Wikipedia:Closure requests
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close a Wikipedia discussion. Do so when consensus appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our policies or guidelines).
Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.
Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, it is appropriate to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.
Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.
On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.
There is no fixed length for a formal request for comment (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.
When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.
Include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing easier. Move discussions go in the 'other types' section.
Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.
Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if the area is contentious. You should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the discussions for discussion page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.
Non-admins can close most discussions. Admins may not overturn your non-admin closures just because you are not an admin, and this is not normally in itself a problem at reviews. Still, there are caveats. You may not close discussions as an unregistered user, or where implementing the closure would need tools or edit permissions you do not have access to. Articles for deletion and move discussion processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.
Technical instructions for closers
|
---|
Please append |
If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
Other areas tracking old discussions
[edit]- Wikipedia:Requested moves#Elapsed listings
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Awaiting closure
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Old discussions
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Old business
- Wikipedia:Proposed mergers/Log
- Wikipedia:Proposed article splits
Administrative discussions
[edit]Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading
[edit]Requests for comment
[edit](Initiated 133 days ago on 3 June 2024) Initial close has been overturned at review. A new close is required. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Surely someone wants to be taken to review and shouted at, even if just for the experience. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Anyone want a closer's barnstar? (okay but seriously maybe we should just panel close this one, if only to prevent any further disputes.) --Licks-rocks (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Panel close is probably a good idea if we can get a panel together. Loki (talk) 19:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I doubt it will be possible to assemble a panel for something as inconsequential as this. Frankly, I don't know what should be done here. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 13:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Panel close is probably a good idea if we can get a panel together. Loki (talk) 19:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Anyone want a closer's barnstar? (okay but seriously maybe we should just panel close this one, if only to prevent any further disputes.) --Licks-rocks (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Just to mention that there has been discussion at AN to attempt to resolve the issue. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:56, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- My headache came back just reading that. Thanks, I'll extend my wikibreak a little longer --Licks-rocks (talk) 21:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done (Special:Diff/1250934591) by User:Sandstein -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 12:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 65 days ago on 9 August 2024)
Wikipedia talk:Notability (species)#Proposal to adopt this guideline is WP:PROPOSAL for a new WP:SNG. The discussion currently stands at 503 comments from 78 editors or 1.8 tomats of text, so please accept the hot beverage of your choice ☕️ and settle in to read for a while. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:22, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 58 days ago on 17 August 2024) Requesting immediate procedural close for Talk:Philippe Pétain#Rfc for Lede Image of Philippe Pétain, because it is blocked on a Wikipedia policy with legal implications that no one at the Rfc is qualified to comment on, namely U.S. copyright law about an image. At a minimum, it will require action at Commons about whether to delete an image, and likely they will have to consult Wikimedia legal for an interpretation in order to resolve the issue. Under current circumstances, it is a waste of editor time to leave the Rfc open, and is impossible to reliably evaluate by a closer, and therefore should be procedurally closed without assessment, the sooner the better. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's not appropriate to make an immediate procedural close in those circumstances. Wikipedians routinely make decisions about copyright, even those Wikipedians who aren't US attorneys. This is not a high-drama situation. However I'm starting to wonder if the RFC nominator might be on a crusade about our lede images for prominent WW2 figures, and if so, whether they might benefit from a sysop's advice and guidance about overusing our RFC process.—S Marshall T/C 09:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll do this, although I'm going to do the other close I committed to first. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 16:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Compassionate727 FWIW the image was kept at Commons and here's a bit of a follow up on the copyright stuff discussed afterward.[1] Nemov (talk) 01:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Compassionate727 do you still plan on closing this? Nemov (talk) 20:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry. The outcome of the Commons DR and subsequent discussions have raised more difficult questions than they answered that I'm struggling a bit to sort through. I've requested input at WP:DfD; depending on the feedback I receive, I may settle on an outcome or punt the whole thing to someone more experienced with images. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 20:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Compassionate727 do you still plan on closing this? Nemov (talk) 20:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Compassionate727 FWIW the image was kept at Commons and here's a bit of a follow up on the copyright stuff discussed afterward.[1] Nemov (talk) 01:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'll do this, although I'm going to do the other close I committed to first. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 16:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 42 days ago on 2 September 2024) Legobot removed RFC tag 2/10/2024 TarnishedPathtalk 01:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading
[edit]Deletion discussions
[edit]V | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
FfD | 0 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 14 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 18 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 6#Category:Interwiki link templates - inline
[edit](Initiated 37 days ago on 6 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 10#Category:Fictional witches and wizards
[edit](Initiated 33 days ago on 10 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 30 days ago on 13 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 15#Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories
[edit](Initiated 29 days ago on 15 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 11 days ago on 3 October 2024) Active for over a week and the draft is submitted, would be nice if we can close. Crete44 (talk) 14:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Done by Explicit. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 21 days ago on 23 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 33 days ago on 11 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 28#Category:Medical doctors in British media
[edit](Initiated 30 days ago on 13 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 30#Category:Jewish American legal scholars
[edit](Initiated 22 days ago on 22 September 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 22:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading
[edit]Other types of closing requests
[edit](Initiated 139 days ago on 28 May 2024) Latest comment: 3 days ago, 79 comments, 37 people in discussion. Closing statement may be helpful for future discussions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Doing...— Frostly (talk) 22:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Frostly Are you still planning on doing this? Soni (talk) 16:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Soni, yes - have drafted close and will post by the end of today. Thanks! — Frostly (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I wanted to note that this is taking slightly longer than expected, but it is at the top of my priority and will be completed soon. — Frostly (talk) 05:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Frostly Just checking, would you like someone else to help with this? Soni (talk) 07:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- I wanted to note that this is taking slightly longer than expected, but it is at the top of my priority and will be completed soon. — Frostly (talk) 05:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Soni, yes - have drafted close and will post by the end of today. Thanks! — Frostly (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Frostly: also checking in. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Voorts and Soni, thanks for the pings! I've unfortunately been in the hospital for the past week but am now feeling better. I apologize for the long delay in putting out the close and appreciate your messages! Best, — Frostly (talk) 03:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to hear that; a week-long hospitalization is not fun. But, I'm glad that you're feeling better. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 19:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ping @Frostly again (I saw you've been editing Commons). Hope your still better, and if you don't feel like doing this one anymore, just let people know. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Voorts and Soni, thanks for the pings! I've unfortunately been in the hospital for the past week but am now feeling better. I apologize for the long delay in putting out the close and appreciate your messages! Best, — Frostly (talk) 03:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Frostly Are you still planning on doing this? Soni (talk) 16:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Archived. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 13:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just a note here that Frostly has not edited in over a month. Might be best for someone else to close. --Super Goku V (talk) 07:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can't touch that cos I !voted, but although that was a productive and thought-provoking discussion, it's not a discussion that has an actionable outcome. I personally feel it can lie in the archives unclosed.—S Marshall T/C 11:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 62 days ago on 13 August 2024) It's been more than a month. The closer must be shrewd and articulate, as the topic is highly contentious. They should also discard comments based on personal opinion rather than policy, and, of course, avoid having their own opinion influence their assessment of consensus. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Imane Khelif#Proposal to create and split off new article "2024 Olympic Boxing Controversy"
[edit](Initiated 58 days ago on 16 August 2024) Discussion has slowed. No comments in a few days. TarnishedPathtalk 02:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 53 days ago on 22 August 2024) Open for more than 1 month. Natg 19 (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Doing... —Compassionate727 (T·C) 13:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Climbing#Suggesting_a_change_of_WP:WikiProject_Climbing/Article_recommendations
[edit](Initiated 49 days ago on 26 August 2024) I'd like a closure of this discussion, which was preceded by this discussion:Talk:Cobra_Crack#MOS:ITAL Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- There's not a lot of participation here. It might benefit from going to an RfC. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 18:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- The Cobra Crack discussion had 8 people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 45 days ago on 29 August 2024) Open for more than 1 month. Natg 19 (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Doing... —Compassionate727 (T·C) 16:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 44 days ago on 30 August 2024) Open for more than 1 month. Natg 19 (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Doing... —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 39 days ago on 4 September 2024) Open for more than 1 month. Natg 19 (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Talk:The Bonnie Banks o' Loch Lomond#Proposed merge of Loch Lomond (Runrig song) into The Bonnie Banks o' Loch Lomond
[edit](Initiated 37 days ago on 6 September 2024) Contested proposed merge. Neutral closer required per WP:MERGECLOSE. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:22, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 24 days ago on 19 September 2024) - Discussion has kind of stabilized, with 68 people giving over 256 comments. Awesome Aasim 21:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)