03:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:List of leaders of the Soviet Union
Should Khrushchev be included as a member of the post-Stalin troika after assuming a key position in the leadership after Beria’s removal? Emiya1980 (talk) 14:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
What is the reliability of the New York Post?
|
Should only one etymology theory be mentioned in the lede or should all of the etymological theories be discussed in their own section? Zakaria1978 (talk) 03:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics
Is the term right-wing
|
Talk:Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania
Relative to this addition from August 24, should the article contain a two-paragraph section about the rhetoric of slavery used by Dickinson and others, and a paragraph introducing it in the lead section? Binksternet (talk) 21:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC) |
The lead section should be changed to something like this:
|
In the 'operational history' section, there is a large and unnecessary part about the India-Pakistan aerial clash. Can we remove that and put back the older version, which simply stated that India claimed and Pakistan counterclaimed? So much content about this secondary thing is not necessary on article about a missile. 183.83.146.190 (talk) 01:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC) |
Looking at reliable sources, how should we describe the political position of Frances National Rally?
|
Per closing here [1] should Strauss's political party be included in the article?Casprings (talk) 14:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC) |
Template talk:Infobox officeholder
Recently, the template that appears on the infobox of every U.S. Senator was changed. It used to read "United States Senator from Anystate" Admin GoldRingChip changed this to "United States senator from Anystate". He also said that he wants this settled (see above), so I started this RfC.
|
Talk:David Zuckerman (politician)
Should David Zuckerman's Party be listed as Progressive or Democratic?MCUSRAP (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2020 (UTC) |
Should the article include the sentence: "As Argentina lays claim to the Falkland Islands, Falkland-born individuals have the right to claim Argentine citizenship."? Boynamedsue (talk) 11:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC) |
Should the infobox contain the Presidents and Prime Ministers of Hungary Mrs. Kounalakis served under while she was US Ambassador to Hungary, in addition to Barack Obama as the US President she served under? Glide08 (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:List of presidents of the United States
Recommend we divide up the party colours again, in the John Tyler & Andrew Johnson entries, the way they used to be. GoodDay (talk) 00:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC) |
Should the section of this article "Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory" be split to a stand-alone article titled "Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory"? (t · c) buidhe 00:52, 14 August 2020 (UTC) |
Should Kamala Harris be described as 'African American' in the lead? - MrX 🖋 11:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC) |
I got to the Austria-Hungary Wiki article some time ago and immediately noticed it displayed a wrong flag - in the place of the "country" flag, a "civil ensign" created for being used by civilian ships. As the article states, the country had no official flag, but the Habsburg flag, which as the article also shows was the official flag of both the Kingdom of Hungary and the Austrian Empire, was frequently used as an official flag. Since there existed no official flag, I believe the article should just not have any flag at all (like in the German wiki). I believe there is absolutely no reason why a naval "civil ensign" should be displayed in the place of the country flag. The exactly same point has apparently been made throughout the years - 15 years ago there was consensus that it was wrong but after the correction someone re-added the wrong civil ensign without discussion; in 2016, another user pointed out the same mistake, and the only response was agreeing with his comment and presenting a historical source in which the black-and-yellow Habsburg flag was used for the country; finally, in 2019, yet another user politely indicated that the flag was wrong, only 3 people participated in the discussion which was therefore short of a consensus, but yet another user concluded it was sensible to add the yellow-and-black flag to the article, except that it was removed afterwards by the same user who has removed it twice today. So I think we need the help of some experts here, which would be very much appreciated. Thanks. 213.245.147.96 (talk) 22:27, 11 August 2020 (UTC) |
Should the lead of this article include criticisms of Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories and its annexations of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem where those annexations are mentioned? Should the lead include Israel's settlement project and the sustained condemnations of that project from the international community? Nableezy 16:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Political parties
If one reliable source says a party is A: "right", and another reliable source says they are B: "far-right" and we join A and B together to imply a conclusion C: "right to far right" that is not mentioned by either of the sources. Is this an improper editorial WP:SYNTHESIS of published material or WP:OR? Bacondrum (talk) 23:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
What is the reliability of China Global Television Network (cgtn.com )?
|
- ^ Said, Farida. "REVIEWS: The Rumi craze". Archived from the original on 2007-09-27. Retrieved 2007-05-19.