The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: (refresh)

Biographies

Which of the following should be Liam Payne's infobox photo? Please rank in order of preference: --- 18:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:The Keys to the White House

Should the article be substantially in the form of Version 1 or Version 2? The most salient difference is how the article should present disputes about the prediction for the 2016 presidential election, but there are several other issues as well. Here is a diff showing the edit by which Version 1 was replaced by Version 2, a change that has since been reverted. JamesMLane t c 20:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Neal D. Barnard

There are two questions:

Can we add a new Publications section that includes at least a few books? I see that Robert Atkins (physician)#Books, Loren Cordain#Selected works, and other related BLPs also have these kinds of sections.
Can we add "physician" to the first sentence of the article? The subject's primary occupation does not appear to be "animal rights activist", but rather more of a nutritionist or nutrition writer.

Mark0vPedro (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:John Rustad

Should the following content regarding the conspiracies and controversies of John Rustad, as supported by the multiple reliable sources listed, be included in the article, either in the lead of the article or in the body of the article with a summary in the lead of the article? PoliticalPoint (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:David Lammy

In the first sentence of the article about David Lammy, how should he be described?

British politician
English politician
English lawyer

Khiikiat (talk) 11:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Economy, trade, and companies

Talk:Ranked-choice voting in the United States

Should articles in American English refer to the alternative vote as "instant-runoff" or "ranked-choice voting" in their titles? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin

Shall we continue to use lowercase or capitalize the first character, and thus use Bitcoin? Note Talk:Bitcoin/FAQ says to use lowercase bitcoin in all cases, and this dates to 2014. And does this consensus apply to inbound wikilinks? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

History and geography

Talk:Genocide

Should Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians added as colonial/settler colonial genocide examples into the second paragraph in History section?

A. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples
B. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples along with other examples in history section (expansion of History section)
C. Do not include
D. Other

Bogazicili (talk) 19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:1796 United States presidential election

Should we mention in the infobox, that Jefferson was elected vice president? GoodDay (talk) 20:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Has the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict ended and if so what date should be listed as the end in the infobox? Pithon314 (talk) 03:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion

Should the following sentence be added to the lede?

In its investigation on 20 October 2023, Forensic Architecture concluded the blast was the result of a munition fired from the direction of Israel

04:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Modern Hebrew

Should the text in bold below be kept in the introduction?

Hebrew, a Northwest Semitic language within the Afroasiatic language family, was spoken since antiquity and the vernacular of the Jewish people until the 3rd century BCE, when it was supplanted by Western Aramaic, a dialect of the Aramaic language, the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages. Although Hebrew continued to be used for Jewish liturgy, poetry and literature, and written correspondence, it became extinct as a spoken language.

and

By the late 19th century, Russian-Jewish linguist Eliezer Ben-Yehuda had begun a popular movement to revive Hebrew as a living language, motivated by his desire to preserve Hebrew literature and a distinct Jewish nationality in the context of Zionism. Soon after, a large number of Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish speakers were murdered in the Holocaust or fled to Israel, and many speakers of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel in the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world, where many adapted to Modern Hebrew.

This has been discussed above at Talk:Modern Hebrew#WP:OR in lede. إيان (talk) 00:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:1948 Arab–Israeli War

Should the lead section of 1948 Arab-Israeli War mention the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world? Andre🚐 21:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:The Keys to the White House

Should the article be substantially in the form of Version 1 or Version 2? The most salient difference is how the article should present disputes about the prediction for the 2016 presidential election, but there are several other issues as well. Here is a diff showing the edit by which Version 1 was replaced by Version 2, a change that has since been reverted. JamesMLane t c 20:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Korea-related articles

Which romanization system do you think we should use for historical Korean topics, McCune–Reischauer (MR) or Revised Romanization of Korean (RR)? We currently use MR. seefooddiet (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge

Should the content in this article [1] that details the murder of Giulio Regeni be truncated to a single sentence summary with a wikilink to the main article (Murder of Giulio Regeni)? Chetsford (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

Currently, OurCampaigns is listed as an unreliable source. Should it also be deprecated or even blacklisted to prevent its continued use and allow for mass removal? Wowzers122 (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Masada myth

Is the lede for this article basically OK (except for maybe some minor tweaks)? or is it Not OK and needs some major changes? Herostratus (talk) 05:05, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Storrs, Connecticut

Comments would be appreciated to achieve an accurate and supportable consensus regarding references to Storrs-Mansfield, Connecticut - an unincorporated village which is sometimes referred to as Storrs. The community is notably home to the main campus of the University of Connecticut, and, naturally reflects cultural differences both as a New England fixture but also due to some misplaced or incorrect historical usage.

The request would be to alter the lead section of the article to read as follows:

Storrs-Mansfield (/stɔːrzˈmænsfild/ storz-MANS-feeld) is an unincorporated village and census-designated place (CDP) in the town of Mansfield in eastern Tolland County, Connecticut, United States. The community is part of the Capitol Planning Region.

Sometimes referred to as Storrs, the village is dominated economically and demographically by the main campus of the University of Connecticut and the associated Connecticut Repertory Theatre.

Several points of discussion, including the preference and differences between census-designated place boundaries and postal town boundaries are included on the article talk page. It is not appropriate to immediately dismiss the need for a new consensus, due to the substantial official and community usage of both names. Thank you, Jonathanhusky (talk) 19:58, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Somali Civil War

Which map should be used? (Listed below) (the main issue is the map's sources) Zabezt (talk) 15:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Language and linguistics

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Modern Hebrew

Should the text in bold below be kept in the introduction?

Hebrew, a Northwest Semitic language within the Afroasiatic language family, was spoken since antiquity and the vernacular of the Jewish people until the 3rd century BCE, when it was supplanted by Western Aramaic, a dialect of the Aramaic language, the local or dominant languages of the regions Jews migrated to, and later Judeo-Arabic, Judaeo-Spanish, Yiddish, and other Jewish languages. Although Hebrew continued to be used for Jewish liturgy, poetry and literature, and written correspondence, it became extinct as a spoken language.

and

By the late 19th century, Russian-Jewish linguist Eliezer Ben-Yehuda had begun a popular movement to revive Hebrew as a living language, motivated by his desire to preserve Hebrew literature and a distinct Jewish nationality in the context of Zionism. Soon after, a large number of Yiddish and Judaeo-Spanish speakers were murdered in the Holocaust or fled to Israel, and many speakers of Judeo-Arabic emigrated to Israel in the Jewish exodus from the Muslim world, where many adapted to Modern Hebrew.

This has been discussed above at Talk:Modern Hebrew#WP:OR in lede. إيان (talk) 00:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Maths, science, and technology

Talk:15.ai

How should the current status of the 15.ai web site be listed in the infobox?

A. Under maintenance.
B. Abandoned.
C. Omit the Current Status field from the infobox.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Tuner (radio)

Should the article contain a gallery of images (as shown below) illustrating the history of radio tuners?

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin

Shall we continue to use lowercase or capitalize the first character, and thus use Bitcoin? Note Talk:Bitcoin/FAQ says to use lowercase bitcoin in all cases, and this dates to 2014. And does this consensus apply to inbound wikilinks? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Art, architecture, literature, and media

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Liam Payne

Which of the following should be Liam Payne's infobox photo? Please rank in order of preference: --- 18:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Kiss (band)

Based on the discussion above, should the band be counted as 'active' in the infobox when the digital avatars begin performances, or should they not to avoid confusion with readers? HorrorLover555 (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:One Direction

There are two questions:

Should One Direction be described in the past tense ("was", "were", rather than "is")
Should all members be listed as past members in the infobox or just Zayn Malik and Liam Payne?

Hemiauchenia (talk) 11:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Politics, government, and law

Talk:Genocide

Should Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians added as colonial/settler colonial genocide examples into the second paragraph in History section?

A. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples
B. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples along with other examples in history section (expansion of History section)
C. Do not include
D. Other

Bogazicili (talk) 19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:1796 United States presidential election

Should we mention in the infobox, that Jefferson was elected vice president? GoodDay (talk) 20:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Israel–Hamas war infobox

Should the US and UK be added as allies in other theaters to Israel in the infobox?

Yes for US
Yes for US and UK
No for both

RFCBefore

Smallangryplanet (talk) 13:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Central university (India)

Should this article include an image of Aligarh Muslim University with the caption second central university? -- User4edits (T) 11:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Has the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict ended and if so what date should be listed as the end in the infobox? Pithon314 (talk) 03:49, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Social democracy

The Lede currently describes socdem as an ideology within socialism. 5 sources are cited for this sentence clause. Three book sources from 1999, 2005, and 2007 respectively, and two online sources from 2018 and 2019 respectively. Only 2 of them are accessible, the two online sources. Neither of the two online sources (this and this) make the claim that Social democracy is a movement within Socialism.

The question for the RFC is: should the lede describe the ideology as Socialist? There will be 6 options; please write the option you support along with your reasoning in the survey section, and then discuss in the discussion section. Also please write the extent to which you support the other proposals. Please don't reply to others in the survey section. Please don't just write an option without any reasoning for it.

Option 1: It should should describe it as 'a Liberal poltical ideology that supports things such as a welfare state, mixed economy, etc'.

Option 2: It should should omit the 'is a movement within' part in favour of the lede sentence, instead describing it as 'a political ideology that supports things such as a welfare state, mixed economy, etc'.

Option 3: It should describe it as a socialist political ideology, as it does now [status quo].

Option 4: It should should describe it as 'a democratic poltical ideology that supports things such as a welfare state, mixed economy, etc'

Option 5: It should should describe it as 'a capitalist poltical ideology that supports things such as a welfare state, mixed economy, etc'

Option 6: Other, it should [insert thing].

Option 7: Comment.

.A Socialist Trans Girl 08:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Time zone

The maps of time zones in Wikipedia (SVG, PNG) show the time actually observed in each area, de facto, regardless of legality. For example, the maps show certain parts of Australia, Canada and the United States in the time that they actually observe even though it's different from what the law specifies there. Similarly, the maps show the occupied regions of Ukraine and the separatist regions of Georgia in UTC+3, which is the time enforced by the Russian or separatist authorities there. Previous discussions about this topic resulted in keeping the map de facto, including the occupied or separatist regions in UTC+3, but many users continue to complain about it, so I'm restarting the discussion here. How should the maps show the time zones of the occupied regions of Ukraine and separatist regions of Georgia? You may answer differently for each region.

Please note that the maps still show these regions as part of Ukraine and Georgia, with the international borders as generally recognized. The question here is only regarding the time zones. For reference, the IANA time zone database includes Crimea in UTC+3, but it doesn't mention the other occupied regions of Ukraine or the separatist regions of Georgia. Heitordp (talk) 02:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:The Keys to the White House

Should the article be substantially in the form of Version 1 or Version 2? The most salient difference is how the article should present disputes about the prediction for the 2016 presidential election, but there are several other issues as well. Here is a diff showing the edit by which Version 1 was replaced by Version 2, a change that has since been reverted. JamesMLane t c 20:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Jordan

Is Jordan a constitutional monarchy or semi-constitutional monarchy? See discussions above and in other sections. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 15:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Ranked-choice voting in the United States

Should articles in American English refer to the alternative vote as "instant-runoff" or "ranked-choice voting" in their titles? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Conservative Party of British Columbia

Should the following content regarding the conspiracies and controversies of the Conservative Party of British Columbia, as supported by the multiple reliable sources listed, be included in the article, either in the lead of the article or in the body of the article with a summary in the lead of the article? PoliticalPoint (talk) 04:37, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:John Rustad

Should the following content regarding the conspiracies and controversies of John Rustad, as supported by the multiple reliable sources listed, be included in the article, either in the lead of the article or in the body of the article with a summary in the lead of the article? PoliticalPoint (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Conservative Party of British Columbia

Should the following description of the Conservative Party of British Columbia as Right-wing to Far-right, as supported by the multiple reliable sources listed, be included in the lead of the article, the infobox of the article, or both? PoliticalPoint (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:David Lammy

In the first sentence of the article about David Lammy, how should he be described?

British politician
English politician
English lawyer

Khiikiat (talk) 11:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

Currently, OurCampaigns is listed as an unreliable source. Should it also be deprecated or even blacklisted to prevent its continued use and allow for mass removal? Wowzers122 (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Antifa (United States)

Should this article have "left-wing" changed to "left wing to far-left" in the first sentence of the lead, as in this edit? --Aquillion (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Somali Civil War

Which map should be used? (Listed below) (the main issue is the map's sources) Zabezt (talk) 15:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Religion and philosophy

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Landmark Worldwide

Is Undue Weight being given to the issue of "Cult accusations" in the light of the references cited in support of these claims? DaveApter (talk) 15:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Catholic theology

Request for Comment: Does the section on Josephology give undue weight to this article?

I am seeking community input regarding the current description of the Josephology in this "Catholic theology" article. I believe that Josephology is central to Catholic theology as major doctrinal topics like Christology, Triadology, or Mariology, which are more widely recognized as pillars of Catholic theology.

I propose that the description of Josephology should be there to ensure that the article maintains a balanced and proportionate representation of Catholic theology. Jeaucques Quœure (talk) 03:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Society, sports, and culture

Talk:Genocide

Should Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians added as colonial/settler colonial genocide examples into the second paragraph in History section?

A. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples
B. Include Native American genocide in the United States and Genocide of Indigenous Australians as examples along with other examples in history section (expansion of History section)
C. Do not include
D. Other

Bogazicili (talk) 19:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Football squad start

What flag should we use for players born in territories that are not fifa members? Currently guidance says regardless of nationality of birth or citizenship, or non-FIFA sporting nationalities the player may use in other contexts. However some editors have suggested this is outdated and there should be exceptions.

This creates a problem particularly for the Crown Dependencies as they are not members of FIFA or UEFA in their own right but part of the English FA. The Crown Dependencies are not part of England in the political sense though. In FIFA terms they are part of England however this could be considered controversial.

There are other instances where this is the case such as players from Åland, the Isle of Wight and Anglesey all of which have football teams that appear at the island games on the same basis as the crown dependencies but in FIFA terms they are part of Finland, England and Wales respectively. Players from these territories would normally have their respective FIFA national team flag on this template. C. 22468 Talk to me 23:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Talk:List of common misconceptions

We have already established a consensus to split this very long list. The next question is how to split it. Should this become two, three, or four separate lists of common misconceptions? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Landmark Worldwide

Is Undue Weight being given to the issue of "Cult accusations" in the light of the references cited in support of these claims? DaveApter (talk) 15:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Ranked-choice voting in the United States

Should articles in American English refer to the alternative vote as "instant-runoff" or "ranked-choice voting" in their titles? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Major professional sports teams of the United States and Canada

Should all team nicknames be listed, instead of just the most recent?

The article states "For brevity, only the most recent names for teams that have had multiple nicknames in their current media market are listed." While "New Jersey Nets" and "Washington Bullets" are listed, although they have stayed in the same media market respectively, "San Francisco Warriors" is not listed as a previous name for the Golden State Warriors, who have also stayed in the same media market. So, for the sake of completeness, should all of a team's previous names be listed?

One drawback to this option would be the number of names that would have to be listed for some teams. For example, the Pittsburgh Steelers had multiple names during their early years, including a couple during WWII when their players combined with another team's. Alielmi1207 (talk) 22:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Antifa (United States)

Should this article have "left-wing" changed to "left wing to far-left" in the first sentence of the lead, as in this edit? --Aquillion (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Turkic peoples

Should the Hazaras people be included in this template, a navbox? This RfC was malformatted, so I'm assuming this is what @Joseph—the guy who opened this RfC—meant to do. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin

Shall we continue to use lowercase or capitalize the first character, and thus use Bitcoin? Note Talk:Bitcoin/FAQ says to use lowercase bitcoin in all cases, and this dates to 2014. And does this consensus apply to inbound wikilinks? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia style and naming

Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources

There has been an initiative to change the interface so that the gray header at the top of the table "follows around" as you scroll down. See: {{sticky header}}. Which of the choices below (A-E) do you prefer? What other ideas do you have?

The header is now 2 lines tall. What Timeshifter is now proposing (scroll down this example) is a narrow one-line sticky header with a link from the "Status" column head back to the "Legend" section of the article. And a link from the "Sources" column head back to the "Sources" section of the article. Notes explain this just above the table. He states this allows new users of the table to quickly return to the table TOC, or to quickly find the meaning of the legend icons.

An issue in any skin other than the default Vector 2022: When you use the horizontal table TOC, or if you follow ("jump to") an anchored link within the table such as WP:FORBESCON, the top line of the note in the row you jump to would be covered by the narrow sticky header. 2 lines are covered by the 2-line header. Template discussions have not found a way to fix this. Timeshifter does not believe this is a serious problem. Others do. One solution (see E below) is to add a line's worth of blank padding at the top of each row.

A: No sticky header, same style (2-line) header as before.
B: Full size (2-line) header with sticky enabled.
C: Narrow (1-line) header without sticky enabled.
D: Narrow header with sticky header that follows you around.
E: Same as D, but with padding at the top of each row.

Graywalls (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Korea-related articles

Which romanization system do you think we should use for historical Korean topics, McCune–Reischauer (MR) or Revised Romanization of Korean (RR)? We currently use MR. seefooddiet (talk) 21:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking

There are two common ways to link to a place name with an "A, B, C" format where the article is titled [[A, B]]. Both can be read as fair interpretations of the guidance to "link only the first unit".

Have the link span only the smallest unit, using piping if necessary
Buffalo, New York, United States
Have the displayed text match the title of the linked article
Buffalo, New York, United States

Which style(s) is/are acceptable? If both, is one preferable to the other?

Note: See previous discussion above and above. This is not a question about whether "New York" should be linked to New York (state) in this example; basically everyone agrees that it should not be. 20:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia policies and guidelines

Wikipedia talk:Administrators

In Wikipedia:Administrators#Restoration of adminship, should the policy regarding Over five years since administrative tools were last used for restoration of adminship apply to:

Option 1: Only those former administrators desysopped for inactivity
Option 2: All former administrators

Thryduulf (talk) 22:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Administrator recall

Should the following text -- or text to the same basic effect -- be added to Petition section, at the end of the main text, right before the field to start a new page (or elsewhere):

As with any petition, all that is wanted is signatures. Any editor may and should remove any material found on a petition page except for the nomination and signatures. Any exceptions should be discussed and agreed to on the talk page first.

Yes or no? Suggestions of changes to the text are of course invited. Herostratus (talk) 05:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

To anyone unfamiliar with this, admin recall is a new process that is exactly what it sounds like. Currently, there is a 30 day petition period: if 25 people sign it, the admin then needs to pass a new RfA within 30 days to keep the tools. Should we change the petition period?

Option A: Keep the petition period the same (30 days)
Option B: Change the petition period to 7 days
Option C: Some other time period (like 14 or 15 days?) that's longer than a week but shorter than a month.

Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The reliability of the Jerusalem Post is:

Option 1: Generally reliable

Option 2: Additional considerations

Option 3: Generally unreliable

Option 4: Deprecate

RFCBEFORE. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Redirects are costly

WP:PANDORA has become a hotpoint of contention in RfD. Should it be removed, or rewritten? If it should be rewritten, what changes should be made, and what can be salvaged?

I'd like to open by directing everyone's attention to this essay I wrote: WP:BACKINBOX. It was written as a reply to anyone attempting to use WP:PANDORA in good faith, listing the many issues I and many others at RfD have with it. (This was, well, before I was told that doing this might be a good idea.)

Scrolling up here on the talk page, you'll also find reference to the fact that this essay, WP:COSTLY, did not originally contain WP:PANDORA-- it was added in 2019, without consensus, by user:The Man in Question, who... as of yet has still not appeared in the talk page to discuss it. It has since been treated as a guideline essay by many a user here in RfD, despite... well, the numerous problems the section has. You'll also find that a discussion on this topic already exists, having been opened back in 2019, with... no resolution. I'm going to go ahead and ping the ones who took part in that discussion, so they might give feedback for the newer one-- user:Thryduulf, user:Steel1943, user:Crouch, Swale, user:Rosguill, user:Tavix, user:Uanfala, user:Sonicwave32, user:Chris troutman, user:Nabla, user:FOARP, user:ComplexRational. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines

WP:TPO details several instances of comments that are appropriate to remove from talk pages, such as vandalism, spam, gibberish, and test edits. Does this apply to archived talk pages as well? I will post a more detailed statement and further context in the replies. Gnomingstuff (talk) 17:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

WikiProjects and collaborations

Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources

There has been an initiative to change the interface so that the gray header at the top of the table "follows around" as you scroll down. See: {{sticky header}}. Which of the choices below (A-E) do you prefer? What other ideas do you have?

The header is now 2 lines tall. What Timeshifter is now proposing (scroll down this example) is a narrow one-line sticky header with a link from the "Status" column head back to the "Legend" section of the article. And a link from the "Sources" column head back to the "Sources" section of the article. Notes explain this just above the table. He states this allows new users of the table to quickly return to the table TOC, or to quickly find the meaning of the legend icons.

An issue in any skin other than the default Vector 2022: When you use the horizontal table TOC, or if you follow ("jump to") an anchored link within the table such as WP:FORBESCON, the top line of the note in the row you jump to would be covered by the narrow sticky header. 2 lines are covered by the 2-line header. Template discussions have not found a way to fix this. Timeshifter does not believe this is a serious problem. Others do. One solution (see E below) is to add a line's worth of blank padding at the top of each row.

A: No sticky header, same style (2-line) header as before.
B: Full size (2-line) header with sticky enabled.
C: Narrow (1-line) header without sticky enabled.
D: Narrow header with sticky header that follows you around.
E: Same as D, but with padding at the top of each row.

Graywalls (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox aircraft occurrence

Can the officially-determined causes be included in the Summary field of this infobox? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia proposals

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Should a new pending changes protection level - extended confirmed pending changes (hereby abbreviated as PCECP) - be added to Wikipedia? Awesome Aasim 19:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox aircraft occurrence

Can the officially-determined causes be included in the Summary field of this infobox? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Unsorted

User names

Shortcuts

Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:

Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.

Do NOT post here if:

the user in question has made no recent edits.
you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).

Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:

has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
is not already blocked.

If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.

Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.

Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList

Reports

Latest comment: 12 days ago11 comments8 people in discussion

Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.

Place your report below this line. Please put new reports on the top of the list.

Willow and nacho

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: allow. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Willow and nacho (talk · contribs)

Username implies shared use.Shadow311 (talk) 23:06, 22 October 2024 (UTC).

It doesn't, really. It is reasonable to include "and" because "Willow" and "nacho" are probably not names, just two objects. Cremastra (u — c) 23:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

That's a good point, there's no actual evidence that these are personal names, or that the account is actually being shared. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 23:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Catfish Jim and the soapdish is not blocked, although that "implies shared use" – the soap dish, like the nacho, is also using the account. Cremastra (u — c) 20:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Just noting that while an initial warning was given, the user has not edited since that warning was given. Not sure why there was such a rush to come here after only 24 hours. Primefac (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

At least 22 hours after the warning was given, They resubmitted their sandbox to AFC without making any changes to it. Shadow311 (talk) 16:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Allow - "Willow" and "nacho" are almost certainly not meant to be personal names, so there is not clear implication of shared use. - ZLEA _T\^C 17:16, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Allow a vague suspiscion that maybe "Willow" and "Nacho" are the names of people is not a valid reason to block a user. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 18:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Allow. Yes, it is possible that this could be two individuals named "Willow" and "Nacho". However, it's equally reasonable that it's just the name of two objects, and thus the name doesn't necessarily imply shared use. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Allow. I would bet dollars to donuts this user was having a hard time coming up with a username and these are the names of their cats. Jessamyn (my talk page) 00:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

v t e Requests for comment (All)
Articles (All)	Biographies (bio) Economy, trade, and companies (econ) History and geography (hist) Language and linguistics (lang) Maths, science, and technology (sci) Media, the arts, and architecture (media) Politics, government, and law (pol) Religion and philosophy (reli) Society, sports, and culture (soc)
Non-articles (All)	Wikipedia style and naming (style) Wikipedia policies and guidelines (policy) WikiProjects and collaborations (proj) Wikipedia technical issues and templates (tech) Wikipedia proposals (prop) Unsorted
Instructions	To add a discussion to this list: Add the tag `{{rfc\|xxx}}` at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, `{{rfc\|xxx\|yyy}}`, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category.
For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot.

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Wikipedia noticeboards

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All

Contents

Biographies

Economy, trade, and companies

History and geography

Language and linguistics

Maths, science, and technology

Art, architecture, literature, and media

Politics, government, and law

Religion and philosophy

Society, sports, and culture

Wikipedia style and naming

Wikipedia policies and guidelines

WikiProjects and collaborations

Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Wikipedia proposals

Unsorted

User names

Reports

Willow and nacho