From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WP:RFC/A

For more information, see the main page Wikipedia:Requests for comment.

Contents 1 Biographies 2 Economy and trade 3 History and geography 4 Language and linguistics 5 Mathematics, natural science and technology 5.1 Clinical and medical topics 5.2 Biology and related 5.3 Mathematics 5.4 Physical science 5.5 Technology and engineering 6 Media, art and literature 7 Politics 8 Religion and philosophy 9 Society and law 10 Style issues 11 Policies, guidelines and proposals 12 User conduct 12.1 Uncertified user RfCs 12.2 Closing and archiving 12.3 General user conduct 12.3.1 Candidate pages 12.3.2 Approved pages 12.4 Use of administrator privileges 12.4.1 Candidate pages 12.4.2 Approved pages 13 User_names 13.1 BloodOnADagger (talk • contribs) 14 See also

[edit] Biographies

Shortcut: WP:RFC/BIO

Requests for comment on Biographies Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• talk:Criticism of Prem Rawat disputes about inclusion of allegations of anxiety alleviated by heavy drinking. Also dispute about whether this article should be merged with Prem Rawat. 02:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• A dispute exists regarding the Jung Myung Seok article. The biographry in question is of a relatively unknown religious figure, but may be used as a primary source of research for those concerned. Those who oppose the individual seem to employ the wiki article as a vehicle for propaganda, rather than as a neutral source for factual (and thereby credibly cited) information. Instead, they cite their own overtly malicious webpages as primary sources and claim vandalism when the offending citations are removed.

• A revived dispute over Sacha Baron Cohen's article. Some editors are questioning the validity of the information provided by the sources. Some third party editors would be more than welcome to come help resolve this issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sacha_Baron_Cohen#Request_For_Comment 02:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Multiple disputes at Talk:James Kim regarding a variety of things, including a timeline (which there seems to be a consensus on but an editor has threatened edit warring over it), a long debate over speculating about what Kim did and didn't do, and a number of other unresolved debates.00:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Recurring dispute reagarding Alireza Jafarzadeh. Some editors are claiming that some of the information written about him is libelous, despite that the information is sourced. They also claim that the given sources are partisan. --Ezeu 00:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• talk:Kim Richard Nossal#re: Drinking Game This debate has been off and on for about two months now, with a number of IP address users consisten tly re-adding a drinking game to the Nossal article, defending its inclusion while ignoring WP:OR. Some neutral editors would be welcome to educate these users of Wikipedia's original research policy. 05:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• talk:Bat Ye'or#Gisele Littman (born Orebi) This debate has been off and on for some time now. According to some editors, Bat Ye'or (a pseudonym for Gisele Littman) wishes only to be known by her pen name while other editors believe that she is a public figure and an active participant in public discourse, so the article should include her real name. 23:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• talk:Jennifer Ann's Group This is a tricky situation. Drew30319 (talk • contribs) created a bio page for his murdered daughter, which was userfied and deleted after an AfD discussion. Since he'd had some prior conflict with the first editor to comment, he claimed it was a personal attack or vendetta; other editors raised concerns about the author's conflict of interest. Just before that page was nominated, he also created Jennifer Ann's Group, a page about the non-profit group he founded earlier this year, receiving a couple of news items one verifiable, local news item and a proposed law in Texas. It was nominated for WP:CSD a few days ago, and I put my clumsy foot in it, citing that the page was promotional, a conflict of interest concern, and that (perhaps) the page was created to circumvent other page's deletion (conjecture on my part). Again, his response was that this was a personal attack. Impartial voices are needed. TIA. 16:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC) _{modified: 16:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)}

• Talk:Marc Bloch#Ethnicity in lead section. Should it be mentioned that Marc Bloch is Jewish in the lead section, or only in the body of the article. -- Stbalbach 15:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Starwood Festival This is a dispute about whether it is appropriate to add internal links (intra-Wikipedia links) to this article to dozens of articles on people and groups who have appeared at this festival. It is also about whether it is appropriate to add external links to the website of the group which organizes the festival to those same dozens of articles. (This is a second placement of this notice, the first in the Religion/Spirituality section. Because these links are being inserted in biographical entries, this also seemed like an appropriate section.) 06:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:List_of_Lebanese_people#Request_for_Comment:_Notable_Lebanese_and_assassinations - This is a dispute encompassing two issues. Specifically on whether "assassinated" individuals should be described as such in a list and generally over the detail of descriptions added to individuals listed. Also the extent to which indivduals with no Wiki articles (yet) and questioned notability should be listed. 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• The Nadine Gordimer article has been the subject of an edit/revert war regarding one paragraph of text. The controversial text is a reference to a recent criminal assault on Gordimer, which includes the race of the perpetrators and a quote stating that it is "ironic" that Gordimer was attacked by 3 black men, given Gordimer's anti-apartheid position. Summary and comment history at Talk:Nadine Gordimer. Two users have asked for any neutral non-racist justification for the perpetrators' race and "ironic" comment to be included; the IP-address user has asserted that Wikipedia policy and the other two users are pushing an anti-white POV. 22:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Continual edits of Homi Bhabha with reference to Prose Style. User's starting point is that references to Bhabha's prose style are 'insulting' to him, and seemingly with this in mind, has continually removed sourced text and reverted edits. Trying to find a reasoned consensus with the user on Talk:Homi Bhabha has proved difficult (in unrelated incidents, the user has been given previous warnings about their editing and asked to refrain from insulting others). After providing explanations to the user about the sourced content, these have been disregarded and the user has just deleted the parts of the text they don't like. Can anyone help resolve this situation? 18:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Marshall M. Parks - Should a list containing 42 surgeons trained by Parks be included in the article? 21:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• The article Rudy Franchi (Talk:Rudy Franchi) was written by the subject of the article. Any way the article can be salvaged without going to AfD for COI/POV? -- NYArtsnWords 21:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• An anon user has persisted in changing the birth name in the Sid James article (see Talk:Sid James#Real-Name, claiming to be his grandson and citing only sight of the birth certificate. I have reverted, citing four external sites, but looking back at the history of the article both birth names have been listed in the past. Can anyone resolve the dispute? I'm fed up reverting, saying that the anon user has provided no evidence. Stephenb (Talk) 14:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• The Paul McKenna (hypnotist) biography. Under the "controversy" heading, I've added a direct (referenced) quotation from a published court ruling which highlights an important criticism of the subject's publications. However, another user keeps removing the quotation. I've restored it a couple of times, removing any comments, to just let it speak for itself. Is there any way of preventing removal of material like this, which seems intended to doctor the article by removing criticism? I would have thought that the quotation itself was justified and unconvtroversial, in terms of its inclusion, because it is simply a quote taken directly from a published legal document. Is it inappropriate for inclusion? 172.188.48.211 11:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• See Talk:Gregg Berhalter for an escalating conflict regarding use of a quote regarding the US Soccer team at the 2006 World Cup. 04:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• See: Talk:Wang Wei (pilot). The question is, should there be mention of the joke about his name sounding like "Wrong Way"? 11:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Tittell Brune I have used a see also link which goes from the particular to the general i.e. a bio article on Tittell Brune with a link to "Actor" and "Celebrity". The dispute is that I'm not allowed to do this by WP. I maintain that Wikipedia has some of the qualities of a scholarly encyclopedia, see What is a Scholarly Encyclopedia? (for Art, or any Subject). Please give guidance. 17:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:William G. Tifft Whether some additional information and a quote from a third party source, are suitable to add to this biography of an astronomer. 17:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Mwai Kibaki, Talk:Mwai Kibaki I would like comment about including refernced information about Kibaki's second wife that keeps being removed by someone who objects. It is neutrally reported and referenced, imo. What's yours? Thanks. 16:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:O.J. Simpson#'Death_of_his_ex_wife'_section Disagrement over the use of the term "murder of." Needs input from third party with a NPV. 22:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Barbara Schwarz - Barbara Schwarz is the subject of her own article, against her wishes, and is also featured in the article on Mark Rathbun. On the talk page of her article one of the regular editors there wrote to me: If you are genuinely "someone [who] cares about her", then recommending a course of psychotherapy by a qualified and licensed practitioner would appear to be a more practical extention of this sentiment than quibbling over words in an article you say "has almost no importance." If this is true do you think that a person in need of psychiatric care should be the subject of a Wikipedia article? Thanks. Steve Dufour 17:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:John_Howard#Request_for_Comment:_Failure_to_enlist - Dispute over whether something that has not occurred should be included in the biography and whether there should be reference to a reliable source for the event not having occurred. 12:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Joan of Arc bibliography#RFC - Disagreement over whether Daniel Hobbins' book should be included in the bibliography. Hobbins is an academic historian, his book is published by Harvard University Press, and has received favorable reviews. One editor questions whether the press and the reviews are reliable, and feels that Hobbins' work is "crackpot" and "fringe". 20:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Mark Rathbun - He was a top official in the Church of Scientology. Now it seems he has become a "non-person". I think he is notable enough. However about half of his article is taken up by someone's conspiracy theories about him.
• Talk:Mustafa Kemal Ataturk - advice needed on including a section with arguments for and against his involvement in genocide. As of now, the article has virtually no criticism, which has been noted by many users, and the section I added is balanced and sourced, but is continually getting removed. Am I crazy? --21:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Rani_Mukerji#Mukerji_Mukherjee.3F Advice needed on discussion on moving article to a correct name for Wikipedia due to incorrect name. 19:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Economy and trade

Shortcut: WP:RFC/ECON

Requests for comment on Economy and trade Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sydney/Railway stations. Are railway stations inherently notable? A discussion centred on Sydney's CityRail network with wider implications. Joestella 04:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Hypermarket. Disagreement over source on who "pioneered" the hypermarket concept.Sprotch 11:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Palestine. Disagreement over sources used for the portrayal of the economy and population of Ottoman Palestine. 21:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Irish_property_bubble Dispute over neutrality of title.15:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Cigar. Dispute over whether a section concerning the danger of smoking cigars belongs in the article. In addition, there's a secondary dispute over whether external links, documenting the role of product placement in fueling cigar smoking's resurgence in the 1990s, belong in the article.11:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History and geography

Shortcut: WP:RFC/HIST

Requests for comment on History and geography Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Gernika vs. Guernica - Should it be Guernica (city) (actually a town, btw) or Gernika-Lumo (offcial name)? It was moved to the second on consensus and with due care re. links. This was unilaterally reverted single-handedly claiming WP:TITLE.
• Template talk:Groundbreaking submarines - Should Drebbel's submarine be listed with a Dutch flag, an English flag, or both? Drebbel was Dutch and was living in England as a patron of the throne, and built the submarine for the Royal Navy. 14:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Should the guideline WP:FRINGE, apply to diciplines such as history, or is it purely science oriented?
• Talk:Altbier -- There is an ongoing content dispute over the use of American sources for European beer styles. One side (American) feels that American references are fine as long as European sources are primary; the other side (European) seems to feel that American references and examples are irrelevant and should not be part of the page at all. 01:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Adolf Eichmann#It is a kidnap - Dispute if the capture of a man in a foreign land is to be considered kidnapping.19:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Taba Summit#Request for comment - Dispute is about whether some quotes with references belong in 2 sections titled "How close did Taba Summit come to a peace agreement?" and "Who ended the peace negotiations?" 13:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Essex#Request_for_comment:_essexclubbing.co.uk - Dispute as to whether a particular link is appropriate to Wikipedia. 13:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Joseph_Stalin#Dictator - Argument about whether Stalin should be termed a 'dictator' or not and where in the article. - Merzbow 23:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Transnistria#intro- There has been a long discussion on the page regarding the best way in which to present the introduction. Multiple users have been involved in this dispute, with the debate stretching on past archives of the page, however so far no resolution has come about. The dispute involves the way in which the de jure and de facto aspects of the region should be presented and what exact wording is appopriate for the specific case. 23:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Turkish Van#Request for comment - This page - about a breed of cat - has undergone regular frequent reversion lately by two editors. The reversions have mostly been based on arguments about the status and credibility of historical and archaeological information. 20:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Flag of Poland: discussion about the colour of the flag of Poland, if it is white/red or grey/red, and if it is possible on en.wiki to adopt a solution different from the one chosen by pl.wiki, of if they are authoritative here.16:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Occupation of Latvia 1940-1945 certain users pushing the Soviet view that Soviet Union did not occupy the Baltic states. Despite proof (on talk page) that most of the world retained the Soviets occupied the countries, some users keep adding unsuitable POV tags to the article.16:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Temple Street 10:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Hafrada#To_Moshe Dispute on how a source should be identified. 06:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Fork_in_the_road#Image_RFC Dispute about whether an image would improve the article 22:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Thanksgiving: A discussion on whether to split the article into separate Canadian and American versions. --20:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Birka. Dispute over the appropriateness of quoting primary sources at length. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Nordic theory This is an article about the history of the concept of the "blond blue-eyed" master-race associated with Nazism. POV dispute about neutrality of the article. 13:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks#NPOV Dispute Some users say that it's neural and includes enough on alternate theories, while others say that it favors the Government's POV and doesn't include enough on the alternate theories.--18:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Thomas Jefferson#Comments. Should this article (and related articles) state, without explanation, that Jefferson "founded and led the "Republican Party"?
• Talk:Palestine. Disagreement over sources used for the portrayal of the economy and population of Ottoman Palestine. 21:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Palestinian exodus. Serious and protracted disagreement over compatibility of sources with the policy on verifiability. --20:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Ukraine after the Russian Revolution. Survey. Should the article be named as "History of Ukraine (1917-1922)", or be kept under the current title? 21:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Please join the discussion at Portal talk:China. 04:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Should the parenthetical (Taiwan) be used along side Chinese Taipei in sports related pages. One side indicates that the use of Taiwan is not necessary and is against IOC usage. The other side contends that it is useful for clarification for many people don't know what Chinese Taipei refers to and that those supporting IOC usage are not consistant in that usage as it is not used for all IOC members (i.e. China, Laos, Iran) Please see Talk:2006 Asian Games#Request for Comments 07:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) - Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries, in particular Canada. 14:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Cheema - The article is biased against Hindu Jatts, with disruptive editors (currently blocked) making unverified statements and misrepresenting sources.Some Neutral observers are needed to clean up the article. Some knowledgable editors are also needed. 18:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Old Great Bulgaria — There are concerns that the title of the article results from ill-advised Romantic Nationalism. 12:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Deir Yassin massacre -- There is a disagreement as to whether the article should contain a statement by Emanuel Winston, and whether the occurrence should be described as an incident or a massacre. 06:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Tipu Sultan#Religious_Persecution The usual Hindu/Muslim thing. Some pretty nasty stuff is being alleged with (in my view) the purpose of whipping up religious tensions and inflaming hatred. I have tried to point out that much of the negative propaganda about Tipu stems from the work of British historians in the twenty years or so after the fall of Seringapatam, when they had a vested interest in painting as black a picture of Tipu as possible. I have been endeavouring to remove references to religious polemic and replace them with scholarly sources, whilst pointing out that the projection of a stark Hindu/Muslim divide into the past is anachronistic. I am not having much success. 09:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Assyrian people. Somewhat of an entrenched situation. Scope issues. It appears that the article is exposed to patriotic feelings of various natures, with people insisting on discussing Bronze Age history in the lead paragraph in order to "not disconnect" this contemporary ethnic group from its "ancient roots". Calm-headed input would be much appreciated. 21:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Armenia. There is a disagreement between various users about whether Armenia should be classed as a European or Asian country. As a compromise, it has been proposed to change this sentence Culturally, historically and politically Armenia is considered part of Europe to this sentence: Armenia is situated at a cultural, historical, and religious intersection and located at the crossroads between Europe and Asia, in the southern Caucasus. However, a number of users have strongly opposed this change and feel that the article should stay as it is. 09:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Language and linguistics

Shortcut: WP:RFC/LANG

Requests for comment on Language and linguistics Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

Please note that this page is reserved for disputes in articles about language or linguistics, not policy disputes or language usage in unrelated articles.

• Talk:Flemish – A conflict over whether Flemish should be a normal disambiguation page as with all other language/ethnicity pages like English, Scanian and Japanese. At least one user is insisting on adding information that seems to belong in Flemish (linguistics) and avoiding to Cite sources when being pointed out that the additions are completely unverifiable. 12:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Jahbulon#Poll:_Tag_on_article - is the article encyclopedic and can the tag stating otherwise be removed? 04:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Fork_in_the_road#Image_RFC Dispute about whether an image would improve the article 22:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Canadian English - an editor, RyanRP, has been making a series of edits ([1] [2] [3], of which I've reverted the first two) which strike me as being somewhat questionable. I'd like some input from an editor who has a good grasp of the history and influences of Canadian English, as I'm having to rely on what I can source from web references right now. Here's the relevant section on the talk page Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide. 10:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Bajan - this article contains an exhaustingly long list of Barbados slang. The presence of the list in the article is contested for being a clear violation of Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary. Furthermore, the list keeps growing ad nauseam with a vast array of sexual slang/neologisms. Since the list removal has been reverted twice by two different users, objector kindly requests comments on this issue. 00:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Reorganization Agent of Korean History#Samguk Yusa, regarding the Chinese character 囯 on the left side of Image:Hwanin hwanguk.jpg. Could this character have been used in the 13th century original version of Samguk Yusa? 21:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Swedish language#"Dialect" Samples – A dispute over the definition of Swedish dialects. A user has raised objections about the validity of defining certain speech samples as genuine dialects which includes strong criticism of SweDia, a major research project on Swedish dialects. Counter-objections include concerns of original research and a lack of references, neutrality and civility from the objector. 06:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Not really a dispute, but since there's nothing else on this page, I'll just mention it: Irish phonology is up for peer review. Please leave comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Irish phonology. 18:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mathematics, natural science and technology

Shortcut: WP:RFC/MATH or WP:RFC/SCI or WP:RFC/TECH

Requests for comment on Mathematics, natural science, and technology Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

[edit] Clinical and medical topics

• Talk:Abortion/First paragraph#Definition of abortion is the last in a long line of discussions over the definition of abortion, focusing on whether it should include the word 'death'. There are several definitions of abortion, most of which (the medical ones) don't use the word, but some do. The article uses the second type, giving the first as sort of an 'afterthought'. The suggestion to give both definitions side by side did not reach a consensus. Oddly, the conclusion form that was that the second definition should be used as the primary one in stead of stating the most used medical definition first. I don't know about the way such things should be resolved, but this seems wrong to me. Note that any new discussions on this are 'archived' the moment they are put on the talk page. 09:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Homeopathy#Wikipedia guidelines re categorization summarizes a long, heated debate about the use of the Categorization guidelines, specifically the part that says "Categories appear without annotations, so be careful of NPOV when creating or filling categories. Unless it is self-evident and uncontroversial that something belongs in a category, it should not be put into a category." Some editors feel that it is self-evident and un-controversial that homeopathy belongs in quackery while other editors feel that such a categorization is not self-evident and is highly controversial 02:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Depleted uranium#Comparison of the two versions contains a comparison of the current version of Depleted uranium with a recent major revision which replaced a lot of what some people had been taking out of it over the past several months, mostly in the "Health considerations" section.LossIsNotMore 10:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biology and related

• Talk:Irreducible complexity#Discredited Three descriptors have been proposed - "controversial" (which is inaccurate, since there is no scientific controversy, simply dismissal), "Behe's theory" (which misses the broader context) and "discredited" (which is accurate, but may not be the best choice of words). 16:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Turkish Van#Request for comment - This page has undergone regular frequent reversion lately by two editors involved in a dispute about how exactly the name of the article should be applied. 01:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Evolution#Request_for_comment_November_22_2006 Any talk about making clear that parts of evolution are theory is summarily archived. You will have to look into the history of the talk page to see it, because of course it's been archived. There is no addressing of the issues. --05:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Gliding action Please contribute comments on the neutrality and relevance of the possibly NPOV statement that a foreskin is similar to wearing a condom. 22:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mathematics

Mathematics RFC's should also be cross-posted and announced at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics

[edit] Physical science

Physics RFC's should also be cross-posted and announced at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics

Chemistry RFC's should also be cross-posted and announced at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry

• Talk:Pressure Should the article refer to 'gage pressure' or 'gauge pressure'? 03:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Wolf effect User:Iantresman wishes to put across certian ideas which will need to be carefully weighed, he has prudently decided to debate on Talk due to ArbCom probation; Ian and ScienceApologist are the only two active here and they do not work well together. More eyes definitely required. Guy (Help!) 17:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Global_warming#Controversy_Section There is a dispute and edit war of the neutrality of the article and as to whether or not both sides of the issue are being presented well enough within the article. The machine512 12:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Emergence#RfC We are having a heated dispute in the Emergence article over a proper definition for Emergence (specifically whether systems are irreducible and cannot be predicted/described by their constituent parts) and moreover what sort of citations should be required for this article. Please help us resolve these disputes and get the article unprotected. 16:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Electronic_voice_phenomenon Is EVP recognized by the scientific community as a legitimate phenomenon, or is it a pseudoscience? Can research by non-peer review publications be claimed as factual? 08:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Technology and engineering

• Talk:Video_game_crash_of_1983#Serious_Problems Article, though well written and interesting, seems rife with original research, unverified claims, and is largely unsourced. Seems as though some insiders sheppard the article, and may even be 100% correct, however there seems to be a massive amount of synthesis of thought, unreferenced claims, and a wholly unverifiable article. Editors in the past have brought up concerns of factual accuracy as well. Major policy problems: WP:OR WP:RS WP:VERIFY. Comments? /Blaxthos 15:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Media, art and literature

Shortcut: WP:RFC/ART

Requests for comment on Media, art, and literature Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Talk:Academy Award#criticism: A small dispute has arisen centered around my desire to cut the "criticism" section of this article, with one other user in particular feeling that I am being a policy wonk. I counter, however, that it is up to the editor who wishes to include material that might constitute original research to find references, and not just expect someone else to. This isn't such a huge deal but I'd like some other opinions on the matter, because it is self-evident to me (but perhaps just me) that the section is problematic...--20:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:1966-67_NHL_season: Corey Bryant has, over the course of recent weeks, made numerous edits to this article that have both been copyvios and unencyclopedic. After long hassle and comment between this article's Talk page, the Hockey Wikiproject page and various user talk pages, the copyvio's gone, but user keeps reverting to his own edits against unanimous consensus. 20:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Wii: various editors in a reverting match over whether the controller should be referred to as the "Wiimote" in the article. Someone go over there and persuade them to stop being idiots, please. Sockatume 12:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Singing bowl: dispute over two different versions of the article. 07:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:ABBA#Request_for_Comment:__Whether_to_add_one_good_fansite - Editors disagree as to whether include an External Link to one fansite, or to no fansites at all. 03:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Against the Day#Abstruse words - Some editors object to a short glossary, others to a list linking to specific years and one has objections to other content in this article about the latest, difficult tome by Thomas Pynchon Noroton 19:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:WKBS-TV (Philadelphia) - User:RMc mentioned WKBS-TV's last program was also the first Kickoff Classic football game. User:Rollosmokes finds this to be "trivial." 17:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Several users (including User:TJ Spyke) insist on making the match order for WWE Armageddon and TNA Turning Point 2006 (upcoming wrestling events) an exact copy of the official preview on the official site for the event. No compromise or discussion works, and they think the order must never change. RobJ1981 00:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Someone insists on deleting some entries and specially pictures from Cross of Iron based a "one frame per article" policy, which is only in existance, AFAIK on the "add picture" process. Other featured articles such as Jaws and Summer of '42 use more than one frame. Fernando K 23:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:DM Ashura - Bill Shillito (talk • contribs) (DM Ashura himself) and his friends are restoring uncited material. --SPUI (T - C) 09:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Psycho_(1960_film)#Hitchcock's cameo. There is a dispute among several editors about whether to devote a major section heading to a brief paragraph on Alfred Hitchcock's cameo appearance in the film. This applies to several other Hitchcock film articles as well. 21:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC) Resolved as of 21:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Eragon#Criticism- I'm concerned about the NPOV-ness of the criticism section of the Eragon article. I think it emphasizes the negative, but lacks perspective on the actual facts involved. Mister.Manticore 05:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• User talk:Herostratus/Image RfC - Not an actual article, but a series of images. An established and good editor is feeling poorly used by the deletion of many images he has uploaded. Does policy require the deletion of these images, or not? 05:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Babylon 5#Scripts link: Is it spam to include a citation link to the official site of the Babylon 5 script books? 23:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:London After Midnight (band) This is a dispute about whether the article is about a band or a music project, whether this band/music project belongs to any genre, whether the music is political and the inclusion/exclusion of former band members from the article. 10:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Wizard (fantasy)#Request for comment 2 This is a dispute about whether this article, which has been merged with Magicians in fantasy, should be pointed to it, or whether it should point to Wizard. 00:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
• Blagoj Nacoski - dispute about neutral tone and possible fancruft in this article about a young opera singer. 09:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Whistle_While_Your_Wife_Works editors involved disagree as to the use of cultural references/notes. Note that this has happened in many situations as of late, but this is just one of the specific events 03:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Towers of London Dispute about the language used to describe a video clip 14:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the current standards of modern musicians like the Click Five and JoJo fall short of the detailed articles of the past rock artists. Like Queen, The Who, The Beatles... Etc. I strongly urge all editors to regulate such articles. They are currently unfit, caring little information on the bands sounds, live aspect or discography. This is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed.

[edit] Politics

Shortcut: WP:RFC/P WP:RFC/POLITICS

Requests for comment on Politics Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Talk:Naeim Giladi#RFC I want to add what I believe a good citation well articulalted about the fact certain views are being used by certain anti-semitic organizations for their own purpose - seems of interest. There's disagreement if it should be added. 00:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Racism (section) There is a tag team edit operating on Wikipedia blocking all atttempts to discuss or develope the discussion of insitutional racism as part of Israels goverment policy. I have cited the comments by Desomond Tutu, and also discussed the case of the Beta Israel whom according to the references are being denied equal rights as Jewish citizens.--Halaqah 21:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:London_Action_Resource_Centre Three editors are stuck in a dispute about the contents of this page. Two of the editors are apparently expelled members of the centre. Informal mediation has failed.03:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:List_of_Lebanese_people#Request_for_Comment:_Notable_Lebanese_and_assassinations - This is a dispute encompassing two issues. Specifically on whether "assassinated" politicians should be described as such in a general list and generally over the detail of descriptions added to individuals listed. Also the extent to which indivduals with no Wiki articles (yet) and questioned notability should be listed. 00:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Temple Street 10:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident#pic regarding pictures. 22:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Scottish national identity#Request for Comment Long edit war regarding the separate identity of Orkney and Shetland inhabitants. --18:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Democracy#Removal of Marxist/Socialist view section Wether or not the Marxist and socialist view on democracy should be represented in the article.06:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Barack Obama#Odd addition of controversy.... Is this addition to the article a legitimate controversy regarding Barack Obama or based on original research? 04:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Bolivarianism#Merge proposal Dispute over the merger of Chavismo into Bolivarianism. 13:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Killian documents. Can blogs be used to provide citations, in an article regarding issues principally explored by and reported on blogs, in potential violation of WP:V and WP:RS? Kaisershatner 16:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:A.N.S.W.E.R.#Request for Comment re: "Infoshop link" Dispute regarding inclusion of a specific external link on A.N.S.W.E.R. whose content is critical of the organization. 22:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Lehi (group). Dispute over the use of a foreign-language novel as a source. 21:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Palestinian exodus. Serious and protracted disagreement over compatibility of sources with the policy on verifiability. --20:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Zionism Dispute concerning whether early Zionists regarded Israel alone as the geographical homeland to be created for the Jewish people, or whether Israel was one of many possible homelands. 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:List of acts labelled as state terrorism sorted by state This page is called "List of acts labelled as state terrorism sorted by state". Should acts that haven't been labelled as "state terrorism" be carried on this page? Or would that contravene WP:NOR and WP:V? --15:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Single-party state – User:Huaiwei, an editor from Singpaore, has insisted Singapore is not a single-party state. He argues that other political parties exist, despite they have never been in power since the independence of Singapore, and are even having difficulties to fulfill the requirements in filling candidates in elections. 12:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:2002_Gujarat_violence#Summary_of_debate:Debate over the inclusion of Ramesh Rao's analysis.Hkelkar 02:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC) note: Hkelkar and his sock puppets have been given a one year ban by ArbCom
• Talk:Boy_Scouts_of_America_membership_controversies#Request_For_Comment - What should the intro look like in this Feature Article. 01:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Democratic_Underground#RFC - Which of the disputed external links (with special attention to the blog Dummie Funnies) should be included/excluded? 23:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Larry Craig#Come on Guys- this is where the dispute starts. It continues down the talk page. The background: several weeks ago, a blogger came out and reported to have talked to 4 different men who said they had sex with Craig. Naturally, Craig being a "traditional values" Republican, the reports were quite juicy. The report was mentioned, I believe, by Bill Maher, a left-wing commentator, and picked up by the Seattle Post. Several mainstream newspapers picked up the story, not to report on it, but to criticize that a paper like the Seattle Post would carry a story from a source like a blogger. There have been three major sides:

• It warrants no inclusion, per WP:BLP. At least one BLP admin thinks this. See [4]
• It warrants some inclusion. At least one BLP admin thinks this too. See [5]
• It should be included without caveat. This position has been added only by a few IPs that, to be honest, are possibly the same person. See [6].

To be honest, I doubt this will work, but it's a required first step. 03:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Views and controversies concerning Juan Cole is it OR and relevant to include a 3rd party's criticism of a critic of Cole, which does not actually mention Cole or the critics's criticism of him 02:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Also: does it comport with WP:BLP and WP:RS to include extensive quotations from blogs attacking Cole, and does it violate WP:NPOV to censor material indicating that the blog writer has an agenda of attacking the organization Cole presides over?10:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Anarchism#Peter Marshall and anarcho-capitalism Dispute about whether an illogical statement from a source is rightly a marginal and incorrect view, or not. 15:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Jim_Inhofe#Request_for_Comment. Does the graph in the environment section simply provide context for one of Senator Inhofe's controversial statements, or does it violate WP:NPOV by implying criticism of his opinion, as well as being outside the scope of this article? -06:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
• Israel and weapons of mass destruction Is describing the well-documented Israeli nuclear collaboration with South Africa extraneous or relevant? 03:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Religion and philosophy

Shortcut: WP:RFC/REL WP:RFC/PHIL

Requests for comment on Religion and philosophy Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Talk:Analytic/Anglophone and Continental Philosophy Editwar whether intro picture is just silly and should be removed or whetehr removing would be overly serious drabness. Other issues as well, see old discussion. 15:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Mami Wata Discussion about the state of the article that has been lingering unresolved with little motion since at least this summer. Survey created about presence of cleanup tags conduct of one user. Concerns raised about personal attacks by another user. Needs more eyes. 18:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Islam in the United States Estimates of the size of the Muslim population in the US range from 1.1 million to 6.7 million. One editor believes that calculations of the mean and median for these data points are "BS" and OR. Does calculating the mean and median (one minute on the calculator) constitute original research? 17:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Criticism of the Qur'an - Disputes over authenticity/reputation of sources, what constitutes a reliable source, & what constitutes a valid crriticism & not just a collection of opposing views & flawed understanding. The editors who are pushing to add every web based anti-islamic site in this article & the ones who forced almost everything out of The relation between Islam and science article saying people sourced here should be scholars of both Islam & Science . In my view both articles should be following same policies . Thanks 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Sathya_Sai_Baba#Frank_Baranowski - Should Frank Baranowski be described as a "Professor" and "scientist" or "kirlian photographer"? Can the Island Lanka Newspaper be used as a source for this, despite neither the University of Arizona nor ASU having him listed as a professor, nor any google hits about him as a professor except in the context of his work on Sathya Sai Baba's photographic "aura"? 03:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Jahbulon#Poll:_Tag_on_article - is the article encyclopedic and can the tag stating otherwise be removed? 04:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• Trademark infringement We should not link to an external web site if that web site violates trademark law. All Wiki links to the offending web site should be removed, in keeping with Wikipedia policy. 16:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The editor who is reporting this has an agenda and his suggestion needs to be heavily scrutinized. Please review the article's talk page and the history of this discussion which takes place on several talk pages and articles before acting on the request.

• Talk: Jews for Jesus The dispute regards whether statements such as "belief in Jesus as the son of God, or in Jesus as Christ, is incompatible with Judaism." are appropriate or constitute taking the opinion of a majority. Centers on whether such statements should be presented as fact, or as the majority consensus within Judaism (with qualifiers that JfJ, the subject of the article, disagrees.) 21:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

*Talk:Landmark Education This is a dispute about how prominently any reference to Landmark Education's controversies -- which is itself a controversial question -- should appear in the introduction to this article. Some editors believe some reference to issues such as brainwashing allegations should feature prominently in lead, in the first few sentences. Others believe that a brief reference at the end of the introduction is sufficient. 20:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Starwood Festival This is a dispute about whether it is appropriate to add internal links (intra-Wikipedia links) to this article to dozens of articles on people and groups who have appeared at this festival. It is also about whether it is appropriate to add external links to the website of the group which organizes the festival to those same dozens of articles. 04:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Theomatics An anonymous editor is repeatedly visiting the page, adding unsupported argumentation, and deleting all the footnotes for no apparent reason. Also, he has recently started adding personal comments in all caps, and does not seem to be interested in participating in the talk page. Kazim27 15:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Flower of Life Dispute among three editors about a rather drastic rewrite. Incivility/personal attacks have started. 13:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Age of the Earth Weasel words describing the religious view of the age of the earth. 05:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Messianic Halakha#Survey Dispute over renaming Messianic Halakha to Messianic religious practices. Need comment if it's considered "consensus" if all in favor of the move are not identifiably Messianic or have responded to the Messianic editor's comments. inigmatus 19:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• talk:Sathya Sai Baba One editor asserts that quoting a newspaper violates WP:BLP writing style. Other editor asserts that well-sourced information relevant to the persons notability is removed without good reason. A comment at the WP:BLP noticeboard yielded no response from non-involved editors. [7] 19:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:John Chrysostom User:Beit Or is on an anti-anti-Semitism crusade (a quick look at his/her contribs will exhibit this) throughout Wikipedia, which afflicts this particular article in terms of a continuous edit war regarding both content and categorization. The consensus both in scholarship and on the talk page is generally against his/her POV. 00:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Sathya Sai Baba → Go RFC Section: Two editor dispute: A critic of the Indian guru is attributing quotes to a fellow critic's compendium, attempting to bypass referencing the quotes to their actual and original book sources. I say reference the quotes to the original book sources. Critic says reference the quotes through the compendium, which is not the original source for the quotes. 22:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Society and law

Shortcut: WP:RFC/SOC

Requests for comment on Society, law, and sex Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Stop_Snitchin NPOV. No discussion at all about the interplay of policing and the community or the negative consequences of some types of police informants on the community. Also fails to mention the (debatable) deleterious effects of paid-informants on the court system. 08:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Macrophilia (RfC on talk page). Controversy over lack of reliable sources, made more complicated by the fact that the paraphilia obviously exists, and in a good amount of people, but has very litle media and medical attention. Mediators needed on what course of action to take next, and good source finders needed as well. 23:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Foie gras (RFC on Talk page). Serious controversy, page blocked, outside imput very much needed. There has been much disagreement about how much the article should address (1) the production of foie gras (force-feeding, or gavage) and (2) the controversies about foie gras. A Proposal has been circulated; is it sound? That is, would it help the article better conform to NPOV, etc? 09:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Taylor Allderdice High School Is a school newspaper a reliable source and how should information sourced from it be represented, if at all? 16:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Cat: Is the term "owner" the most appropriate one to use to describe the relationship of humans to cats in the article on Cats, including where the context is not about legal issues? 21:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Otterbein College: Dispute is between a person that describes themselves as the communications director at the college and myself, as well as a previous editor that first reverted her edits. She is copying and pasting unformatted information and deleting the previously formatted information. I have asked her several times to stop and to read Wikipedia's policies on this issue, but she has refused and insists because "she wrote it" that is not copyright violation. 15:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Basque people infobox: related groups - Dispute regarding wether Spanish and French should be named as directly related to Basques. I am against on what I deem are ethnological reasons (there's a wider "Western Europeans" mention already). Another user claims that my position is politically extremist (to put it in mild terms). 14:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Columbia University - Dispute regarding the inclusion of “Barnard jokes” as part of the Columbia University article. An article by the name of “Barnard Jokes” was deleted and blocked for violating wikipedia’s rules on attack page and Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Now an anonymous user is trying to include the same text in the Columbia article as “tradition.” There is no such tradition, and even if there were, I believe the topic is irrelevant to the article as a whole, perpetuates further attacks on women, is not sourced, and should not be part of an encyclopedia. 22:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Zoophilia - Controversy over section called "Health and Safety" (of sex with animals). Input from medically-trained people required if possible. Issue covered at length on talk page. 12:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations - Dispute about whether to translate the names of Scout organizations from non-English speaking countries. 23:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Kevin Federline - should the rumors concerning the sex tape be included on the page?
• Talk:White people - Should the infobox stay?
• Talk:Mulatto - Does the offspring of a black person and white person constitute an "oxymoron"? Is mulatto a common racial category in US society? Are Barack Obama and Colin Powell "American mulattos"? Is it okay to tell readers in the introduction that one shouldn't find the term mulatto offensive/inoffensive? 13:03, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• List of celebrity cocaine addicts I really think this "article" should be deleted, but I will give it a chance here first. 00:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Portal talk:Current events/Sports - What sports and what scores should be reported on the page? -- 09:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:High-heeled shoe - dispute about validity of content, WP:EL, WP:SPAM. 13:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• Talk:Waldorf education. Dispute about advert tag, personal opinions, whether including the stated aims of the schools is "brochure language". 13:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Style issues

Shortcut: WP:RFC/STYLE

Requests for comment on Style, reference, layout and projects Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Talk:Theoretical plate - Is the section on Simple Analogy appropriate? 59.182.10.190 06:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Canton_of_Berne#Spelling_request_for_comment: Should we use Bern or Berne for the name of this Swiss canton and city? 21:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:Case_Closed/Name_dispute_discussions#Request_for_Comment:_Case_Closed_Naming_Conventions
  This dispute has been around for a few years; it surrounds, when the an anime's US, UK and Canada adaptions has used another set of character name, since that constitutes more than half of the Anglosphere, should those names be used? 04:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Template talk:Navigation#Survey: Titlebar's default background colo/ur
  This formatting template used to create multiple templates, e.g. most of those appearing at the ends of articles about countries. Present background colo/ur for its titlebar is a faint grey, but prevoius/original was a light blue. Which do folk prefer – or maybe something else...?  David Kernow (talk) 05:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:John_McCain#Straw_poll:_Use_of_Citation_Tag. Article has over 53 citations but a user wants a banner at the top of the article that says "Citations missing". When are enough citations enough? -- Stbalbach 17:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Talk:List_of_strange_units_of_measurement#RFC_-_Criteria_for_inclusion - formulating a policy on what kinds of units should be included in the article. 06:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Policies, guidelines and proposals

Shortcut: WP:RFC/POLICIES

This page is to request comment on policy or guideline topics. That applies both to disputes about any current policy or guideline, and any new proposals or amendments to those. Further, policy matters are also discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy).

Requests for comment on Policy, guideline, and proposal issues Please help out by providing comment on another dispute listed here List newer entries on top, stating briefly and neutrally what the debate is about. Provide a link to the relevant section on the article's talk page. Sign entries with the date only, by using five tildes: ~~~~~. Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page.

• Wikipedia:Notability (fandom) - a proposal on people, events, and related subjects in science fiction, media, comics, and anime fandom. This is to help clarify issues not completely covered by Wikipedia:Notability (people), Wikipedia:Notability (books), etc. 16:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• WP:FRINGE - A question of whether this guideline has community consensus or not. Blueboar 18:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Fair use/Historical logos in galleries - Request for clarification on the use of historical logo galleries in the articles whose subject the logos represent, and whether such galleries violate fair use policy or not. DHowell 04:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#RfC new proposal regarding controversial names - a proposed addition to the naming conventions which discourages editors from editing for the sole purpose of changing between controversial names, and specifically allows multiple names to be used on wikipedia when there lacks consensus to support one over the other.--23:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#External links in disambiguation pages? - Sometimes an external link in a disambig page seems to be useful. Please discuss. Anthony Appleyard 09:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Talk page formatting - A proposal for new cleaner formatting for Talk pages. 21:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals - Amendment to allow fair use images in portals, relisted since consensus has not been reached and discussion can continue. Ddcc 20:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• User talk:Herostratus/Image RfC - an established and good editor is feeling poorly used by the deletion of many images he has uploaded. Does policy require the deletion of these images, or not? 05:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names) - it would appear we have a consensus that this naming onvention has gained wide acceptance of involved participants and shouldbe promoted to an official guideline. Comments, as always, appreciated.18:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Replaceability of fair-use images A response to the problems that have developed over the enforcement of WP:FUC guideline 1. 05:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Speedy deletion criterion for unsourced articles - A proposal to delete newly created articles after 14 days unless sources are provided. 09:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Attribution - A proposal to subsume Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research. 06:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Notability (albums) - new proposed guideline regarding albums. Addhoc 23:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Editor integrity - A proposed guideline to address gaps in the Wikipedia namespace regarding plagiarism, copyright, and citations. 00:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Categorization#stubs and categories - A discussion over whether articles that have a regular category assigned via their stub category, also must have regular categories explicitly included in the article. Grouse 18:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Game guide - Trying to get the ball rolling on this, seeing as many have had problems with deciding what is considered braking WP:NOT when it comes to the information allowed in a gaming article. Havok (T/C/c) 09:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works): I've overhauled it based on a 2nd round of feedback; possibly it's complete and ready? -Quiddity 05:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User conduct

Shortcut: WP:RFC/USER WP:RFC/ADMIN

This process is for discussing specific users who have violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In order to request comments on a user's actions, follow the instructions to create a subpage in the section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in Article content disputes.

[edit] Uncertified user RfCs

Requests for comment which do not meet the minimum requirements 48 hours after creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment#User-conduct RfC for the minimum requirements. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.

[edit] Closing and archiving

Disputes may be removed from this page and archived under any of the following circumstances:

1. If no additional complaints are registered for an extended period of time, and the dispute appears to have stopped.
2. The parties to the dispute agree.
3. The dispute proceeds to another method of dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration.

Remove the link from the list here and add it to the archives at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. If the dispute is handled in mediation or arbitration, please make a note of where the dispute resolution process continued.

[edit] General user conduct

Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example user as a template, and then list it as follows:

Example user

{one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~ (note: that is five tildes, not four, RFCs are signed with the date only, not your username)

[edit] Candidate pages

These RfCs still need to meet the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

StuRat

WP:NPA, WP:CON 13:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

THB

WP:NPA, WP:CON 13:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Approved pages

These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

Psychohistorian

WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA 04:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

BooyakaDell

User:BooyakaDell has been accused by multiple users of acting in bad faith while proposing multiple non-US wrestling articles for deletion or adding notability tags. BooyakaDell and User:Curse of Fenric (and potentially others) have had edit wars and general uncivil behaviour. This RfC is urgent, to help cool tempers, and work towards agreement on these notability issues. 22:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Mitsos

For quite some time now, Mitsos has brought a severe bias to articles dealing with Nazism or Greece. He makes edits that blatently promote his admitted political bias with little or no regard for Wikipedia's policices. 15:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Piotrus

WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:AGF, WP:REVERT, WP:WHEEL, WP:NPOV, WP:SPAM, WP:POINT

Kelly Martin (3)

This is an omnibus request for comments regarding this editor's long history of administrative and editorial misconduct. 04:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Jance

WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF violations -- 02:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

CltFn

User is making bad faith edits. 02:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Keltik31

All of user's edits seem racist and/or anti-semetic - at the very least extremely controversial. User is also very incivil to other users. 23:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Abu badali

Abu Badali has seem fixated on his quest to delete all images and refuse to accept or listen to any disputes. I have also noticed him deleting dispute tags from images where people have not left a message on the talk page... 21:28, November 28, 2006 (UTC)

Chowbok

User is completely obtuse regarding mass placement of RfD tags. In spite of a large outcry, attempts by numerous editors to discuss this topic with him and reach consensus and agreement, he refuses to stop or listen. Furthermore, he has started trolling me (and has been accused of such by an independent party). 03:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Sugaar

Persistent personal attacks by a contributor and whether warning and blocking for these attacks is appropriate. 02:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

BZ(Bruno Zollinger)

User:BZ(Bruno Zollinger) often uses article talk pages for off-topic musings and personal conversations. When asked not to do so, BZ responds uncivilly and expresses contempt for Wikipedia policies and guidelines—and for other editors, often in nationalistic terms. 05:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Naradasupreme

Naradasupreme is suspected of violating WP:SOCK and has been continually blanking talk pages. He has failed to respond to requests for an explanation. 21:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Kdbuffalo

WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPOV, WP:RS and other policies mainly trying to push a creationist POV. 05:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Rrfayette

Rrfayette (talk • contribs). Disruptive editor who has been exhausting the community's patience with violations of WP:POINT and WP:CIVIL. He has failed to change his way of doing things despite many editors' advice. 14:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Fairness And Accuracy For All

WP:POINT, WP:CIVIL, WP:3RR, WP:U, WP:NPA and general disruption to Wikipedia. 21:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Anarcho-capitalism

Disruptive editor who edits only to push his POV. His user page is insulting and he's shown no respect for WP policies or Wikipedia itself. 09:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Fix Bayonets!

Confederate States of America-related POV pushing, 3RR, assuming bad faith, incivility, and, awhile back, even a legal threat. 05:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Devilmaycares

User is subtly pushing bias across multiple political articles. Most often anti-right but sometimes pro-left. 20:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Nunh-huh

CIV, POINT/ASR. 13:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Halibutt

User conducts disrupting edits, like "jokes" over ethnic names. 22:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of administrator privileges

This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Wikipedia:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example admin

Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~

As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

[edit] Candidate pages

These RfCs still need to meet the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

[edit] Approved pages

These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.

InShaneee

User has apparently engaged in wheel-warring of some sort. I've no involvement or real knowledge of the issue (user who made the request is blocked at the moment and cannot edit... asked for a proxy filing on IRC) 06:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User_names

Shortcut: WP:RFC/NAME

If you believe someone has chosen an inappropriate username under Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here. However, before listing the user here, please first contact the user on his or her talk page and give them an opportunity to change usernames voluntarily.

Names that are offensive, inflammatory, impersonating an existing user, or asserting inappropriate authority will generally be permanently blocked by visiting admins. If a matter turns out to be controversial, a subpage may be created here to discuss it.

Tools  : Special:Listusers, Special:Ipblocklist

New listings below this line, at the bottom, please. Add a new listing.

---

[edit] BloodOnADagger (talk • contribs)

First posted at WP:AIV, not obvious, listing here. Reason given by SunStar Net was username suggesting murder or other related activity. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Eh... this might just be some emo kid. I'm not particularly inclined to block their username, though this might very well come back to bite me in the ass. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Meh. Its never even edited. I'd wait and see. pschemp | talk 16:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I second the meh, no big deal to me. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Allow. Could potentially indicate anything from being a Victorian mystery novel fan to being a human sacrificing cultist, but we can't assume any of those possibilities. Doesn't seem like too big of a deal to me either. Definitely less offensive than, say, HighInBC (zOMG implied drug reference?). --tjstrf talk 17:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Allow. Hasn't posted anything; suggest closing this out. John Broughton | Talk 18:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree this can be closed, I only moved it here to give SunStar Net's concerns due attention, I think this has been acheived. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] See also

• Wikipedia:Current surveys