103.6.159.68 (talk) →Talk:David L. Jones: no top-posting plesse |
Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs) →Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Breakfast: +Ethnic groups infoboxes |
||
Line 234: | Line 234: | ||
An affirmative close would authorizes a request to the WMF to end this Flow trial and return (the) conversations to a talk page. All that is needed is a close. I can take care of delivering the request to the appropriate WMF page. [[User:Alsee|Alsee]] ([[User talk:Alsee|talk]]) 16:37, 28 December 2015 (UTC) |
An affirmative close would authorizes a request to the WMF to end this Flow trial and return (the) conversations to a talk page. All that is needed is a close. I can take care of delivering the request to the appropriate WMF page. [[User:Alsee|Alsee]] ([[User talk:Alsee|talk]]) 16:37, 28 December 2015 (UTC) |
||
===[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups]]=== |
|||
{{Initiated|30 November 2015|type=|done=}} |
|||
RfC about deprecating the use of image galleries in infoboxes of ethnic group articles has been open for a month. Current consensus is that it has drawn enough participation to allow for a reasonably clear closure now. [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#Proposal for the deletion of all the galleries of personalities from the infoboxes of articles about ethnic groups]]. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 11:16, 31 December 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:16, 31 December 2015
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.
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 23 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
Wikipedia:Non-free content review
This discussion forum has an extensive backlog where the oldest active entry was started on 10 June 2015 ({{Initiated|10 June 2015}}), and at the time if me posting this request, the page has 163 discussions that have yet to be closed, several started over a month ago. Steel1943 (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Please update {{Initiated}} below as the backlog is (slowly) taken care of.--Aervanath (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- (Initiated 3267 days ago on 13 June 2015)
- About 155 discussions still to be closed.
Since this discussion board is now deprecated, and there will be no new discussions opened there, I would appreciate some help clearing the backlog.--Aervanath (talk) 21:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- I just "did" about 3 of them. For the ones where I believe could really use more discussion, I've been relisting them on WP:FFD (but not in huge droves as that would overwhelm the daily subpages over there.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- We're getting close to having all these discussions closed. NFCR is now down to 100 open discussions. Also, in November, NFCR was shut down to new requests, directing new requests to WP:FFD; when all of the discussions are closed from NFCR, the noticeboard will be closed and marked as historical. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Is it OK for Wikipedia to choose its own pronunciation symbols?
This discussion is happening on three pages at once (NORNB, Help talk:IPA for English where it actually belongs, plus another at MOS:PRONUNCIATION). This NORNB tine of the fork has turned into another couple-of-editors-textwalling-against-each-other thing, and is actually in the wrong venue. WP:NOR pertains to the information content, not how WP presentationally wraps it. I.e., the actual content that is subject to core content policies is what the pronunciation(s) is/are. WP has multiple pronunciation transcription markup systems, and like our citation styles, this is WP-original metadata, not subject to WP:CORE. One of them is based on (mostly American) dictionary-style pronunciation keys: [pro-NUN-see-ay-shun]; the other loosely based on IPA. Both are synthetic and are internal matters, and not subject to WP:NOR / WP:V. As long as the pronunciation that emerges in the reader's mind is verifiable, it does not matter what markup wrapper we convey it with. Both of our extant pronunciation guide systems could be replaced tomorrow with something entirely different and even more arbitrary (even one consisting of entirely WP-invented orthography, though that would not of course be practical). While I agree that OP has a point – it's not wise for us to use a WP-modified version of IPA that conflicts with IPA norms that a linguist would expect – that's not an NOR matter, but a matter for consensus discussion at the IPA for English talk page. The discussion there should remain open until naturally resolved or a closure request is made, while the one at NORNB should be closed as no consensus / off topic. (Initiated 3131 days ago on 27 October 2015) — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 14:47, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
- Now both sides of the dispute have conceded that this won't be resolved as a WP:NOR issue, so this fork of the discussion has no reason to stay open at WP:NORNB, and can be centralized, finally, at Help talk:IPA for English, which is collectively trying to actually resolve it. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 11:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
- Now archivec at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard/Archive 35#Is it OK for Wikipedia to choose its own pronunciation symbols?. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Community discussion regarding disruptive edits to Heathenry-themed articles
Would an administrator assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Community discussion regarding disruptive edits to Heathenry-themed articles (Initiated 3116 days ago on 11 November 2015) and administer news of a topic ban to the user in question if that is what consensus calls for? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive276#Community discussion regarding disruptive edits to Heathenry-themed articles (Initiated 3116 days ago on 11 November 2015)? See the subsection Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive276#Proposed topic ban. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2015 November#Kim Davis (county clerk)
(Initiated 3118 days ago on 9 November 2015) - review of a move originally proposed 21 October 2015. Experience closing contentious discussions needed, and apologies in advance for the wall of text. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
- Discussion has waned past the point of productivity. Calidum T|C 01:59, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Total discussion stopped December 2, so it is stable and ready for closure. Tiggerjay (talk) 23:30, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Original close was voluntarily withdrawn. Listed for a new Admin close. (non-admin closure)Alsee (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allie X Topic Ban Proposal
Consensus seems clear and discussion has halted, so an administrator is needed to review and close three topic bans, and possibly enforce the topic bans at the following incident report: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allie X Topic Ban Proposal. I can help however I can. Thank you. (Initiated 3108 days ago on 19 November 2015) SanctuaryXStop talking in codes 15:35, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allie X Topic Ban Proposal (Initiated 3108 days ago on 19 November 2015)? See the subsections Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic-Ban for WordSeventeen and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic ban for SanctuaryX. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- There is a subsection for Zpeopleheart as well at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic-Ban for Zpeopleheart Please resolve this quickly because there are still ongoing issues that need to be resolved ASAP. SanctuaryXStop talking in codes 14:33, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
In all actuality there are new comments and discussion points have been added since the last archiving for lack of discussion, so discussion may continue. So any admin or other proper person please unarchive the whole deal so we make discuss greely to make it gair for all parties. Thanks. WordSeventeen (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
-
- The only continued "discussion" was you opposing your own ban after removing your comments from my talk page. The discussion is very much stalled, with a pretty clear consensus for all three cases; it can still be closed regardless of whether it is archived or not. SanctuaryXStop talking in codes 21:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
sanx, I do note this comment that you placed here. You are though quite incorrect on the policies and protocol at wikipedia. Please do have a fantastic day©! WordSeventeen (talk) 21:25, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
- Wordseventeen, SanctuaryX is correct. In an issue that has been as tendentious as this one has been, it's a good idea to not suggest that someone is quite incorrect about policies and protocol unless you are going to back it up with diffs and links to specific policies. Kevin Gorman (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia#Juraj Sklenár's view
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia#Juraj Sklenár's view (Initiated 3132 days ago on 26 October 2015)? See the subsection Talk:Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia#RfC: Sklenár's theory.Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Political correctness#Definition of political correctness
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Political correctness#Definition of political correctness (Initiated 3121 days ago on 6 November 2015)? See Talk:Political correctness#Closing this RfC. The opening poster wrote: "Is political correctness a concept of not offending — especially the marginalized — in a community or is it primarily pejorative?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Template talk:Certification Table Entry#Sales figures: combined vs traditional
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Template talk:Certification Table Entry#Sales figures: combined vs traditional (Initiated 3126 days ago on 1 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 November 28#Category:Academic pressure in East Asian cultures
Hello, I originally initiated a discussion on the renaming of Category:Academic pressure in East Asian cultures a few weeks back. I can see that the discussion appears to support a renaming of the category. I am an IP user so I do not have the power to close this discussion or rename it. I initially opened the discussion under the IP address of 137.147.55.166 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), you will notice that has changed today because my IP address always changes, I am still the same person I just have a different IP address. Could someone please close the discussion and rename the category please? It has completed its 7 day discussion as it finished last Saturday, thank you. (120.144.180.158 (talk) 06:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC))
- Hello, for those of you who might be sceptical of whether I am the original user who opened the discussion mentioned above, 137.147.55.166 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), I can guarantee you I am the same person my IP address often changes so that's why I look like another user. I even mentioned this to another user on their talk page when I was using that IP address - User talk:Smileguy91#Vandalism. I just wanted to make sure everyone knew I am the same user, just a different IP address. (137.147.151.25 (talk) 05:33, 12 December 2015 (UTC))
Talk:Glyphosate#RFC: Appropriate use of NON-WP:MEDRS primary study
clearly defined question in contentious topic area, ?consensus - need closure by uninvolved admin.--Wuerzele (talk) 05:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note that the RfC is only five days old and no one has agreed to end it early. That being said, the GMO ArbCom case should be wrapping up soon, so there's no harm in letting the RfC run it's normal time to allow the remedies can take effect in the meantime. Kingofaces43 (talk) 06:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- Just a note that there are walls of text growing since Dec 4, no new editors have chimed in, and an unreasonable repetition of the same arguments, furthering WP:FUD stifles process. No one has disagreed tothe RFC. That being said, the GMO ArbCom case has been going on and on though King wants it to be wrapped up soon as possible, as he has stated repeatedly on the arbcom page, there's no harm in closing the RfC to stop the hemorraging of glyphosate so that small remedies can take effect in the meantime. --Wuerzele (talk) 07:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC) This RFC is only the first in 3 whole sale deletions by the same editor group, anticipating more RFC's to come.--Wuerzele (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:2015 administrator election reform/Phase II/RfC
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Was supposed to close on 17th, but it's still open now. Doesn't really need a formal closure but it's two days over and no one's cared. Needs to be closed ASAP. --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 04:58, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: RfC was officially opened on Nov. 29 – with the "false" 24-hour close (and the objections to that), it is now advisable that it stay open through at least Dec. 30. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:33, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Don't close this early, as the earlier close was controversial. However it will need a forma close. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Forgive me, but shouldn't it be closed by an uninvolved editor? Although, it's a site-wide affecting RfC, any competent editor can close it, no? --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 17:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- As far reaching as this RFC is, as a NAC, I wouldnt touch it alone. I think a team closure would be best since its so big and what it seeks to accomplish, just to make sure we get it right. AlbinoFerret 19:03, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Forgive me, but shouldn't it be closed by an uninvolved editor? Although, it's a site-wide affecting RfC, any competent editor can close it, no? --QEDK ♠ T ♥ C 17:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- Don't close this early, as the earlier close was controversial. However it will need a forma close. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Repeating: we've now reached the 30 day point. Any takers? - Dank (push to talk) 18:07, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- I think this should be closed by a team including at least one Bureaucrat and one Administrator, and have posted a request at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard#Request for closure: 2015 administrator election reform, Phase II. Wbm1058 (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- Again, advise waiting until Dec. 30 to close for the reason I alluded to above... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Wikipedia talk:In the news#Size of headings of nominations
Should be closed as soon as possible. George Ho (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
(Initiated 3094 days ago on 3 December 2015) AlbinoFerret 20:28, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
CANVASS by User:Green_Cardamom
Requesting a closure of this old ANI discussion. The nominator is accused of systemic targeting a user (me) and nominating his articles at AFD. There was a boomerang, in fact. The discussion is old but not closed. (Initiated 3345 days ago on 27 March 2015) Mhhossein (talk) 19:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:NQ Mobile#Stock crash and lawsuit#What the company does#(Copied here from Talk:Nagle)#Whitewashing, NPOV and potential COI
Requesting closure on these old discussions as the only relevant discussion is that the article is out of date which I started and has now been lost. The company recently announced a new Showself entertainment brand and some divestitures [1] which I'd intended on working on. Rgeurts (talk) 15:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Request for closure on Phaedrus (dialogue) which has had thirty-days and in ready to be closed
Could someone visit this Talk page at Talk:Phaedrus (dialogue) and do a close on this short RfC during the holidays. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Request for closure of Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_29#Category:Latter-day_Saints_portal
Please close the discussion and rename the category. Thanks.--Broter (talk) 11:15, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
You now have to only close the discussion and delete the old category.--Broter (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#What does MEDRS cover?
Would an uninvolved admin please close this. Due to the topic under discussion an admin closure is preferred. A very involved editor (CFCF) has tried to close it. (Initiated 3125 days ago on 2 November 2015) The opening question was not signed so the bot has no refrence of when to removed the RFC header, but it has been open over 30 days. AlbinoFerret 22:40, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items#Removal proposal: Toronto International Film Festival
There is a consensus. An uninvolved administrator may be needed. --George Ho (talk) 09:07, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry MacAlmon (2nd nomination)
Discussion was relisted but I'm pretty sure there's a clear consensus to keep. Would have withdrawn my nomination earlier but assumed it would be closed as keep regardless. No need for this to be open for another week imo. Sam Walton (talk) 20:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#RfC
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#RfC (Initiated 3121 days ago on 6 November 2015)? The opening poster wrote:
Current language on notability of athletes includes:
- Athletes from any sport are presumed notable if they have competed at the modern Olympic Games, including the Summer Olympics (since 1896) or the Winter Olympics (since 1924), or have won a medal at the Paralympic Games; e.g. Ian Thorpe or Laurentia Tan.
Should this be changed to:
- Individuals who have competed at any modern Olympic Games and who have either won a medal or won at least one heat or match in their event shall generally be considered notable. Any individual winning a medal at a Paralympics may also be generally considered to be notable.
Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:2015 San Bernardino attack/Archive 5#RFC Victim names
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2015 San Bernardino attack/Archive 5#RFC Victim names (Initiated 3089 days ago on 8 December 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Norman Milliken#RfC: Should the article state that Milliken, Ontario is named after Norman Milliken?
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Norman Milliken#RfC: Should the article state that Milliken, Ontario is named after Norman Milliken? (Initiated 3119 days ago on 8 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Fiona Graham#Age
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Fiona Graham#Age (Initiated 3109 days ago on 18 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Eagles of Death Metal#RfC: Anti-Israel Boycott - Roger Waters
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Eagles of Death Metal#RfC: Anti-Israel Boycott - Roger Waters (Initiated 3095 days ago on 2 December 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Royal Households of the United Kingdom#Possible hoax or hoaxes
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Royal Households of the United Kingdom#Possible hoax or hoaxes (Initiated 3104 days ago on 23 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Battle of Karbala#RFC for notability
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Battle of Karbala#RFC for notability (Initiated 3103 days ago on 24 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Jude Wanniski#RFC on description of the Laffer curve
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jude Wanniski#RFC on description of the Laffer curve (Initiated 3110 days ago on 17 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Portal talk:Current events/2015 November 17#APEC Philippines 2015 "Concentration camps"
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Portal talk:Current events/2015 November 17#APEC Philippines 2015 "Concentration camps" (Initiated 3104 days ago on 23 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:St. Petersburg, Florida#RFC: The Burg
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:St. Petersburg, Florida#RFC: The Burg (Initiated 3120 days ago on 7 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- RFC was updated on (Initiated 3083 days ago on 14 December 2015) with a new RFC header, we might want to close both at the same time. AlbinoFerret 15:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Greco-Italian War#RfC v2
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Greco-Italian War#RfC v2 (Initiated 3113 days ago on 14 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Iranian peoples#RfC: Should modern Azeris be described as one of the "Iranian peoples"?
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Iranian peoples#RfC: Should modern Azeris be described as one of the "Iranian peoples"? (Initiated 3111 days ago on 16 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:German evacuation from East-Central Europe near the end of World War II#RFC
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:German evacuation from East-Central Europe near the end of World War II#RFC (Initiated 3107 days ago on 20 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Phaedrus (dialogue)#RfC: Two contradictory sections in current Phaedrus (dialogue) article are self-contradictory and should be repaired
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Phaedrus (dialogue)#RfC: Two contradictory sections in current Phaedrus (dialogue) article are self-contradictory and should be repaired (Initiated 3107 days ago on 20 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Florida State Road 997#RJL reversions
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Florida State Road 997#RJL reversions (Initiated 3114 days ago on 13 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)#RfC Appropriate version for the new clause
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)#RfC Appropriate version for the new clause (Initiated 3126 days ago on 1 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 November 26#File:Chris Mercer.jpg
Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2015 November 26#File:Chris Mercer.jpg (Initiated 3101 days ago on 26 November 2015)? Please consider the related discussion Talk:Umpqua Community College shooting#Photo of Harper-Mercer in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Contemporary worship music#Request for comment: Length and content of article lede
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Contemporary worship music#Request for comment: Length and content of article lede (Initiated 3120 days ago on 7 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#RfC: Flag icons in professional boxing record tables
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#RfC: Flag icons in professional boxing record tables (Initiated 3091 days ago on 6 December 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)#RfC: Apply this Guideline to Redirects
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)#RfC: Apply this Guideline to Redirects (Initiated 3108 days ago on 19 November 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 119#The current "indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed" requirement: retain or abandon?
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 119#The current "indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed" requirement: retain or abandon? (Initiated 3135 days ago on 23 October 2015)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Breakfast
Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Breakfast (Initiated 3098 days ago on 29 November 2015)? NOTE: This is a FLOW board. There has been zero project activity in 14 months. This is an RFC to request the WMF end the Flow trial on the page. Running the RFC inside Flow was a mess. I've provided a participant summary below for assistance:
- 6 Support: Alsee Cullen328 BethNaught Doug_Weller Scott Fram
- 3 Oppose: Ottawahitech Bluerasberry WhatamIdoing
- 2 Tangential discussion with no attempt to !vote: HHill Quiddity_(WMF)
An affirmative close would authorizes a request to the WMF to end this Flow trial and return (the) conversations to a talk page. All that is needed is a close. I can take care of delivering the request to the appropriate WMF page. Alsee (talk) 16:37, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups
(Initiated 3097 days ago on 30 November 2015) RfC about deprecating the use of image galleries in infoboxes of ethnic group articles has been open for a month. Current consensus is that it has drawn enough participation to allow for a reasonably clear closure now. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#Proposal for the deletion of all the galleries of personalities from the infoboxes of articles about ethnic groups. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:16, 31 December 2015 (UTC)