The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Should the recent comments by Jeremy Searle on "Jewish guilt" be included in this page? | MK17b | (talk) 06:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC) |
Should the Lead contain the statement "also known as Persia"? Bromley86 (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:Kosher tax (antisemitic canard)
Does this article comply with the neutral point of view policy? (permalink to the version of this article at the start of this RfC) 05:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:United Kingdom general election, 2015
Should this page use either the Template:Infobox election with the details of four parties (Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats, SNP) displayed, or the all-party version of Template:Infobox legislative election? In the absence of an agreed permanent alternative, editors have agreed that these options are the two most enforcable as a consensus 'least bad option' while debate continues as to the best infobox for this article.
You can see what they look like here. Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC) |
Should this article have a section for just "Accolades", be comprehensive and have a section named "Accolades and criticisms", or leave such a section out entirely? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:Trump: The Art of the Deal
Should the following be included in the "Reception" sub-section?
n the discussion space below please leave a comment or !vote Support for inclusion or Oppose. Per WP:RFC discussions usually remain open for about a month. -- GreenC 14:33, 1 May 2016 (UTC) |
This article (+ Wikipedia generally) need more background on the legal codes and history of Venice. One of the Tiepolo doges has a note on his personal page mentioning he finished a codification of the statutes begun under Enrico Dandolo but there's no other information anywhere in the encyclopedia. Help? — LlywelynII 09:03, 1 May 2016 (UTC) |
The crash article seems short enough to fit into another article. Shall we merge the private airplane crash incident into the biography of the Canadian politician? George Ho (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC) |
Template talk:Anarchism sidebar
Does anarcho-capitalism belong in this template and, if it does, what is its appropriate place? — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC) |
I observe that the text of the External Link to the Act, which I added in conformity with the normal practice for such links, as requested in the header of the meme which I subsequently deleted, states that the text is the current and up to date version. This is generically incorrect in relation to all Acts of Parliament, legislation.gov.uk is kept as up to date as resources and the arrival of new legislation permit, but carries an alert when the Act in question has been altered in some way and the change has not yet been reflected in its pages. You should either detect that in loading the text and alter the wording accordingly, or alter the phrasing to include the word "recently", and possibly add another rider to the effect that the site itself may qualify that.
What provisions exist in respect to legislation from other countries I cannot comment on, I was simply a member of the beta-test panel which vetted the first incarnation of legislation.gov.uk as StatuteLaw.gov.uk. 176.253.252.93 (talk) 12:57, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:United States presidential election, 2016
Should current and recent candidates in the 2016 US Presidential election include politician among their notable occupations in the lead of their biographical articles, even if the candidate eschews the term? (This is intended to be a structured RfC. For a recent unstructured, and unresolved, discussion of this question as it pertains to Donald Trump, see Talk:Donald Trump#Is Trump a politician?) General Ization Talk 12:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016
Just for the record:
There is something wrong when a majority of sources have Clinton's super delegate lead above 500 but we don't. My proposal is that we stop relying on our list, and do what is normally done on Wikipedia by following what the majority of reliable sources say. So I ask the community to please choose on what we should do going forward:
- Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC) |
In February, a large amount of material was deleted from Lyndon LaRouche. The only explanation offered, in one of the edit summaries, was that the sources were "sketchy". Among the sources for the deleted material were the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune, Corriere della Sera, and Xinhua. Other material sourced to these same publications was retained in the article. The deleted material depicted the subject in a relatively favorable light, while the retained material was unfavorable. Requests for an explanation on the talk page have gone unanswered. Should this article be considered non-neutral and display the "neutrality dispute" message? 75.27.248.232 (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:Education of the British Royal Family
In response to repeated blanking of this section this RfC has been opened. This is currently included in "Analysis" -
- should the final sentence (bolded) be included or deleted? Sources have been obfuscated for ease of reading but can be viewed here [7]. (Please do not delete content under active RfC until the RfC has been closed.) LavaBaron (talk) 05:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC) |
Should the graph with the more explanatory caption shown at right be included adjacent to the passage on the size of the consumer spending proportion of the economy, as per [8]? 22:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC) |
Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
Please change:
"In March 2016 the Israeli Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Yisrael Katz argued that Israel should employ “targeted civil eliminations” against leaders of the BDS movement. The expression puns on the Hebrew word for targeted assassinations.[48]" to: In March 2016 the Israeli Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Yisrael Katz argued that Israel should employ “targeted civil thwarting” (” סיכול אזרחי ממוקד “) against leaders of the BDS movement. The expression is a play on the Hebrew term for targeted assassinations[1]. When the moderator of the conference interview asked Yisrael Katz to elaborate on the use of the words “targeted civil thwarting”, Katz goes on to say:
References
This should be changed because: 1. 972mag.com grossly misquoted both the source it refrences in its own article, and the minister himself by mistaking the hebrew word for “thwarting” ” סיכול “, for the word “elimination” ” חיסול “. Therefore the source should be removed completely and changed to the original source Ynet so to maintain the integrity of this wikipedia article. 2. The source should be changed from the 972mag.com to the actual video recording of the quote in question. Reference to quotes are not subject to interpretation when they are in their original context, and thus should be made directly to the source if available, in order avoid violating the Wikipedia.org sourcing policy. 3. Changed "puns on the Hebrew word" to "play on the Hebrew term...". 4. Added context for the full quote by Yisrael Katz, where he elaborates on his use of the term. 5. References to Yisrael Katz wiki page, so not to be confused with former Minister of Labour and Social Welfare also of the name Yisrael Katz. NOTE: An English translation is available in the following youtube video belonging to the user "boycott apartheid" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukXAFxI8Ix4 |
Should the changes in this diff be made to the article which includes addition of content about violence against Biharis, the edit also includes different figures regarding number of people killed and women raped and reason why Operation Searchlight was launched? Sheriff |
Talk:Education of the British Royal Family
Should these passages be included in the "criticism" section (sources obfuscated below for ease of reading, but contained here [9]) as representative of significant criticism this topic as received?
|
Which country(s) should we show in Elizabeth II's notes? A) United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Ceylon, New Zealand, Pakistan & South Africa? which is the status-quo. |
Talk:Education of the British Royal Family
Should the table in this article remain in its current format and layout, be changed to a different format or layout, or be deleted? LavaBaron (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC) |
Should Flag of Northern Ireland state at the start that there is currently no national flag of Northern Ireland? I am not disputing the main coverage should be of the Ulster Banner as the former flag and because of its current uses. Dmcq (talk) 11:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC) |
Should this page include only cases that satisfy mainstream definition of genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group"? My very best wishes (talk) 20:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC) |
An RFC recently closed on Israel and it was determined that this article's lead should not describe State of Palestine as partially recognized.
Please respond whether in your opinion, the lead should say that State of Palestine:
|
|
For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. This list is updated every hour by Legobot.