Added: Talk:Julian Assange. |
|||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{rfclistintro}} |
{{rfclistintro}} |
||
</noinclude> |
</noinclude> |
||
'''[[Talk:Julian Assange#rfc_1815A4A|Talk:Julian Assange]]''' |
|||
{{rfcquote|text= |
|||
Should we include |
|||
"According to former intelligence officials, in the wake of the Vault 7 leaks, the CIA plotted to [[kidnapping|kidnap]] Assange from Ecuador's London embassy, and some senior officials discussed his potential assassination. [[Yahoo! News]] found "no indication that the most extreme measures targeting Assange were ever approved." Some of its sources stated that they had alerted House and Senate intelligence committees to the plans that Pompeo was suggesting." |
|||
In the body?[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 11:43, 3 October 2021 (UTC)}} |
|||
'''[[Template talk:China–Hong Kong border crossings#rfc_6DF7CDE|Template talk:China–Hong Kong border crossings]]''' |
'''[[Template talk:China–Hong Kong border crossings#rfc_6DF7CDE|Template talk:China–Hong Kong border crossings]]''' |
||
{{rfcquote|text= |
{{rfcquote|text= |
Revision as of 12:01, 3 October 2021
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Should we include
In the body?Slatersteven (talk) 11:43, 3 October 2021 (UTC) |
Template talk:China–Hong Kong border crossings
Hong Kong is not a sovereign nation and commonly known as part of China (PRC). So that
The title parameter should use which?
Matthew hk (talk) 09:01, 3 October 2021 (UTC) |
The proposal is to move the following sentences out of the ethnic groups sub-section and to the end of the paragraph at the start of the demography section: "The census results are contested by the Republika Srpska statistical office and by Bosnian Serb politicians.[140] The dispute over the census concerns the inclusion of non-permanent Bosnian residents in the figures, which Republika Srpska officials oppose.[141] The European Union's statistics office, Eurostat, concluded in May 2016 that the census methodology used by the Bosnian statistical agency is in line with international recommendations.[142]" and to add something like "The RS statistical office has published its own, rival version of the results". Suggested references: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nana.12500, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17449057.2020.1821335 and https://www.sarajevotimes.com/republika-srpska-published-census-results/.
This is necessary because it's not only the results on ethnicity that are contested - the RS government claims that there are fewer people overall in the country than the state-level statistics office and uses its own results on the territory of the RS. 84.69.89.6 (talk) 15:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC) |
Is the background to the French response relevant to the article? AustraliaRodeo (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC) |
Talk:2021 North Kosovo protests
To prevent a potential edit war: should this article be in the Protests in Serbia category? Dege31 (talk) 14:17, 29 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Elections and referendums claims to contain guidelines as to how to title articles about such democratic exercises. However, it appears to be a guideline which is not in sync with practice and which sometimes even leads to results which are outright contrary to the WP:TITLE policy.
Thus, I propose that all relevant phrases of NCELECT be altered to reflect actual usage, i.e. elections should be at [Date] [location name or adjective] [election], with the preference being left to other considerations of the article title policy (notably WP:COMMONNAME). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty
Should the surname Windsor be included in the lead for George V and any of his descendants who also hold the surname, seeing as it's already included in infoboxes and in various portions of articles? The last discussion on this was 18 months ago, so I feel this is appropriate. DeaconShotFire (talk) 19:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC) |
I brought this up in the previous section, but I think that a formal RFC is best, so I'm copying it below.
I believe that we have reached the point where we can mention in the lede how his presidency is generally ranked by scholars and historians – specifically, that he is considered one of the worst presidents in history. We have done this for every former president; in fact we added rankings to Obama's lede less than a month after his term ended, and the scholarly consensus was far less clear for him than it is for Trump. Doing so will of course be controversial, but it is exactly how we have treated every other president, and it is backed by ample RS. See our article on the matter, the 2018 APSA survey, the 2018 Siena survey, the 2019 Northwestern CSDD survey (though the scope of that one was more limited), and the 2021 C-SPAN survey. |
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard
Question: Is it WP:DUE to state in the Australian Strategic Policy Institute article that In August 2021, Michael West Media contributor Marcus Reubenstein wrote that "sockpuppet" accounts and accounts that appeared to be linked to ASPI had edited its Wikipedia article,based off of the two references (1 2) present?
— Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC) |
Shall an image or a map be added to the article? (Options are provided at the "Long version") --George Ho (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2021 (UTC) |
Talk:2021 Canadian federal election
Should the People's Party of Canada be included in the article's infobox?
With more complete results, it looks like People's Party of Canada received 4.96% of the vote, slightly under the threshold usually used for infobox inclusion. The previous RfC was not conclusive on this matter. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:37, 25 September 2021 (UTC) |
Should the Serbian Radical Party be described as "right-wing to far-right" or "far-right"? --Vacant0 (talk) 17:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC) |
How should the infobox report Eritrea's population, given the lack of an official census? BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC) |
This rfc comes to open a discussion whether the current infobox picture should be replaced by either Image A or B below. |
Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war
Should Pakistan be included in the list of supported countries in the infobox, based on these sources? Sincerely, Գարիկ Ավագյան (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty
Should we include Head of the Commonwealth in the infoboxes of George VI, Elizabeth II & eventually Charles? A low attended-discussion (which was held April-May, July 2021) was declared a consensus (in Sept 2021, by @RandomCanadian:) to include at George VI, but there's been no consensus to include at Elizabeth II. We can't have inconsistency. So what say you all? GoodDay (talk) 02:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC) |
Talk:List of genocides by death toll
Should Native Americans be included on this list? This comes up, both pro and con, all the time on the talk page, and it would be excellent to have a solid RFC consensus to point to.
Yes is to support the inclusion on the list. No is to oppose inclusion on the list. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Should Republic TV (republicworld.com) be deprecated? Tayi Arajakate Talk 11:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
@WhinyTheYounger:
I'd like to start the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources discussion for Caixin. Which of the following best describe the work of Caixin:
WhisperToMe (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2021 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) is a defence and strategic policy think tank established by the Australian Department of Defence. Reports from ASPI are increasingly being used as sources on WP both with and without in-text attribution.
Which of the following best describe the work of ASPI:
Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC) |
Should we say
A "Assange must have known that Rich could not have been the source of the leak, because he received the mails when Rich was already dead and continued to confer with the Russian hackers to coordinate the release of the material" B. "Assange continued to deny Russian involvement even though he had received the emails after Rich's death and was conferring with the Russian hackers to coordinate the release of the material." C. "Assange received the emails when Rich was already dead, and continued to confer with the Russian hackers to coordinate the release of the material." D. “Assange received the emails when Rich was already dead, and continued to confer with the Guccifer 2 to coordinate the release of the material" E. Exclude. F. “Assange received the emails when Rich was already dead, and conferred with Guccifer 2.0 (a persona thought to have been created by Russian hackers) in order to coordinate the release of the material." Note sources are currently in the article or the talk page section titled Odd wording?Slatersteven (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2021 (UTC) |
Should the lead include the following paragraph?:
Snooganssnoogans (talk) 00:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC) |
Do the balance of current reliable sources assert that Guaido is "interim President of Venezuela"? --David Tornheim (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2021 (UTC) |
Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war
Should Turkey be listed as a full belligerent (not just support)? In light of 11 Turkish soldiers, including 3 pilots, recently being awarded combat medals for the war, for showing "great success in the victory in the Nagorno-Karabakh War between Azerbaijan and Armenia".[1][2] --Steverci (talk) 17:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC) |
I'm creating this based on previous discussions here and here. Should the lead section mention that the subject promotes conspiracy theories? ––FormalDude talk 05:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC) |
Template talk:Country data Afghanistan
Now that consensus has been reached to use only the IEA flag in the Afghanistan article (consensus link), which flag should be the main one here? |
Now that consensus has been reached to use only the IEA flag in the Afghanistan article (consensus link), what should be done here? |
Talk:Historical rankings of presidents of the United States
The table contains quanitative rankings of the presidents, based on scholar surveys. The racism survey (current rightmost column) is qualitative data and does not belong in the table. Previous discussion here. Kstern (talk) 00:47, 11 September 2021 (UTC) |
Three articles exist on Wikipedia with substantial overlap in geography: Santa Clara Valley, Santa Clara County, California, and Silicon Valley.
Should the three articles cover three different aspects with minimal overlap? If so, the proposed inclusion criteria for the three would be:
|
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
A dispute has been raging in June and July about reliability of some sources in the context of Jan Żaryn, a conservative Polish politician, which spilt into WP:NPPSG, hence the scope of the request. Details will be mentioned in the "Discussion" section on the dispute, so that the RfC question fits in here.
Please evaluate the following resources in the following manner:
Thank you. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 19:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC) |