Template:RFCsoc list

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

  • Talk:Penis Should we put a diagram in the lead and put the photos in as thumbnails and/or a gallery?
  • Talk:Breast Should we change the breast picture in the lead?
  • Talk:Satellite High School Does lengthy 1992 Clinton laud of Bailey detract from high school?
  • Talk:Miss Universe 2008 3 questions -- Is the current hidden comment regarding references appropriate? Is the current standard of referencing (in regards to what constitutes reliable sources) appropriate? What is people's opinion of this discussion?
  • Talk:Major League Soccer An editor has disputed the standing consensus against inclusion of the Supporters' Shield results.
  • Talk:Pedophilia I am adamant that the version supported by SqueakBox, PetraSchelm and Jack-A-Roe misrepresents sources and fails to attribute them. Others claim that the version supported by myself and AnotherSolipsist is biased.
  • Talk:2008 Summer Olympics torch relay route I and another editor appear to disagree as to whether two tables each containing the names of 120 runners of the Hong Kong and Macau legs of the torch relay should belong specifically in this article, or whether it is unencyclopaedic
  • Talk:Adoption Which terminology should be used a) in the lead and b) in the article as a whole. Read Talk:Adoption#Terminology_of_parties_to_adoption to see the terms
  • Talk:List of University of Toronto people Does this list need to use in-line citations?
  • Talk:Taser Should information on "excited delirium" as well as scientific studies on the Taser be included in this article or in the Taser controversy spin-off. Is moving critical information in the Taser article, such as medical studies regarding the device, to the Taser controversy article consistent with NPOV? Is having a separate criticism article or section consistent with NPOV?
  • Talk:Carefree (chant) Should we be including "parody" sections in entries such as Carefree (chant)? Seems like a clear case of inviting trouble.

To add a discussion to RFC:

  • Add {{RFCsoc| section=section name !! reason=a short summary of the discussion !! time= ~~~~~ }}
  • Warning: ! and = will not work anywhere in the template, except for parameter separation. {{ and }} might work outside of the time parameter. | works again.
  • Do not edit the RFC list directly; the bot will invariably undo your edits.
  • Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comments.

For more information, see User:RFC bot