Fish and karate (talk | contribs) →Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Behavioural genetics/1: closing summary |
|||
Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
{{initiated|7 March 2018}} |
{{initiated|7 March 2018}} |
||
*I can help with the procedural elements of the close once consensus is determined. [[User:Aircorn|AIR<b style="color: green;">''corn''</b>]] [[User talk:Aircorn|(talk)]] 07:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC) |
*I can help with the procedural elements of the close once consensus is determined. [[User:Aircorn|AIR<b style="color: green;">''corn''</b>]] [[User talk:Aircorn|(talk)]] 07:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC) |
||
*:{{re|Aircorn}} - I see this as a close with the GA status being kept; the primary concerns (a lack of a criticism section; the lack of discussion of animal behaviour in favour of exclusively focusing on human behavioural genetics) have been addressed. If you can carry out all the procedural elements and tell me where to post that as the closing summary I'm happy to do that, or just link to this post. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:1.1em/1em Arial Black;letter-spacing:-0.09em">[[User:Fish and karate|<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#38a">Fish</u>]]+[[User_talk:Fish and karate|<u style="text-decoration:none;color:#B44">Karate</u>]]</u> 08:18, 29 May 2018 (UTC) |
|||
====[[Talk:Donald Trump#North Korea in lead]]==== |
====[[Talk:Donald Trump#North Korea in lead]]==== |
Revision as of 08:18, 29 May 2018
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 12 April 2024); 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.
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.
Requests for closure
Administrative discussions
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:DePiep_and_DYK
- (Initiated 2197 days ago on 7 May 2018)
This has gone on for long enough, and has not attracted any attention in the last two days. Vanamonde (talk) 04:21, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, could an uninvolved administrator please close this discussion? The consensus is fairly clear I think. Alex Shih (talk) 07:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Place new administrative discussions above this line
RfCs
Wikipedia:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC
(Initiated 2227 days ago on 6 April 2018) This one's quite complex (sorry!) and controversial, so probably needs multiple admins to close. I've been keeping track of the raw numbers for the !votes at [1] (which could do with double-checking), but obviously the numbers only tell a part of the story here. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Since the closure has a potential to be contested, three admins would definitely be a preference.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Working. Note: Polling is closed to enable a consensus to be determined. -- llywrch (talk) 21:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Specifying the code of football at first reference in team articles
(Initiated 2222 days ago on 11 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Specifying the code of football at first reference in team articles? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:26, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- This RFC is now archived at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_142#Specifying_the_code_of_football_at_first_reference_in_team_articles. Iffy★Chat -- 15:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Peter Thiel#Peter Thiel philanthropy section
(Initiated 2216 days ago on 17 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Peter Thiel#Peter Thiel philanthropy section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Existentialism Is a Humanism#RfC: what views in 'Existentialism is a Humanism' did Sartre reject and where and when did he do so?
(Initiated 2214 days ago on 19 April 2018) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Existentialism Is a Humanism#RfC: what views in 'Existentialism is a Humanism' did Sartre reject and where and when did he do so?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Donald Trump#Should we mention the Forbes 400 tapes in the 'wealth' section of the article?
(Initiated 2206 days ago on 28 April 2018) Would someone assess the consensus at Talk:Donald Trump#Should we mention the Forbes 400 tapes in the 'wealth' section of the article? Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:28, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line
Deletion discussions
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_February_13#Wrestling_and_professional_wrestling
(Initiated 2280 days ago on 13 February 2018) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_February_25#Category:Ancient_and_medieval_individual_animals
(Initiated 2268 days ago on 25 February 2018) Marcocapelle (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line
Other types of closing requests
Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Behavioural genetics/1
(Initiated 2258 days ago on 7 March 2018)
- I can help with the procedural elements of the close once consensus is determined. AIRcorn (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Aircorn: - I see this as a close with the GA status being kept; the primary concerns (a lack of a criticism section; the lack of discussion of animal behaviour in favour of exclusively focusing on human behavioural genetics) have been addressed. If you can carry out all the procedural elements and tell me where to post that as the closing summary I'm happy to do that, or just link to this post. Fish+Karate 08:18, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Donald Trump#North Korea in lead
(Initiated 2189 days ago on 15 May 2018) Could an uninvolved editor please assess consensus at Talk:Donald Trump#North Korea in lead? This was meant to be a quick survey to pick one of two versions of a phrase in the lead after some recent edits, but there is no obvious consensus, so the discussion requires a more subtle closure. There is an element of timeliness that weighs against keeping it open for 30 days. — JFG talk 19:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note there is an intimately related debate in the section below it: Talk:Donald_Trump#The_North_Korea_talks_are_WP:UNDUE_for_the_lead. Any closer should consider whether the two sections should be closed as a single unit. Alsee (talk) 21:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:List of Super Nintendo Entertainment System games#Merger proposal
Requesting an uninvolved editor to close this merge discussion.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:22, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Nextdoor#Proposed_new_language_for_"Racial_profiling"_section
(Initiated 2177 days ago on 27 May 2018) Could an uninvolved editor please assess consensus at Talk:Nextdoor#Proposed_new_language_for_"Racial_profiling"_section? Is this ready for closure or does it need to go to mediation? - BC1278 (talk) 00:06, 28 May 2018 (UTC)BC1278
Talk:Rick Kirby#Merger from Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)
(Initiated 2176 days ago on 28 May 2018) Though after a month the consensus appears to be clearly against a merge, and nobody has contested the notability of the sculpture, I would appreciate an uninvolved editor closing this discussion. Thanks! --Usernameunique (talk) 02:09, 28 May 2018 (UTC)