Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Ball1.png

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 29 April 2017); 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.

Ball2.png

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.

Billiardball3.png

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.

Contents

Requests for closure

Administrative discussions

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#WP:HOUND

Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#WP:HOUND (Initiated 29 days ago on 30 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Creuzbourg and User:K.e.coffman Talk:Hans-Ulrich Rudel

Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Creuzbourg and User:K.e.coffman Talk:Hans-Ulrich Rudel (Initiated 34 days ago on 25 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Xx236.27s disruptive editing and advocacy on Vladimir Lenin and other Soviet themed articles

Would an admin assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Xx236.27s disruptive editing and advocacy on Vladimir Lenin and other Soviet themed articles (Initiated 3 days ago on 26 May 2017)? Thanks, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Place new administrative discussions above this line

RfCs

Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest#Investigating COI policy (2nd request)

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest#Investigating COI policy (Initiated 122 days ago on 27 January 2017)? The discussion was listed at and archived from Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 05:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I've added a part of the overall discussion, Wikipedia_talk:Conflict_of_interest#Concrete_proposal_1, separately below. Without comment on what the results should be, I believe that the overall discussion will be difficult to close, but that Concrete proposal 1, should be very easy to close, and, as the original proposer, I'd rather not see it get lost in the shuffle. Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Link to a request for a three-person close of the RfC: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Re-requesting closure of Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest#Investigating COI policy. Cunard (talk) 01:13, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
@George Ho:--I feel that all discussions need not be closed esp. given that the spectrum is too broad.Winged Blades Godric 16:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Got it, Godric. BTW, emailed you. George Ho (talk) 17:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:User categories#Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories.

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:User categories#Request for Comment on the guidelines regarding "joke" categories. (Initiated 101 days ago on 17 February 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Would an uninvolved admin please assess the consensus at this RfC and perform a close? Thank you. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:45, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, would someone experienced please close this? --Tryptofish (talk) 23:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2017#RfC rerun: House demolitions

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2017#RfC rerun: House demolitions (Initiated 60 days ago on 30 March 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Jewish diaspora#RFC concerning how to present the reasons causing the Diaspora

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Jewish diaspora#RFC concerning how to present the reasons causing the Diaspora (Initiated 53 days ago on 6 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Lithuania#RfC: Lithuania in the USSR debate.

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Lithuania#RfC: Lithuania in the USSR debate. (Initiated 61 days ago on 29 March 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done by Winged Blades of Godric on 26 May 2017, updating listing here. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:32, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#RfC regarding bolding of sponsored names

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#RfC regarding bolding of sponsored names (Initiated 57 days ago on 2 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

 Working Yashovardhan (talk) 04:23, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 Relisted by Yashovardhan Dhanania.Winged Blades Godric 04:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) thanks. Was just mentioning this! Yashovardhan (talk) 04:43, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft talk:US Presidents navbox#RfC about whether the draft is appropriate for a merge

Requesting an uninvolved editor to kindly assess consensus about the draft merge of {{US Presidents}} and {{US Presidential Administrations}}, which strongly overlap each other. (Initiated 50 days ago on 9 April 2017) This RfC is the continuation of a previous debate held at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 February 7#Template:US Presidential Administrations (29 January – 3 March), following the process suggested by the closer. Thanks, — JFG talk 15:02, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#RfC: Proposed lead section

Would an uninvolved editor kindly assess the outcome of this consensus-building effort on the lead section of a controversial article? (Initiated 47 days ago on 12 April 2017)JFG talk 19:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Should the WP:ANDOR guideline be softened to begin with "Avoid unless" wording or similar?

(Initiated 41 days ago on 17 April 2017) This RfC recently expired. Needs a close. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Doing...Winged Blades Godric 16:34, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Note: This still has not been closed yet. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#The criteria of WP:NSPORT here are too inclusive

Needs uninvolved closer. (Initiated 41 days ago on 18 April 2017) --George Ho (talk) 22:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Re-requested closure at WP:AN on assumption that more than one closer may be needed. --George Ho (talk) 18:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Abraham#Infobox RfC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Abraham#Infobox RfC (Initiated 47 days ago on 12 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Day-care sex-abuse hysteria#RfC: Overall compliance with BLP and neutrality policies

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Day-care sex-abuse hysteria#RfC: Overall compliance with BLP and neutrality policies (Initiated 39 days ago on 20 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of Cao Bang (1979)#RfC: Number of troops in a division

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Battle of Cao Bang (1979)#RfC: Number of troops in a division (Initiated 45 days ago on 14 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Not sure:-I believe the matter is already resolved! Winged Blades Godric 12:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad#RfC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Muhammad#RfC (Initiated 44 days ago on 15 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Genocide#RfC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Genocide#RfC (Initiated 42 days ago on 17 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine#RfC: Proposed split

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine#RfC: Proposed split (Initiated 40 days ago on 19 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Abkhazia#Proposal for the Abkhazia Article

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Abkhazia#Proposal for the Abkhazia Article (Initiated 51 days ago on 8 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Protests against Donald Trump#RfC: "multiple/several cities"

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Protests against Donald Trump#RfC: "multiple/several cities" (Initiated 50 days ago on 9 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#RfC on Jeffrey Carr and IISS

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#RfC on Jeffrey Carr and IISS (Initiated 42 days ago on 17 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2012–2016)#RfC about Al-Masdar

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2012–2016)#RfC about Al-Masdar (Initiated 41 days ago on 18 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Plummer v. State#Request for Comment - Internet meme section - 1st revision

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Plummer v. State#Request for Comment - Internet meme section - 1st revision (Initiated 39 days ago on 20 April 2017)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Wikipedia and Net Neutrality

Requesting uninvolved closer, even though the request seems early. (Initiated 13 days ago on 16 May 2017) --George Ho (talk) 08:12, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Already done by Mz7, for whom I thank. --George Ho (talk) 06:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:RuPaul's_Drag_Race#Request_for_comment

I would like a closure as the user is being disruptive and preventing the community's decision from being enforced. The consensus is also nearly unanimous. (Initiated 31 days ago on 28 April 2017) nihlus kryik (talk) 16:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

The RfC has hit 30 days today. Calling it "nearly unanimous" is contentious and some arguments go against WP:PRIMARY, so there is enough to sift through that it might be advisable to seek an admin particularly well-versed in that policy.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line

Deletion discussions

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 14#Category:Television programming by language

(Initiated 104 days ago on 14 February 2017) Stale discussion, no contributions after early April. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 February 17#Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments

(Initiated 101 days ago on 17 February 2017) Looks like there is consensus. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:12, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 30#Kemono

(Initiated 72 days ago on 18 March 2017). -- Tavix (talk) 18:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line

Other types of closing requests

Talk:Lagardère Sports and Entertainment#Merger Proposal

(Initiated 132 days ago on 17 January 2017) Stale discussion, needs someone to put it out of its misery please. GiantSnowman 08:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 Relisted for RFC to increase participation. --George Ho (talk) 09:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Another request to close this discussion. (Initiated 30 days ago on 29 April 2017) --George Ho (talk) 07:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories

Following four discussions were sort of heated (two of them definitely are). As none of the discussions did not achieve consensus, they provide a false impression. Requesting an unbiased closure, based on facts/sources provided in the discussions. this, that, this, and that.usernamekiran(talk) 03:34, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Not done-The discusion wasn't an RFC.And this is not a place to ask to close random discussions.Winged Blades Godric 06:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: sure. Where should this be taken to? —usernamekiran(talk) 21:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Where should this be taken to? —usernamekiran(talk) 22:25, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Don't know. Don't care, except that the point I was making was that since these four discussions were not requests for comment, they shouldn't have been listed in the RfCs section of this page, which has four sections, each with a different purpose. They also did not require admin action, and were not pages for deletion. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:23, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Echo Redrose64.Winged Blades Godric 02:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric and Redrose64: you two geniuses should read this: Wikipedia:Closing discussions. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
I thought I already made it clear, we only close RfC and RMs on article talk pages, or if a discussion is especially heated (nuclear). An article talk page is not ANI. We don't close a discussion because a participant thinks it gives the wrong impression. Just make a note of why that is at the bottom of the discussion and any reader can make up their own minds. Insulting editors who are rightly confused by your request is not on. El_C 09:15, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @El C: I apologise. I thought by "we" you meant admins. Wikipedia:Closing discussions states discussions on talkpage of articles can be closed if the situation calls for it.

If @Winged Blades of Godric: was confused by my request or didn't know what can be requested here then he shouldn't have used {not done} template so confidently, and the words "don't know, don't care".

And no, I didn't insult anybody.

Anyways, I closed the discussions. I think there is no point continuing this discussion. I humbly request everybody to cease communication here. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Don't know, don't care was not Winged Blades of Godric—that was Redrose64—who told you pretty much what I said before: we, on Wikipedia, don't ordinarily close regular discussions. Calling them "geniuses" is unhelpful, they were just telling you what any one else would have. Your request is unusual. El_C 01:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
So you decide to close them yourself, really? Why should those threads be frozen? What if someone else wants to continue commenting? You provided no convincing reason for this. Also, you're one of the main participants, it is not objective for you to close those yourself(!). This is starting to become disruptive. El_C 09:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Koren Specific Technique#Selective merge

the discussion has not been edited in over a year, and it has been brought up at AN/I that it was not closed. if this might be considered forumshopping, feel free to refuse. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 18:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump talk discussion/survey close request

Can an admin please review this discussion and survey on Donald Trump talk here and close it? Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Taking a look!Am not even sure this qualifies for a closure.Winged Blades Godric 04:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Talk:2017 Manchester Arena incident#Requested move 23 May 2017

The discussion requested a move to 2017 Manchester Arena bombing. It's effectively been mooted a short time ago as the police have confirmed that it was, in fact, a bombing. [1] As this is a very high-profile article at the top of the Main Page news section, could an admin please close the discussion and make the move ASAP? Prioryman (talk) 06:30, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 May#Lucas Horton

Uninvolved closer is needed please. (Initiated 7 days ago on 22 May 2017) George Ho (talk) 02:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Unblocking after community-imposed block

Need an uninvolved closer. (Initiated 26 days ago on 3 May 2017) George Ho (talk) 07:45, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure&oldid=782819817"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA