Removed: Talk:Involuntary commitment. |
Removed: Talk:French Revolution. |
||
Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
{{rfcquote|text= |
{{rfcquote|text= |
||
Should veterinary sources be given greater weight than the popular press for the lede and dog attack risk sections?[[User:PearlSt82|PearlSt82]] ([[User talk:PearlSt82|talk]]) 17:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)}} |
Should veterinary sources be given greater weight than the popular press for the lede and dog attack risk sections?[[User:PearlSt82|PearlSt82]] ([[User talk:PearlSt82|talk]]) 17:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC)}} |
||
'''[[Talk:French Revolution#rfc_6A81332|Talk:French Revolution]]''' |
|||
{{rfcquote|text= |
|||
Question: '''What should we do with the paragraph that says that the American revolution was an inspiration to the French Revolution, currently in the lede?''' |
|||
Good evening all, |
|||
I have come across a paragraph discussing the American revolution as a precursor or inspiration to the French Revolution. At first the suspect paragraph was in the lede, which I have now moved to the causes sections, as it seems more appropriate. |
|||
In doing so, I reviewed the sources involved for this paragraph, and found them to be lacking. In particular, these two claims are using rather unconvincing, and I'm uncertain of their veracity. [[User:Acebulf|Acebulf]] ([[User talk:Acebulf|talk]]) 15:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)}} |
|||
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |
{{RFC list footer|pol|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} |
Revision as of 16:01, 6 October 2020
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Should information about Iranian Azerbaijanis be listed under Azerbaijani diaspora, or should it be added to a separate section? (currently:[1]) - LouisAragon (talk) 14:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Democratic Progressive Party
Should this article include Simplified Chinese characters in its {{Infobox Chinese}} template? 17:28, 3 October 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Committee for a Workers' International (1974)
Should the following paragraph added by User:Abu ali be included in the body of the article or should the site(s) mentioned be listed under "External links" instead?
|
Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran
This RfC takes into account the points made in the previous RfC "about copy-editing "cult" claims in the article".
Shall we summarize the following:
|
Should the lead section refer to this person as a "journalist"? --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC) |
Should the following be adopted as a content guide for naming of Kyiv in other articles? Guy (help! - typo?) 11:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Andrew Hastie (politician)
Discussion above has mostly been about how to set out the political views of the subject at hand, who is an Australian federal Member of Parliament. There is consensus that political views should be outlined. What follows is an iteration of setting out the person's articulated principles then seeing they have become particular views or announcements. This seems to help avoid the problem of the section become a list of disconnected ideas. To be clear the below is what I'm proposing for the "Political views" section of the article on the subject. I welcome your suggestions, especially those who have contributed above @Onetwothreeip:@Controllingchaos:@Veronique Cognac:@Welsh Hamlet:@Damien Linnane:@BorderTensions: The Little Platoon (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Committee for a Workers' International (1974)
Should the infobox of this article include a link to internationalsocialist.net (one of the organizations that claims to be the successor of the original CWI - see International Socialist Alternative) socialistworld.net (an organization which claims to have dissolved and refounded the CWI - see Committee for a Workers' International (2019)), neither organization, or both organizations. There is a second dispute - I hope to open an RFC for it once the current RFC is concluded. Sowny (talk) 18:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC) |
Template talk:Italian political parties
Since this template will have to be modified following the results of the regional elections, I take this opportunity to propose the modification of the criterion that convinces me least of all, the no. 3 ("being represented by at least two MPs/MEPs"): the criterion is not clear, since it is unconditional, it could be a party completely incorporated into another major party, I would change it as follows "being represented with its name by at least one MP/MEP in the reference assembly". What about it?--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should the following content be removed? Chetsford (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC) |
Question: Should the Main Allied Leaders list in the article's infobox start with Franklin D. Roosevelt followed by Joseph Stalin, thus reversing the current order on the list. --E-960 (talk) 06:52, 24 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:List of Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign endorsements
Should Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu be added based on this article [2]?
Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should the analysis of Stickman's ruling in Butler v. Wolf include multiple points of view from legal sources, or is the current description, describing it as relying on Lochner appropriate? Trying to reconnect (talk) 20:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:2020 United States presidential election
Should this article include full-size templates presenting presidential nominees of third parties, like below? 00:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC) |
Talk:Governor General of Canada
Request for Comment: Should the term "viceroy" be used as a synonym for "Governor General" or "Lieutenant Governor" in articles on Canadian government?
--Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should every image of horse slaughter be removed from the Horse slaughter article? Mariolovr (talk) 17:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC) |
Lately, I have been arguing with editors, Joker0002710 and Mattia332, over whether Nicholas II should be characterized as a "good ruler" in the lead. In light of the sources I've cited as well as the overwhelming evidence set forth in the article, it is my position that such a description is a minority viewpoint which should not be used to sum up assessments of his reign recently made after the Soviet Union's fall. If the consensus among Wikipedia's Community is that this view should be included, I'll yield the argument. However, it seems very inappropriate to do so given the existing consensus on Nicholas's reign. Emiya1980 (talk) 22:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should the first sentence of the article state that Mark Duggan was "lawfully killed"? – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should the Black Lives Matter (2020) section include the following statement?
JimKaatFan (talk) 19:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC) |
If the Australian Labor Party is described as democratic socialist in the parties own constitution and our article also uses the same descriptor, should the info box reflect this also? Bacondrum (talk) 01:55, 14 September 2020 (UTC) |
Looking at reliable sources, would you describe Marxism-Leninism as an Authoritarian ideology?
|
Should we include a section on possible CIA participation in Camarena's interrogation, and his case more broadly, using this text at least, [3] and based on these sources? -Darouet (talk) 22:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC) |
Should veterinary sources be given greater weight than the popular press for the lede and dog attack risk sections?PearlSt82 (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2020 (UTC) |
- ^ "In Defence of Trotskyism – the documents – Marxist.net". Retrieved 2020-03-28.
- ^ "Continuing the Fight for International Socialism". International Socialist Alternative. Retrieved September 19, 2020.