This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 38 |
(Initiated 807 days ago on 14 February 2022) Note: Rfc header removed by Legobot 16 March. Although quiescent for some time, this may have implications beyond this one article, and should have formal evaluation. Mathglot ( talk) 07:31, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 793 days ago on 27 February 2022)
Requesting formal closure since it requires changing a WP:GUIDELINE. Rgrds. -- Bison X ( talk) 19:53, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
It's going on two months now. Would someone please give us closure? GoodDay ( talk) 15:27, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 763 days ago on 29 March 2022) Please review Talk:Will_Smith–Chris_Rock_slapping_incident#Page_title. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 30 March 2022) Please review Talk:Will_Smith–Chris_Rock_slapping_incident#Reactions. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:50, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 775 days ago on 18 March 2022) Hi
I ask and admin or an experienced user to close Talk:Eastern_Ukraine_offensive#Requested_move_18_March_2022. There are consensus to move to Donbas offensive.-- Panam2014 ( talk) 11:39, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 845 days ago on 6 January 2022) The result should be clear. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 14:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) Last comment in the RfC was over a week ago. While the outcome is clear, the topic area ( WP:GENSEX) is generally contentious, so an uninvolved close would be best. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 23:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 851 days ago on 31 December 2021). Request is described at #Request hatting closure. (Talk is stale, after a noconsensus-closure of an AfD). I am involved; I think this thread status is not controversional. - DePiep ( talk) 11:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 804 days ago on 16 February 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 828 days ago on 23 January 2022) No new discussion for a week. No resolution or clarity has emerged from the discussion. Would be useful to have an outside closer. Bondegezou ( talk) 22:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 810 days ago on 10 February 2022) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 371 § Amnesty International? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 06:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 805 days ago on 15 February 2022) Requesting close to open RFC on another subject. CutePeach ( talk) 15:24, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 785 days ago on 8 March 2022) Discussion has stagnated, an uninvolved close is needed. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 02:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) - only been open a day, but consensus is clear. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) - only been open a day, but consensus is clear. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 1 April 2022) this RM has been going for almost a month now, with a relisting and the WikiProject concerned notified 18 days ago. The only comment so far, made 13 days ago, is a comment which seem to support the RM. Per WP:RMNOMIN, I ask that the RM be carried out. Veverve ( talk) 11:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 782 days ago on 11 March 2022) Discussion seems to be ripe for closure. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 01:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 832 days ago on 20 January 2022) Please see also this talk page discussion. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 12:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply) 16:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1035 days ago on 30 June 2021) – The split discussion has been open for almost 10 months, no new opinions for half a year. Please close. -- RJFF ( talk) 19:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) This RM has (in my view) run its course, is going on its 7 day listing period (in like a few hours) and consensus seems pretty unilateral and 'easy to establish'. I'm involved myself since I voted. Thanks in advance for anyone taking the time and energy to drop the figurative hammer on this one. It has no real hurry or priority, for the record. ★Ama TALK CONTRIBS 04:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) Uninvolved editor provided his feedback. RFC template was removed by the bot. No new comments since 4th of April. Formal closure is required. Thanks in advance. -- Abrvagl ( talk) 16:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 789 days ago on 3 March 2022) – Last relisted 18 days ago, needs closing. Avilich ( talk) 14:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 17 April 2022) Boomerang proposal that needs closing; no new !votes for almost a week. BilledMammal ( talk) 17:36, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 815 days ago on 5 February 2022) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pete Best Beatles ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 783 days ago on 10 March 2022) The close of the 2022 NSPORT RfC was challenged at AN. Given the magnitude of the issue, closure may be needed now that the AN discussion has been archived. The implementation of the RfC is dependent on the AN discussion. An experienced closer previously uninvolved with the NSPORTS discussions would be ideal. Pilaz ( talk) 18:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 757 days ago on 5 April 2022) Forgive me if I formatted this incorrectly, this is my first closure request. I submitted the issues with user Desertambition on the noticeboard and the discussion needs closer one way or the other. A proposal was presented and there appears to be consensus. It's a bit of a chore to read though so I appreciate the time it will take to pour through. Thanks! Nemov ( talk) 16:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 12 April 2022) This discussion has wound down. I believe there is a consensus. I would like a clear close by an uninvolved editor. MB 00:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 803 days ago on 18 February 2022) On top of the inherently contentious nature of the proposal, there was significant controversy over whether this RfC (which failed WP:RFCNEUTRAL) is adequate to its intended aim. Have fun with this one. — Compassionate727 ( T· C) 14:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 790 days ago on 3 March 2022)
No comments in nearly a month. A close is needed. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 00:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 756 days ago on 5 April 2022) More than 30 days have passed, no one other than the users that were already discussing the issue participated in it, I would like to request a formal closure for it. -- 2804:248:f6f7:5f00:c103:4e6:143a:96bd ( talk) 18:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) – Open for three weeks now; needs closing. North America 1000 09:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 894 days ago on 19 November 2021) Hasn't been resolved or commented on in months. Bill Williams 23:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 785 days ago on 7 March 2022) The discussion is circling the drain with same users repeating the same points to each other. Calidum 17:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
{{ Done}} by User:Wugapodes. -- Vaulter 03:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 780 days ago on 12 March 2022) It seem this AfD has been forgotten, as noted by Metropolitan90. Veverve ( talk) 10:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 743 days ago on 18 April 2022) Apparently duplicate AfDs were created for this article, after which Newyorkbrad copied one discussion to the other, including the AfD close templates. The inclusion of the close templates is apparently confusing the bots, because it is not being listed anywhere as open, and it is therefore overdue for closure or relisting. Based on the discussion to date, it would be eminently plausible to relist rather than close, and I could easily remove the existing close templates myself to help restore some semblance of order, but I hesitated to do so without bringing it to one of the admin boards and explaining the situation. So here I am. -- Finngall talk 16:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 769 days ago on 23 March 2022) Contentious topic area, so requesting admin please close RM opened more than a month ago. Thank you, Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 05:08, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 30 March 2022) This RfC has been quiet a few days. I think the main points have been made for both sides. Ready for a close. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 20:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 730 days ago on 1 May 2022) There is an obvious consensus that has even been acknowledged by the nominator, but the discussion has descended into hostilities between between two users, with disruption and edit-warring over a !vote removal and some intemperate language. The sooner this is closed the better. (imho) - wolf 22:26, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 753 days ago on 8 April 2022) Take it out back and shoot it. Tewdar 10:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 765 days ago on 27 March 2022) discussion is stale. - Kevo327 ( talk) 14:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 804 days ago on 17 February 2022) Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 724 days ago on 8 May 2022) Requesting closure 52-whalien ( talk) 02:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 3 April 2022) Not sure if this is the right place to put this. Happy for it to be removed if it is not. Discussion was opened 1 month ago, last comment was on 23 April. Requesting experienced closure as this CfD was subject to offwiki canvassing. Thanks. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 02:24, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 10 May 2022) Not sure if this is the right place to put this; but this needs relisting. -- Firestar464 ( talk) 02:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 745 days ago on 17 April 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 16:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 897 days ago on 16 November 2021) With all the edit warring going on in the article, I think it's time for a neutral editor to determine a consensus. Jalen Folf (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 783 days ago on 9 March 2022) Discussion has been still for a while. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 4 April 2022) Requesting close from an uninvolved editor. Last comment was made on 29 April 2022. Fiwec81618 ( talk) 00:39, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 774 days ago on 19 March 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 02:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 905 days ago on 7 November 2021) - stale discussion --Animalparty! ( talk) 23:29, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 13 April 2022) This RFC has been contentious because the question that it addresses has been contentious. So a close by an administrator may be a good idea. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 742 days ago on 20 April 2022) – Listed since 20 April, last relist 4 May, closure overdue by a week. Stifle ( talk) 11:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 712 days ago on 19 May 2022) – Highly personalized AFD stemming from a VPP discussion about the misapplication of MEDRS, which is ironically evoked in the AFD statement and in several !votes. I fear this is a case where the AFD is being used to build a consensus against including content on MEDRS grounds, without discussing the applicability of the guideline to the disputed content, which would then be deleted under a WP:BLAR close. The nominator, who singled out the Tinnitis claim in the VPP and AFD didn't even bother checking if there are review articles on the subject, so I really don't see any grounds for deleting content on the basis of WP:MEDRS, WPLOR, or WP:FRINGE. CutePeach ( talk) 02:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 894 days ago on 19 November 2021) A closure of the RfC was withdrawn following a WP:CLOSECHALLENGE at WP:AN. An experienced closer is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 04:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 2 April 2022) I'd close it myself as noncontroversial (consensus looks pretty clear to me) but I did participate, so for the sake of the vocal dissenter and the look of the thing I'm requesting an uninvolved editor step in. Fieari ( talk) 04:58, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 766 days ago on 26 March 2022) Discussion is stale. Cinderella157 ( talk) 02:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) ITN nomination that needs closing before it is archived. BilledMammal ( talk) 13:03, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 776 days ago on 16 March 2022) Been open 2+ months and the discussion should be closed at this point. -- Vaulter 14:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 716 days ago on 16 May 2022) It's been open for a week and discussion has slowed, it's not necessary to drag this out any longer as it seems unlikely to get more feedback that would sway the result. Recommend closing in 24 hours in case there are any last minute objections. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) The AE thread has been open for two weeks, with minimal substantial participation in the past week. Multiple participants are calling for a closure; an uninvolved admin is requested to take a look. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 21:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 716 days ago on 15 May 2022) – This request was listed nine days ago; two editors have commented, both on that day. Could someone uninvolved close the discussion? CohenTheBohemian ( talk) 04:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 3 April 2022) Needs one or two uninvolved editors to close this. -- George Ho ( talk) 19:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) I closed this following a request on 4 May but reopened to try and gain further participation. RfC has now been open nearly two months with no activity for over a week. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 22:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 737 days ago on 24 April 2022) – Already 1 month. GenuineArt ( talk) 14:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 723 days ago on 8 May 2022) Closure review of widely participated RSN RFC. — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 22:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 891 days ago on 22 November 2021) Uninvolved closure is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 03:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) High visibility/newsworthiness article. Strongly-held disputed views. Messy RfC. Policy questions. Overflow and further disputation in additional sections now archived. Also previous RfCs and former discussions. Panel close by experienced admins could be valuable. Jheald ( talk) 22:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
{{
rfc}}
tag, so it will need to be manually removed. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 21:40, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 714 days ago on 17 May 2022) Merge discussion was closed and reopened by another editor with reason "involved editor". Could an uninvolved editor review the discussion and close. Selfstudier ( talk) 18:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 772 days ago on 20 March 2022) Nearly a week since the last comment was made. –– FormalDude talk 08:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 3 May 2022) Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Side Show Freaks (2nd nomination). -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 11:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 709 days ago on 22 May 2022) Uninvolved closure in this move discussion is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 18:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 793 days ago on 28 February 2022) Would like a formal close for this one before it gets archived. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 23:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator. (Initiated 701 days ago on 31 May 2022) -- Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 00:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 740 days ago on 21 April 2022) . Discussion died afer a week, apart from one comment 3 weeks later (15 May). No consensus, and no point in leaving open. Request closure.-- Smerus ( talk) 16:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 718 days ago on 14 May 2022) Discussion has slowed considerably in the two weeks since the PM was opened so I'd like to request an uninvolved user to review and formally close it. JOE BRO 64 13:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 18 April 2022) Requires an uninvolved editor to close. All but one commenter supported removing Good Article status. HenryCrun15 ( talk) 05:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 778 days ago on 14 March 2022) The activity on this has long dropped off and it just needs an ideally admin close, as its a key page in a conflict area. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 724 days ago on 8 May 2022) I, foolishly perhaps, closed the last RfC on this topic as the consensus was clear. It would be good for an uninvolved editor to close the latest RfC to put this issue to bed. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 03:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 773 days ago on 20 March 2022) Someone to evaluate consensus or lack thereof requested. Discussion has long died down, and it's been roughly three weeks since the last comment. - Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 764 days ago on 28 March 2022) and no further comments for the best part of a fortnight. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:46, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 714 days ago on 17 May 2022) Pretty clear consensus imo, but a closure was undone by another editor who said it "wasn't uncontroversial". Another editor has asked for a closure. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith ( talk) 17:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 13 April 2022) – Expired RfC on revised text to this naming conventions guideline. Expired after 30 days on May 12 with no discussion since. Would prefer someone to close this so that I'm not closing my own RfC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 727 days ago on 4 May 2022) The RfC template has expired, but there still needs to be an assessment of consensus so that we know whether or not to modify the relevant guideline. Discussion was started on may 4 - thanks! theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:06, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 725 days ago on 6 May 2022) No comments since June 2. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) Expired RfC that I started to get community consensus for a proposed bot task. Requesting formal closure so that I can decide whether to file a WP:BRFA. Thanks. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ ( talk) 10:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) Clear consensus to delete after the second relist, per WP:REDLINK. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 02:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 3 April 2022) – Originally opened in 3 April, it was then relisted on 5 May 2022. Last comment after relisting was 7 days ago. Requesting closure. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 03:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 31 March 2022) RM was started on March 31. No new comments since May 4. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 750 days ago on 11 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 733 days ago on 28 April 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 3 April 2022) - archived topic ban appeal, requesting per a request at WP:AN BilledMammal ( talk) 02:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 18 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 742 days ago on 19 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 739 days ago on 22 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 2 May 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 3 May 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 740 days ago on 22 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 691 days ago on 9 June 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 771 days ago on 22 March 2022) Expired RFC that I started that has grown into a large, complex discussion where many proposals were considered. An experienced editor who knows how to evaluate consensus carefully would be helpful to close this discussion. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:D528:4D19:2CF7:AEB2 ( talk) 02:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 701 days ago on 31 May 2022) – Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:42, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 730 days ago on 1 May 2022) Political article with no obvious consensus reached.-- Lord Belbury ( talk) 11:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 685 days ago on 15 June 2022) Discussion at:
to redo the close by an uninvolved user. -- Venkat TL ( talk) 12:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) A snow close is in order. Can someone check the weather forecast for Antarctica? Robert McClenon ( talk) 13:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 861 days ago on 21 December 2021) No comments for more than a month. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 19:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) – Novem Linguae ( talk) 11:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 676 days ago on 24 June 2022) Nominator has withdrawn, only other votes are keeps. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 22:30, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 766 days ago on 26 March 2022) The discussion dried 37 days ago. 10 days ago last comment was made. Folks have suggested asking for closure. Venkat TL ( talk) 19:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) I'd say no consensus, but it was leaning delete in later !votes, so I will leave an admin to decide. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 02:11, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) >>> Extorc. talk 16:28, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 778 days ago on 14 March 2022) No new comments have been made for one and a half months. I think it's ready for closure. WARNING: The subject is very controversial and the discussion has become very extensive (I apologise for my part in having perhaps contributed to that excess...). Closure would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! LongLivePortugal ( talk) 14:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) Vote count is 7-1. Last vote was June 11; the three more-recent posts have been about non-contentious technicalities. The page itself seems pretty lifeless, but I don't want to close myself because I responded to the RfC and it involves everyone's favorite perennial source. SamuelRiv ( talk) 19:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 712 days ago on 19 May 2022) Request formal closure of this expired RFC since it was started to deal with a lengthy and heated debate, involves RL political issues, and may attract real-life attention. Abecedare ( talk) 11:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 705 days ago on 27 May 2022) Discussion has appears to have slowed (there is some additional new discussion in a sub-section on sources that shouldn't affect how this is closed) and the RfC template was automatically removed due to expiration. — Locke Cole • t • c 15:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 820 days ago on 31 January 2022) Please review Talk:Death_of_Michelle_Go#"Alleged". -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 17:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) Quiet since June 17. Seeking formal closure as consensus is unclear (to me) and topic is controversial. GabberFlasted ( talk) 15:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 18 June 2022) Seems to be a strong consensus against merging. 47.23.40.14 ( talk) 22:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 703 days ago on 28 May 2022) Request closure of this RFC. Slywriter ( talk) 23:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 702 days ago on 30 May 2022) Needs a formal close. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 23:29, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 672 days ago on 28 June 2022) Request to close page move discussion by an uninvolved editor as consensus is provided by no comments. Jamzze ( talk) 12:46, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 711 days ago on 20 May 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:59, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 776 days ago on 17 March 2022) – Please review Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Geschichte. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 05:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 708 days ago on 24 May 2022) Seems to be a strong consensus. 75.99.68.66 ( talk) 22:07, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 734 days ago on 27 April 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:40, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) Seems to trend towards a keep. Won't do it myself since I voted (but retracted the vote). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 18:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) Seems to trend towards a keep. Won't do it myself since I voted (but retracted the vote). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 18:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 876 days ago on 6 December 2021) Last comment was posted 00:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC). — Michael Z. 20:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) There have been no new comments since July 1 and I am requesting uninvolved closure. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 14:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) I opened a discussion on a proposed page move a week ago, to which no one has responded. I cannot close the discussion myself, of course (as per WP:RMCLOSE). If someone will close it, I shall execute the move. Thank you! – Quick and Dirty User Account ( talk) 11:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 666 days ago on 4 July 2022) - Discussion has only been open for a week, but it appears to be snowing. BilledMammal ( talk) 05:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 728 days ago on 3 May 2022) the last vote (mine) was 22 days ago as of posting. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 12:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 701 days ago on 30 May 2022) Becoming protracted and unwieldy. Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 10:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1047 days ago on 19 June 2021) this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:24, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 732 days ago on 29 April 2022) We have decided to close this RFC to partially rewrite it and start a new one. A formal closure is necessary in order not to create confusion with the new RFC that will be started. -- Scia Della Cometa ( talk) 07:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 680 days ago on 20 June 2022) The discussion was initially closed by me today (13 July 2022), specifically, sometime this afternoon (I launched it last month), as Wikipedia policy ( WP:RFCEND, specifically #5) does allow any editor involved in a discussion to close it upon a consensus being reached. It was closed based upon my interpretation that a consensus was reached (of the editors who got involved, 5, in one way or another, stated support for my proposed change to the current wording; 4 stated no reference for, and thereby no support for, the current wording [which was the reason for the RfC]; & 1 editor didn't even vote, but simply stated that, ultimately, programming defines a station) in favor of the re-wording I had proposed. Another editor, @ General Ization:, got involved, disagreed with my interpretation of a consensus &, at least from my point of view, wrongly re-opened the discussion. After some back & forth with Ization, I have decided to request a review of the discussion, in the hopes that, depending on the result of the review, not only will I no longer have to worry about dealing with the editor, but that they'll be convinced to accept the facts of the situation & move on to something else. 2600:1700:C960:2270:3CD1:517A:41BE:55DB ( talk) 03:48, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 982 days ago on 22 August 2021) Requesting closure of this RFC by an uninvolved editor. Hwy43 ( talk) 02:29, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 711 days ago on 21 May 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 07:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 700 days ago on 31 May 2022) Requesting closure of RfC for inclusion of Australian Indigenous placenames within the lead and infobox of articles. This discussion has stagnated for long periods of time and there is no new arguments being added. It would be helpful if the closer had knowledge of Wikipedia naming guidelines, notability guidelines, and potentially a basic knowledge of history or linguistics. Poketama ( talk) 07:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 690 days ago on 10 June 2022) Request closure of RfC by an uninvolved editor as consensus is unclear. Gusfriend ( talk) 09:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 686 days ago on 14 June 2022) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apaugasma ( talk • contribs) 13:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 677 days ago on 23 June 2022) It's been several days since a !vote. This RfC is about something relatively recent so it would be nice to get a definitive answer on what content should be included. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 04:18, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 669 days ago on 2 July 2022) Requesting closure by an uninvolved admin. I'm aware this is early but the result is (I think) already very clear but is being disputed in other discussions, therefore closure by an admin seems advisable. FOARP ( talk) 07:42, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 676 days ago on 25 June 2022) Could someone please close the RFC, it's been going for 24 days. There's also a related thread you may want to close on User_talk:Jimbo Wales. Andrevan @ 04:48, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 694 days ago on 6 June 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:15, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 667 days ago on 3 July 2022) – Is just going round in circles with one user insisting on (what looks like OR) be inserted in the lede. It is not going to get resolved as the user has refused )it seems to me) any compromise text, and has offered no alternatives to their version. Slatersteven ( talk) 16:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 10 May 2022) Discussion stopped weeks ago. Needs formal closure. Thank you. Iraniangal777 ( talk) 14:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 661 days ago on 9 July 2022) Request for Comment regarding veracity of a source listed on the page. Consensus appears to be clear, but this is contentious, so I would like an uninterested editor to take a look at it for a close. Thanks FrederalBacon ( talk) 18:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 685 days ago on 15 June 2022) Recommend both be closed with a consistent decision, between them. Editor participation was near identical, in both RFCs. GoodDay ( talk) 22:44, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
{{subst:Please see|Talk:Joe Biden#RFC}}
on the Kamala Harris page. –
Novem Linguae (
talk) 03:27, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 682 days ago on 18 June 2022) Need an uninvolved editor to close the RfC and determine the consensus. – Kavyansh.Singh ( talk) 09:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 655 days ago on 15 July 2022) Nominator has withdrawn. I also retracted my solitary delete vote and the other two participants want to keep. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 19:08, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 786 days ago on 6 March 2022) Requires attention from experienced users. -- Mhhossein talk 12:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) – Requesting an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and close this discussion. This lengthy discussion has been going on for 15 days and we have a consensus from three Editors of agreed changes and to close, and a anonymous editor with various IP addresses that has no support for their edits and may object to the close, hence this request. Note their was a previous related discussion at Talk:Space Race#NPOV issues and a ongoing related discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Possible RFC regarding spaceflight chronological timelines and the anom editor has made appeals at various talk pages ie User talk:JustinTime55. Ilenart626 ( talk) 21:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Disclaimer: The original computer network was down so I have to use another network at another place, hence the address difference) and here (
Hi, it's me again. [...] I had to switch networks again). TompaDompa ( talk) 21:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) Has run for a month and seems relatively clear, although one editor has voiced concern that hobbyists may be trying to "distort Wikipedia's consensus processes" and has asked that this be taken into account when the RfC is closed. -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 08:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 674 days ago on 26 June 2022)
(Initiated 672 days ago on 29 June 2022) - RfC, no comments for two weeks. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) Please review this RFC. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 23:08, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 718 days ago on 13 May 2022) Considering that several categories here have been populated since the beginning of the nomination, I'd close as procedural keep per the WP:TRAINWRECK principle. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 14:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) Clear consensus, please close this is a high visibility page. Venkat TL ( talk) 13:39, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) RfC tag expired a few hours ago, and the last contribution to it was on 13 July. Requesting closure please. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 01:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 643 days ago on 27 July 2022) Clearly as there is no consensus. please close this discussion per WP:SNOW. HurricaneEdgar 07:40, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 648 days ago on 23 July 2022)
As has historically been done for other highly contentious and large AfDs, I would like to request a panel closure of this one. It is at 176 kb and rising, with dozens of 'votes'. It would be quite helpful I feel.
It still has about another day to run, but I'm posting it now to give time to make the arrangements and for people to volunteer.
I also posted about this at WP:AN but some editors said I should list it here. Crossroads -talk- 04:28, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 2 April 2022) Consensus is clear but needs top section closure so that we can move on czar 16:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 702 days ago on 30 May 2022) I request that this be formally closed. It appears that there may be a consensus here, but the result of the discussion needs to be logged. Thank you.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 17:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) - RFC tag has expired & activity ended weeks ago. GoodDay ( talk) 21:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 657 days ago on 14 July 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 820 days ago on 31 January 2022) Please review Talk:Death_of_Michelle_Go#"Alleged". -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 08:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
{{ Close}} - The Gnome ( talk) 13:12, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 28 July 2022) A consensus for an American politics TBAN has been reached. Needs closure and implementation. Thank you! -- Kbabej ( talk) 04:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 737 days ago on 24 April 2022) RFC tag expired two days ago, and discussion has stopped since weeks, so it needs a formal closure. Already the OP took initiative and decided the RFC result without a proper closure, and they might try to do this again soon. Yakme ( talk) 13:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1008 days ago on 28 July 2021) Major backlog of requests needing closure czar 17:58, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 668 days ago on 2 July 2022) - Been little activity in the last roughly two weeks. GoodDay ( talk) 20:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 667 days ago on 4 July 2022) - The RFC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 06:08, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 665 days ago on 5 July 2022) The RfC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 20:13, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) No further contributions or comments are being submitted since 6 July 2022. A clear consensus seems to have been reached. All that remains is the formal closure. - The Gnome ( talk) 12:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 659 days ago on 11 July 2022)
RfC expired, closure is requested. Crossroads -talk- 20:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) Open more than two weeks and discussion seems to have tapered off. -- Vaulter 20:35, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) Speedy keep requested here. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 664 days ago on 6 July 2022) Consensus appears clearly in support of split, but I cannot close myself due to my COI. Can an uninvolved editor please close it? Thank you, Bkenny44 ( talk) 13:06, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 631 days ago on 8 August 2022) - The move request has been up for a week. Clear consensus to move although number of contributors is small. Please note also a consensus that the move should actually be to "Unboxed: Creativity in the UK." (i.e. not all upper case). I claim the IP edits and am therefore involved. Many thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 13:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) Nobody's added anything for a week, so it's time to wrap this up. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 679 days ago on 21 June 2022) I really don't think it's fair to the appellant for a ban appeal to remain open for so long, regardless of the outcome (disclaimer: I participated) -- Dylan620 (he/him · talk · edits) 23:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 666 days ago on 4 July 2022) It was archived without closure or administrative resolution. The concern was brought up again at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:84.250.14.116 reported by User:Yae4 (Result: ) on 23 July 2022. 84.250.14.116 ( talk) 13:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 728 days ago on 3 May 2022) No new comments since 1 June. Clear majority favoring the inclusion of the category, with a minority dominated by editors that appear to be in favor of looking at the Book of Mormon as a factual historical document. JimKaatFan ( talk) 20:46, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here. Nice. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 12:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 748 days ago on 14 April 2022) No clear consensus has been reached, and with no comments since July 4, one is not likely to happen anytime soon. I have already messaged the editor who submitted the initial request about creating a draft article instead. SmartAn01 ( talk) 04:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) Previous closure was undone. –– FormalDude talk 16:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 19:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 651 days ago on 20 July 2022) RfC tag has expired and all the discussion has mostly run its course. Iamreallygoodatcheckers t@lk 05:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 647 days ago on 23 July 2022) - Seeing as the RFC tag, has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 18:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 815 days ago on 5 February 2022) Keep, delete per WP:TNT, or close as no consensus? – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 14:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 789 days ago on 3 March 2022) This GAR has been open since March and has been completely stale since the end of April. Skimming through it, there does seem to be a loose consensus to delist or at the worst, intervene to see if disputes have been resolved. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 14:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 9 May 2022) Open since May and has had a reasonable amount of participation. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 01:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 665 days ago on 5 July 2022) The RfC tag has expired. Kpddg (talk) 07:19, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 657 days ago on 13 July 2022) Request for Comment rooted in WP:SYNTH, on whether examples of use should require a reliable source to verify that they are notable examples, or whether editors can search the web and select any examples of its use and cite those directly as examples.
There have been eight (by my count) contributors, but no comments have been added for almost six days, and one of the main contributors has been indefinitely blocked in the meantime, the IP contributor has not edited since, and one contributor commented only on an unasked question.
The issue is quite contentious, and as the outcome would seem to rely on WP:SYNTH interpretation, I favour an uninvolved close please. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:49, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 656 days ago on 15 July 2022) - The RfC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 01:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Isabelle Belato: would you do the honour of closing? GoodDay ( talk) 23:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 650 days ago on 21 July 2022) The RFC tag, has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 07:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
May we please have someone 'close' this RFC, in order avoid any edit-warring? GoodDay ( talk) 16:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
|
@ ScottishFinnishRadish: Would you do the honour of closing? GoodDay ( talk) 23:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 641 days ago on 29 July 2022) This is relatively straightforward phrasing change, but lots of different opinions on a high-profile political controversy in the U.S. New comments have peetered out. A timely close would be helpful to get the talk page down to a reasonable size, and unblock some improvements to the intro. -- Beland ( talk) 21:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) Please relist or review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 11:46, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 640 days ago on 30 July 2022) – I made this move request just over 2 weeks ago. There has been a good and full discussion and the last legitimate comment was posted 4 days ago so it seems to have reached a conclusion. I wonder if an admin or editor could assess consensus and close? This is the first time I have completed a move request so I hope I have this procedure right. All the best, Emmentalist ( talk) 15:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Further to the request above, there seems to be a clear consensus and all it really seems to need is closing by an uninvolved editor. All the best, Emmentalist
(Initiated 648 days ago on 22 July 2022) - Requesting closure from an uninvolved editor for this expired RfC. — Golden call me maybe? 19:36, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 630 days ago on 9 August 2022) Need uninvolved closure on stale discussion. -- George Ho ( talk) 18:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 644 days ago on 27 July 2022) RFC expired, please evaluate for consensus on both Aon’s general reliability and how it compares to NOAA. 69.118.232.58 ( talk) 23:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 645 days ago on 26 July 2022) - RFC tag expired, days ago. GoodDay ( talk) 14:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) RFC has been open 11 days, discussion has slowed. Please note additional discussion in preceding section which may help to gauge consensus. Polyamorph ( talk) 18:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 638 days ago on 1 August 2022) No comments since August 7th. Don't know if this is the correct place to put this merger request closure but oh well.. Peralien ( talk) 01:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 704 days ago on 27 May 2022) This is an RFC about a fairly minor editing matter that may have been better off being discussed in a normal talk thread. The proposer presented a question that was neither a simple yes/no question, nor a clear set of options, but rather is a compound, open-ended question (and on a conflict area page no less). At least one editor called for procedural close precisely because of the lack of clear options. The resulting unresolved mess has been open for three months. Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
"If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here."¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Fad Ariff ( talk) 11:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) This went through a Request for comment, upon which after the RfC time expired, the tag was removed ( diff). Requesting a formal closure of the discussion by an uninvolved user. North America 1000 12:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 29 July 2022) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at this usability-related discussion? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 20:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 637 days ago on 2 August 2022) – Requesting closure of the above RfC from an uninvolved editor. A fair bit of diverging views, the result seems fairly simple to me but I can foresee significant edit warring without a formal closure. Thanks very much. Poketama ( talk) 09:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) – Appears to have achieved a consensus. –– FormalDude (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) Glitchy trainwreck nomination; breaks XFDCloser. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 06:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 613 days ago on 27 August 2022) Appears to be WP:SNOW. Unanimous consensus to merge in a week. 47.21.202.18 ( talk) 18:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 622 days ago on 18 August 2022) Rfc for The question: In an article about an organism, should the scientific name of the organism always be presented in boldface (as well as italics) when it is introduced?
The consensus seems (very) clear, and I suggest closure before the bot automatically removes the tag in 11 days. — BarrelProof ( talk) 16:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 682 days ago on 18 June 2022) RFC on how the Republic of Artsakh should be described in the articles requires formal closure. The last comment was made on 19 July 2022. -- Abrvagl ( talk) 16:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) {{ ndash}} This RfC is not very old, but consensus is very clear. An editor ( Hob Gadling) has already mentioned WP:SNOW, but as the initiator I feel uncomfortable in closing it myself. – LordPickleII ( talk) 14:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 629 days ago on 11 August 2022) Please review this discussion, which has been relisted thrice. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:55, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 669 days ago on 2 July 2022) RfC has been open for over a month and seems ripe for closure. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 635 days ago on 5 August 2022) — Despite my own involvement in this RfC, this is an obvious closure since consensus is near-unanimous on deprecating this site. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 04:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) – This RfC is not very old, but consensus is very clear. An editor ( Hob Gadling) has already mentioned WP:SNOW, but as the initiator I feel uncomfortable in closing it myself. Note: This had previously been archived by mistake, because I had messed up formatting, so here it is again. – LordPickleII ( talk) 07:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 821 days ago on 30 January 2022) Seems to have a consensus, ongoing for a while. 2601:185:8300:42EF:6149:B579:AF6A:2807 ( talk) 12:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 720 days ago on 12 May 2022) No comments since May. Involved editors do not seem to have any interest in addressing GAR issues present and have not commented in the GAR. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) Given that this requested move already had one closure reversed nearly two weeks ago, it could probably do with having another uninvolved administrator take a look. Graham ( talk) 00:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 600 days ago on 8 September 2022) There appears to be disagreement among some editors regarding whether or not there is a firm consensus against using the image of the Queen from 2015, which is resulting in a slow-motion edit war in the infobox. Uninvolved closure by an administrator would be helpful in putting an end to this. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 623 days ago on 17 August 2022) We're about 4 weeks into this and I think we need an uninvolved editor to close. I would recommend the closer also notes the similar discussion that recently occurred at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titus (dinosaur) CT55555 ( talk) 12:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 603 days ago on 6 September 2022) – Honestly, I should have probably just boldly moved this, rather than opening a discussion. The current title is objectively incorrect, according to all the standard books on the material. Only two comments, one in complete agreement, and the other agreeing that it should be moved, but speculating as to the best target. The relevant WikiProject ( WP:WikiProject_Music_theory) was notified at the start of discussion. Thanks! PianoDan ( talk) 22:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 602 days ago on 6 September 2022) Could do with an uninvolved close. Thanks. Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 20:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 28 July 2022) This was relisted by the originator on 30 August 2022. It drew another few "summoned by bots", but there have been no further edits to the page for over seven days. Scolaire ( talk) 15:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
{{ Done}} Thparkth ( talk) 21:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 606 days ago on 2 September 2022) This discussion has been going on for a bit, has had decent levels of participation, and seems ripe for closure. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 650 days ago on 20 July 2022) – Seems like discussion has petered out. At question is WP:SHORTDESC and WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE DolyaIskrina ( talk) 22:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 629 days ago on 11 August 2022) – Would request closure of the above RfC from an uninvolved editor. Their has been a fair few comments however consensus is not clear with lots of divergent views. Note that I am making this request on behalf of the initiator of the RfC, @ Gitz6666: who agrees with this request, refer discussion on his Talkpage. Ilenart626 ( talk) 09:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 621 days ago on 18 August 2022) Request closure by non-administrator. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 14:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 603 days ago on 5 September 2022) Bit of a backlog of DRVs to get through. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 04:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
{{ Resolved}}
(Initiated 595 days ago on 14 September 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 595 days ago on 14 September 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 11 May 2022) It appears this RFC didn't get listed for closure sooner due to people fiddling with the RFC template and timestamps. Alsee ( talk) 16:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 640 days ago on 30 July 2022) Won't expire for another 3-4 days EDT, but might as well get this request out of the way now per GoodDay. 100.7.36.213 ( talk) 19:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Tag expired days ago. GoodDay ( talk) 17:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Willing to be in the panel but wise to have at least a couple of admins. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 697 days ago on 4 June 2022) Article was merged, so GAR may be closed. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 14:33, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 591 days ago on 17 September 2022) Is a snow-close appropriate here? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 07:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 678 days ago on 22 June 2022) – This merge discussion should be easy to close. Fad Ariff ( talk) 11:47, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 598 days ago on 10 September 2022) – A total waste of time. Please close it with prejudice. tgeorgescu ( talk) 15:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC) One IP is now blocked, but another IP popped up with the same story. Please close it with prejudice. tgeorgescu ( talk) 18:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) - Technically this WP:RM has already been closed, but it was closed by the person who made the request. This page move might've actually been OK per WP:RMNOT; however, since an RM was started, it probably would've been better for someone other than the requester to do the close per WP:RMCLOSE#Who can close requested moves. There may also be a conflict of interest involved since the RM requester is listed as a {{ Connected Contributor}} at the top of the article's talk page. For reference, I've also asked about this at WT:ESPORTS#British Esports. I only came across this move after seeing that File:British Esports Association logo.svg had been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:F5. I don't think the close was made in bad faith, but only perhaps by a fairly new WP:SPA user who might have a COI and who might not be very familiar with relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 694 days ago on 6 June 2022) The last post was made back in June 2022, while a strong consensus had already been formed. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 770 days ago on 23 March 2022) No comments since May. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 636 days ago on 3 August 2022) – closure is long overdue. Thanks in advance! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 05:49, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 743 days ago on 19 April 2022) The renewed discussion in 2022 seems to have died out, nor have any support. Time to end this formally. 67.82.182.94 ( talk) 23:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 622 days ago on 17 August 2022) – No discussion in the last ten days. Bit of a tough call given all the options. –– FormalDude (talk) 08:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 777 days ago on 16 March 2022) Discussion about a change in the general notability decline message for AfC. There is disagreement about whether consensus was found for the last (bulleted) proposal, and a template edit request was declined. I started a discussion to address the open question (what to do with the decline messages for topics with an SNG), unaware of this declined edit request. Would be good to have a formal closure, so that the new discussion can build on that. Femke ( talk) 20:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 620 days ago on 19 August 2022) nableezy - 18:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) This RfC has now expired. Could an uninvolved editor or administrator please close it. TFD ( talk) 18:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) — One user who, from the start, disagreed with the majority requested that a RfC be started. There was consensus prior to the RfC that, generally, combined regular season and playoff stats should not be included in lists or articles, aside from 1 notable exception. The RfC did not generate any opposition to the consensus that had already been found. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) Seems to have a pretty clear consensus after over a week and a half. 173.68.184.70 ( talk) 19:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) Discussion has petered out many weeks ago, without a clear consensus. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) - I was asked on my talk page to close "the Redux of the Redux discussion section and the active RfC" [1] but having taken a look I don't understand what is being proposed enough or enough of the comments to properly assess consensus. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 617 days ago on 22 August 2022) nableezy - 15:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 835 days ago on 17 January 2022) Conversation finished in March and has since been archived - some involved users have differing views on whether a consensus has been reached (and what that consensus is), which has since resulted in further disagreements on affected article pages. Would be good to have an outside take, if possible given the archived nature of the discussion. Turnagra ( talk) 09:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 585 days ago on 23 September 2022) Would an admin please clean up this section? Erpert blah, blah, blah... 12:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 29 September 2022) The RM was initiated by a WP:SOCKPUPPET and goes against Wikipedia's conventions and guidelines and particularly WP:MOSMAC, and particularly this provision: [2]. Therefore, the RM requires a speedy closure per WP:SNOWBALL. The initiator got banned. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 17:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 621 days ago on 19 August 2022) There has been several AN/I filings surrounding this issue, lengthy discussions aside from simple !votes and policy implications of some arguments presented. I believe the closure needs to be undertaken by an admin or an experienced user with good knowledge of policy. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 23:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 633 days ago on 6 August 2022) The discussion for this RfC has ended and has been archived. IMHO, a closure is desired. Many thanks! VickKiang 21:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 29 August 2022) Magnolia677 ( talk) 18:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 30 September 2022) – Clearly, many users favor not moving this page. please close this discussion. HurricaneEdgar 02:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 608 days ago on 1 September 2022). — xaosflux Talk 00:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 607 days ago on 1 September 2022). Discussion is stale and tag has been removed. Requesting formal close since this RfC is attempting to change an existing formally closed RfC, and the subject is contentious. Tartan357 ( talk) 04:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 614 days ago on 25 August 2022). Expired at Special:Diff/1112134888. — andrybak ( talk) 20:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 582 days ago on 27 September 2022) Please review Talk:Willow Smith#Coping Mechanism (album). -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 586 days ago on 22 September 2022) Move initially requested 13 days ago by an account that has been discovered to be a sockpuppet and blocked. Consensus seems to be in support of a name change, but not for the particular name change proposed. I propose we close this current move request so a new one can be started with a name that is more supported based on the consensus that currently exists, and then continue from there. Annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts and Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts are two possible consensus names, though I ask whichever person looks at this closure request to make their own determinations based on the discussion as well. Criticalus ( talk) 02:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 615 days ago on 24 August 2022) May need an experienced closer to close this discussion. There haven't been any new comments in over a week. Steel1943 ( talk) 18:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 1 July 2022). It has been four months, discussion has come to a stop, and there is relatively clear support for including both terms in question. Cpotisch ( talk) 00:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 604 days ago on 5 September 2022). Probably want an admin or experienced non-admin closer for this one, as it's a bit of a contentious RfC and (in my biased/involved opinion) the opinions offered seem to have shifted over the course of the RfC, so I don't think it would be a trivial close. Endwise ( talk) 05:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 596 days ago on 13 September 2022) I would be grateful if someone could close this discussion, which has attracted no additional comments for the past eleven days. I would like a formal closure as it is holding up the closure of an FAC nomination. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 597 days ago on 11 September 2022) I called the RfC after reading years of discussion surrounding this thorny and potentially NPOV issue. We needed a more rational and ordered conversation with contributions from less-involved, less-invested editors. The survey and discussion are lengthy but coherent and I have prepared a summary for any uninvolved editor willing to end the RfC. There now seems to be a happy consensus in favour of the change, but I'd be glad if a third party editor could close, preferably with a brief statement confirming the consensus and the legitimacy of the discussion. Thank you! Angry Candy ( talk) 12:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 615 days ago on 24 August 2022) – If there exists consensus to merge, may I kindly ask closer to do so? Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 04:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 988 days ago on 16 August 2021) Split request was started over a year ago without any new discussion in months. ZLEA T\ C 13:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 559 days ago on 19 October 2022) Apparent WP:SNOW? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 23:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 559 days ago on 19 October 2022) Also apparent WP:SNOW over here. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 23:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 567 days ago on 12 October 2022) – Many users had agreed to move this page. This discussion is now 7 days so we need closure this discussion. HurricaneEdgar 02:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 627 days ago on 13 August 2022) - The RfC tag has expired since a month, though I decided to wait until the user who uploaded the map that was the original cause of dispute made a comment on it, but he hasn't edited on Wikipedia since months. Its time to close it. 2804:248:FB6F:4400:B021:971A:800D:7D10 ( talk) 03:23, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) Discussion ended about a month ago, well ripe for closure now. Iffy★ Chat -- 18:05, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 598 days ago on 10 September 2022) In my view, there is not clear enough consensus for an involved participant to close the discussion. Not a super long one. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 16:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 600 days ago on 9 September 2022) The RFC was archived without closure. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 19 May 2022) Needs uninvolved editor to evaluate consensus. -- George Ho ( talk) 07:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 29 September 2022) As far as I know, closure reviews at AN don't have a suggested time frame. This one has been open since 29 September, and it's been five days since the last substantive comment on the central question. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 15:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Already {{ Done}} by Floquenbeam. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 11:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1155 days ago on 2 March 2021) Could any uninvolved editor examine the consensus for a merge of User-in-the-loop into Human-in-the-loop, involving a discussion where I have been a participant. Klbrain ( talk) 12:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 565 days ago on 13 October 2022) Hi. An AfD tag was placed on The Iceman (performer) (a page I created/started) on 13 October 2022. I did not agree that it failed WP:GNG and argued the case (resulting in no further comments). I have since worked to increase the article's integrity by adding quality references to The Independent, the Evening Standard, The Stage, and The List. Nobody else contributed to the discussion until the AfD was relisted on 20 October. Since then, one other editor has suggested we keep it. I've tried to engage further but nobody else is contributing in either direction. I also tried to remove the AfD myself but it was reinstated by the editor who originally placed it. Can an uninvolved editor assess the situation and help to make a decision? Personally I'd like to see the article saved from deletion and the deletion discussion closed but I remain open to further discussion/guidance if necessary. Thanks. Angry Candy ( talk) 14:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 574 days ago on 5 October 2022) Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stereo Satellite (2nd nomination) -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 38 |
(Initiated 807 days ago on 14 February 2022) Note: Rfc header removed by Legobot 16 March. Although quiescent for some time, this may have implications beyond this one article, and should have formal evaluation. Mathglot ( talk) 07:31, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 793 days ago on 27 February 2022)
Requesting formal closure since it requires changing a WP:GUIDELINE. Rgrds. -- Bison X ( talk) 19:53, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
It's going on two months now. Would someone please give us closure? GoodDay ( talk) 15:27, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 763 days ago on 29 March 2022) Please review Talk:Will_Smith–Chris_Rock_slapping_incident#Page_title. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:49, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 30 March 2022) Please review Talk:Will_Smith–Chris_Rock_slapping_incident#Reactions. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:50, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 775 days ago on 18 March 2022) Hi
I ask and admin or an experienced user to close Talk:Eastern_Ukraine_offensive#Requested_move_18_March_2022. There are consensus to move to Donbas offensive.-- Panam2014 ( talk) 11:39, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 845 days ago on 6 January 2022) The result should be clear. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 14:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) Last comment in the RfC was over a week ago. While the outcome is clear, the topic area ( WP:GENSEX) is generally contentious, so an uninvolved close would be best. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 23:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 851 days ago on 31 December 2021). Request is described at #Request hatting closure. (Talk is stale, after a noconsensus-closure of an AfD). I am involved; I think this thread status is not controversional. - DePiep ( talk) 11:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 804 days ago on 16 February 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 828 days ago on 23 January 2022) No new discussion for a week. No resolution or clarity has emerged from the discussion. Would be useful to have an outside closer. Bondegezou ( talk) 22:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 810 days ago on 10 February 2022) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 371 § Amnesty International? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 06:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 805 days ago on 15 February 2022) Requesting close to open RFC on another subject. CutePeach ( talk) 15:24, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 785 days ago on 8 March 2022) Discussion has stagnated, an uninvolved close is needed. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 02:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) - only been open a day, but consensus is clear. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) - only been open a day, but consensus is clear. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 1 April 2022) this RM has been going for almost a month now, with a relisting and the WikiProject concerned notified 18 days ago. The only comment so far, made 13 days ago, is a comment which seem to support the RM. Per WP:RMNOMIN, I ask that the RM be carried out. Veverve ( talk) 11:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 782 days ago on 11 March 2022) Discussion seems to be ripe for closure. — Mhawk10 ( talk) 01:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 832 days ago on 20 January 2022) Please see also this talk page discussion. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 12:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
{{
reply to|Chess}}
on reply) 16:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1035 days ago on 30 June 2021) – The split discussion has been open for almost 10 months, no new opinions for half a year. Please close. -- RJFF ( talk) 19:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 738 days ago on 24 April 2022) This RM has (in my view) run its course, is going on its 7 day listing period (in like a few hours) and consensus seems pretty unilateral and 'easy to establish'. I'm involved myself since I voted. Thanks in advance for anyone taking the time and energy to drop the figurative hammer on this one. It has no real hurry or priority, for the record. ★Ama TALK CONTRIBS 04:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) Uninvolved editor provided his feedback. RFC template was removed by the bot. No new comments since 4th of April. Formal closure is required. Thanks in advance. -- Abrvagl ( talk) 16:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 789 days ago on 3 March 2022) – Last relisted 18 days ago, needs closing. Avilich ( talk) 14:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 17 April 2022) Boomerang proposal that needs closing; no new !votes for almost a week. BilledMammal ( talk) 17:36, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 815 days ago on 5 February 2022) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pete Best Beatles ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 783 days ago on 10 March 2022) The close of the 2022 NSPORT RfC was challenged at AN. Given the magnitude of the issue, closure may be needed now that the AN discussion has been archived. The implementation of the RfC is dependent on the AN discussion. An experienced closer previously uninvolved with the NSPORTS discussions would be ideal. Pilaz ( talk) 18:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 757 days ago on 5 April 2022) Forgive me if I formatted this incorrectly, this is my first closure request. I submitted the issues with user Desertambition on the noticeboard and the discussion needs closer one way or the other. A proposal was presented and there appears to be consensus. It's a bit of a chore to read though so I appreciate the time it will take to pour through. Thanks! Nemov ( talk) 16:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 12 April 2022) This discussion has wound down. I believe there is a consensus. I would like a clear close by an uninvolved editor. MB 00:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 803 days ago on 18 February 2022) On top of the inherently contentious nature of the proposal, there was significant controversy over whether this RfC (which failed WP:RFCNEUTRAL) is adequate to its intended aim. Have fun with this one. — Compassionate727 ( T· C) 14:23, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 790 days ago on 3 March 2022)
No comments in nearly a month. A close is needed. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 00:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 756 days ago on 5 April 2022) More than 30 days have passed, no one other than the users that were already discussing the issue participated in it, I would like to request a formal closure for it. -- 2804:248:f6f7:5f00:c103:4e6:143a:96bd ( talk) 18:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) – Open for three weeks now; needs closing. North America 1000 09:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 894 days ago on 19 November 2021) Hasn't been resolved or commented on in months. Bill Williams 23:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 785 days ago on 7 March 2022) The discussion is circling the drain with same users repeating the same points to each other. Calidum 17:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
{{ Done}} by User:Wugapodes. -- Vaulter 03:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 780 days ago on 12 March 2022) It seem this AfD has been forgotten, as noted by Metropolitan90. Veverve ( talk) 10:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 743 days ago on 18 April 2022) Apparently duplicate AfDs were created for this article, after which Newyorkbrad copied one discussion to the other, including the AfD close templates. The inclusion of the close templates is apparently confusing the bots, because it is not being listed anywhere as open, and it is therefore overdue for closure or relisting. Based on the discussion to date, it would be eminently plausible to relist rather than close, and I could easily remove the existing close templates myself to help restore some semblance of order, but I hesitated to do so without bringing it to one of the admin boards and explaining the situation. So here I am. -- Finngall talk 16:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 769 days ago on 23 March 2022) Contentious topic area, so requesting admin please close RM opened more than a month ago. Thank you, Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 05:08, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 30 March 2022) This RfC has been quiet a few days. I think the main points have been made for both sides. Ready for a close. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 20:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 730 days ago on 1 May 2022) There is an obvious consensus that has even been acknowledged by the nominator, but the discussion has descended into hostilities between between two users, with disruption and edit-warring over a !vote removal and some intemperate language. The sooner this is closed the better. (imho) - wolf 22:26, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 753 days ago on 8 April 2022) Take it out back and shoot it. Tewdar 10:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 765 days ago on 27 March 2022) discussion is stale. - Kevo327 ( talk) 14:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 804 days ago on 17 February 2022) Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 724 days ago on 8 May 2022) Requesting closure 52-whalien ( talk) 02:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 3 April 2022) Not sure if this is the right place to put this. Happy for it to be removed if it is not. Discussion was opened 1 month ago, last comment was on 23 April. Requesting experienced closure as this CfD was subject to offwiki canvassing. Thanks. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 02:24, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 10 May 2022) Not sure if this is the right place to put this; but this needs relisting. -- Firestar464 ( talk) 02:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 745 days ago on 17 April 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 16:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 897 days ago on 16 November 2021) With all the edit warring going on in the article, I think it's time for a neutral editor to determine a consensus. Jalen Folf (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 783 days ago on 9 March 2022) Discussion has been still for a while. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 4 April 2022) Requesting close from an uninvolved editor. Last comment was made on 29 April 2022. Fiwec81618 ( talk) 00:39, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 774 days ago on 19 March 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 02:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 905 days ago on 7 November 2021) - stale discussion --Animalparty! ( talk) 23:29, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 13 April 2022) This RFC has been contentious because the question that it addresses has been contentious. So a close by an administrator may be a good idea. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 742 days ago on 20 April 2022) – Listed since 20 April, last relist 4 May, closure overdue by a week. Stifle ( talk) 11:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 712 days ago on 19 May 2022) – Highly personalized AFD stemming from a VPP discussion about the misapplication of MEDRS, which is ironically evoked in the AFD statement and in several !votes. I fear this is a case where the AFD is being used to build a consensus against including content on MEDRS grounds, without discussing the applicability of the guideline to the disputed content, which would then be deleted under a WP:BLAR close. The nominator, who singled out the Tinnitis claim in the VPP and AFD didn't even bother checking if there are review articles on the subject, so I really don't see any grounds for deleting content on the basis of WP:MEDRS, WPLOR, or WP:FRINGE. CutePeach ( talk) 02:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 894 days ago on 19 November 2021) A closure of the RfC was withdrawn following a WP:CLOSECHALLENGE at WP:AN. An experienced closer is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 04:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 2 April 2022) I'd close it myself as noncontroversial (consensus looks pretty clear to me) but I did participate, so for the sake of the vocal dissenter and the look of the thing I'm requesting an uninvolved editor step in. Fieari ( talk) 04:58, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 766 days ago on 26 March 2022) Discussion is stale. Cinderella157 ( talk) 02:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) ITN nomination that needs closing before it is archived. BilledMammal ( talk) 13:03, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 776 days ago on 16 March 2022) Been open 2+ months and the discussion should be closed at this point. -- Vaulter 14:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 716 days ago on 16 May 2022) It's been open for a week and discussion has slowed, it's not necessary to drag this out any longer as it seems unlikely to get more feedback that would sway the result. Recommend closing in 24 hours in case there are any last minute objections. — Locke Cole • t • c 01:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) The AE thread has been open for two weeks, with minimal substantial participation in the past week. Multiple participants are calling for a closure; an uninvolved admin is requested to take a look. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 21:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 716 days ago on 15 May 2022) – This request was listed nine days ago; two editors have commented, both on that day. Could someone uninvolved close the discussion? CohenTheBohemian ( talk) 04:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 3 April 2022) Needs one or two uninvolved editors to close this. -- George Ho ( talk) 19:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) I closed this following a request on 4 May but reopened to try and gain further participation. RfC has now been open nearly two months with no activity for over a week. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 22:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 737 days ago on 24 April 2022) – Already 1 month. GenuineArt ( talk) 14:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 723 days ago on 8 May 2022) Closure review of widely participated RSN RFC. — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 22:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 891 days ago on 22 November 2021) Uninvolved closure is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 03:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) High visibility/newsworthiness article. Strongly-held disputed views. Messy RfC. Policy questions. Overflow and further disputation in additional sections now archived. Also previous RfCs and former discussions. Panel close by experienced admins could be valuable. Jheald ( talk) 22:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
{{
rfc}}
tag, so it will need to be manually removed. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 21:40, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 714 days ago on 17 May 2022) Merge discussion was closed and reopened by another editor with reason "involved editor". Could an uninvolved editor review the discussion and close. Selfstudier ( talk) 18:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 772 days ago on 20 March 2022) Nearly a week since the last comment was made. –– FormalDude talk 08:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 3 May 2022) Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Side Show Freaks (2nd nomination). -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 11:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 709 days ago on 22 May 2022) Uninvolved closure in this move discussion is requested. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 18:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 793 days ago on 28 February 2022) Would like a formal close for this one before it gets archived. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 23:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator. (Initiated 701 days ago on 31 May 2022) -- Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 00:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 740 days ago on 21 April 2022) . Discussion died afer a week, apart from one comment 3 weeks later (15 May). No consensus, and no point in leaving open. Request closure.-- Smerus ( talk) 16:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 718 days ago on 14 May 2022) Discussion has slowed considerably in the two weeks since the PM was opened so I'd like to request an uninvolved user to review and formally close it. JOE BRO 64 13:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 18 April 2022) Requires an uninvolved editor to close. All but one commenter supported removing Good Article status. HenryCrun15 ( talk) 05:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 778 days ago on 14 March 2022) The activity on this has long dropped off and it just needs an ideally admin close, as its a key page in a conflict area. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 724 days ago on 8 May 2022) I, foolishly perhaps, closed the last RfC on this topic as the consensus was clear. It would be good for an uninvolved editor to close the latest RfC to put this issue to bed. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 03:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 773 days ago on 20 March 2022) Someone to evaluate consensus or lack thereof requested. Discussion has long died down, and it's been roughly three weeks since the last comment. - Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 764 days ago on 28 March 2022) and no further comments for the best part of a fortnight. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:46, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 714 days ago on 17 May 2022) Pretty clear consensus imo, but a closure was undone by another editor who said it "wasn't uncontroversial". Another editor has asked for a closure. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith ( talk) 17:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 749 days ago on 13 April 2022) – Expired RfC on revised text to this naming conventions guideline. Expired after 30 days on May 12 with no discussion since. Would prefer someone to close this so that I'm not closing my own RfC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 727 days ago on 4 May 2022) The RfC template has expired, but there still needs to be an assessment of consensus so that we know whether or not to modify the relevant guideline. Discussion was started on may 4 - thanks! theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:06, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 725 days ago on 6 May 2022) No comments since June 2. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 18:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) Expired RfC that I started to get community consensus for a proposed bot task. Requesting formal closure so that I can decide whether to file a WP:BRFA. Thanks. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ ( talk) 10:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 761 days ago on 31 March 2022) Clear consensus to delete after the second relist, per WP:REDLINK. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 02:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 3 April 2022) – Originally opened in 3 April, it was then relisted on 5 May 2022. Last comment after relisting was 7 days ago. Requesting closure. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 03:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 762 days ago on 31 March 2022) RM was started on March 31. No new comments since May 4. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 750 days ago on 11 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 733 days ago on 28 April 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 758 days ago on 3 April 2022) - archived topic ban appeal, requesting per a request at WP:AN BilledMammal ( talk) 02:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 744 days ago on 18 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 742 days ago on 19 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 739 days ago on 22 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 2 May 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 729 days ago on 3 May 2022) RM open for over 40 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 740 days ago on 22 April 2022) RM open for over 50 days. Natg 19 ( talk) 01:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 691 days ago on 9 June 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 771 days ago on 22 March 2022) Expired RFC that I started that has grown into a large, complex discussion where many proposals were considered. An experienced editor who knows how to evaluate consensus carefully would be helpful to close this discussion. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:D528:4D19:2CF7:AEB2 ( talk) 02:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 701 days ago on 31 May 2022) – Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:42, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 730 days ago on 1 May 2022) Political article with no obvious consensus reached.-- Lord Belbury ( talk) 11:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 685 days ago on 15 June 2022) Discussion at:
to redo the close by an uninvolved user. -- Venkat TL ( talk) 12:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) A snow close is in order. Can someone check the weather forecast for Antarctica? Robert McClenon ( talk) 13:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 861 days ago on 21 December 2021) No comments for more than a month. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 19:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) – Novem Linguae ( talk) 11:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 676 days ago on 24 June 2022) Nominator has withdrawn, only other votes are keeps. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 22:30, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 766 days ago on 26 March 2022) The discussion dried 37 days ago. 10 days ago last comment was made. Folks have suggested asking for closure. Venkat TL ( talk) 19:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 751 days ago on 10 April 2022) I'd say no consensus, but it was leaning delete in later !votes, so I will leave an admin to decide. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 02:11, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 10 May 2022) >>> Extorc. talk 16:28, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 778 days ago on 14 March 2022) No new comments have been made for one and a half months. I think it's ready for closure. WARNING: The subject is very controversial and the discussion has become very extensive (I apologise for my part in having perhaps contributed to that excess...). Closure would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! LongLivePortugal ( talk) 14:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) Vote count is 7-1. Last vote was June 11; the three more-recent posts have been about non-contentious technicalities. The page itself seems pretty lifeless, but I don't want to close myself because I responded to the RfC and it involves everyone's favorite perennial source. SamuelRiv ( talk) 19:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 712 days ago on 19 May 2022) Request formal closure of this expired RFC since it was started to deal with a lengthy and heated debate, involves RL political issues, and may attract real-life attention. Abecedare ( talk) 11:33, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 705 days ago on 27 May 2022) Discussion has appears to have slowed (there is some additional new discussion in a sub-section on sources that shouldn't affect how this is closed) and the RfC template was automatically removed due to expiration. — Locke Cole • t • c 15:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 820 days ago on 31 January 2022) Please review Talk:Death_of_Michelle_Go#"Alleged". -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 17:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 18 May 2022) Quiet since June 17. Seeking formal closure as consensus is unclear (to me) and topic is controversial. GabberFlasted ( talk) 15:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 18 June 2022) Seems to be a strong consensus against merging. 47.23.40.14 ( talk) 22:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 703 days ago on 28 May 2022) Request closure of this RFC. Slywriter ( talk) 23:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 702 days ago on 30 May 2022) Needs a formal close. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 23:29, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 672 days ago on 28 June 2022) Request to close page move discussion by an uninvolved editor as consensus is provided by no comments. Jamzze ( talk) 12:46, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 711 days ago on 20 May 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:59, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 776 days ago on 17 March 2022) – Please review Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Geschichte. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 05:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 708 days ago on 24 May 2022) Seems to be a strong consensus. 75.99.68.66 ( talk) 22:07, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 734 days ago on 27 April 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 12:40, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) Seems to trend towards a keep. Won't do it myself since I voted (but retracted the vote). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 18:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) Seems to trend towards a keep. Won't do it myself since I voted (but retracted the vote). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 18:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 876 days ago on 6 December 2021) Last comment was posted 00:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC). — Michael Z. 20:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) There have been no new comments since July 1 and I am requesting uninvolved closure. — Ⓜ️hawk10 ( talk) 14:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) I opened a discussion on a proposed page move a week ago, to which no one has responded. I cannot close the discussion myself, of course (as per WP:RMCLOSE). If someone will close it, I shall execute the move. Thank you! – Quick and Dirty User Account ( talk) 11:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 666 days ago on 4 July 2022) - Discussion has only been open for a week, but it appears to be snowing. BilledMammal ( talk) 05:47, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 728 days ago on 3 May 2022) the last vote (mine) was 22 days ago as of posting. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 12:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 701 days ago on 30 May 2022) Becoming protracted and unwieldy. Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 10:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1047 days ago on 19 June 2021) this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:24, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 732 days ago on 29 April 2022) We have decided to close this RFC to partially rewrite it and start a new one. A formal closure is necessary in order not to create confusion with the new RFC that will be started. -- Scia Della Cometa ( talk) 07:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 680 days ago on 20 June 2022) The discussion was initially closed by me today (13 July 2022), specifically, sometime this afternoon (I launched it last month), as Wikipedia policy ( WP:RFCEND, specifically #5) does allow any editor involved in a discussion to close it upon a consensus being reached. It was closed based upon my interpretation that a consensus was reached (of the editors who got involved, 5, in one way or another, stated support for my proposed change to the current wording; 4 stated no reference for, and thereby no support for, the current wording [which was the reason for the RfC]; & 1 editor didn't even vote, but simply stated that, ultimately, programming defines a station) in favor of the re-wording I had proposed. Another editor, @ General Ization:, got involved, disagreed with my interpretation of a consensus &, at least from my point of view, wrongly re-opened the discussion. After some back & forth with Ization, I have decided to request a review of the discussion, in the hopes that, depending on the result of the review, not only will I no longer have to worry about dealing with the editor, but that they'll be convinced to accept the facts of the situation & move on to something else. 2600:1700:C960:2270:3CD1:517A:41BE:55DB ( talk) 03:48, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 982 days ago on 22 August 2021) Requesting closure of this RFC by an uninvolved editor. Hwy43 ( talk) 02:29, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 711 days ago on 21 May 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 07:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 700 days ago on 31 May 2022) Requesting closure of RfC for inclusion of Australian Indigenous placenames within the lead and infobox of articles. This discussion has stagnated for long periods of time and there is no new arguments being added. It would be helpful if the closer had knowledge of Wikipedia naming guidelines, notability guidelines, and potentially a basic knowledge of history or linguistics. Poketama ( talk) 07:14, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 690 days ago on 10 June 2022) Request closure of RfC by an uninvolved editor as consensus is unclear. Gusfriend ( talk) 09:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 686 days ago on 14 June 2022) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apaugasma ( talk • contribs) 13:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 677 days ago on 23 June 2022) It's been several days since a !vote. This RfC is about something relatively recent so it would be nice to get a definitive answer on what content should be included. Iamreallygoodatcheckers ( talk) 04:18, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 669 days ago on 2 July 2022) Requesting closure by an uninvolved admin. I'm aware this is early but the result is (I think) already very clear but is being disputed in other discussions, therefore closure by an admin seems advisable. FOARP ( talk) 07:42, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 676 days ago on 25 June 2022) Could someone please close the RFC, it's been going for 24 days. There's also a related thread you may want to close on User_talk:Jimbo Wales. Andrevan @ 04:48, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 694 days ago on 6 June 2022) Please review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 13:15, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 667 days ago on 3 July 2022) – Is just going round in circles with one user insisting on (what looks like OR) be inserted in the lede. It is not going to get resolved as the user has refused )it seems to me) any compromise text, and has offered no alternatives to their version. Slatersteven ( talk) 16:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 10 May 2022) Discussion stopped weeks ago. Needs formal closure. Thank you. Iraniangal777 ( talk) 14:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 661 days ago on 9 July 2022) Request for Comment regarding veracity of a source listed on the page. Consensus appears to be clear, but this is contentious, so I would like an uninterested editor to take a look at it for a close. Thanks FrederalBacon ( talk) 18:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 685 days ago on 15 June 2022) Recommend both be closed with a consistent decision, between them. Editor participation was near identical, in both RFCs. GoodDay ( talk) 22:44, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
{{subst:Please see|Talk:Joe Biden#RFC}}
on the Kamala Harris page. –
Novem Linguae (
talk) 03:27, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 682 days ago on 18 June 2022) Need an uninvolved editor to close the RfC and determine the consensus. – Kavyansh.Singh ( talk) 09:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 655 days ago on 15 July 2022) Nominator has withdrawn. I also retracted my solitary delete vote and the other two participants want to keep. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 19:08, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 786 days ago on 6 March 2022) Requires attention from experienced users. -- Mhhossein talk 12:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) – Requesting an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and close this discussion. This lengthy discussion has been going on for 15 days and we have a consensus from three Editors of agreed changes and to close, and a anonymous editor with various IP addresses that has no support for their edits and may object to the close, hence this request. Note their was a previous related discussion at Talk:Space Race#NPOV issues and a ongoing related discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Possible RFC regarding spaceflight chronological timelines and the anom editor has made appeals at various talk pages ie User talk:JustinTime55. Ilenart626 ( talk) 21:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Disclaimer: The original computer network was down so I have to use another network at another place, hence the address difference) and here (
Hi, it's me again. [...] I had to switch networks again). TompaDompa ( talk) 21:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) Has run for a month and seems relatively clear, although one editor has voiced concern that hobbyists may be trying to "distort Wikipedia's consensus processes" and has asked that this be taken into account when the RfC is closed. -- Lord Belbury ( talk) 08:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 674 days ago on 26 June 2022)
(Initiated 672 days ago on 29 June 2022) - RfC, no comments for two weeks. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) Please review this RFC. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 23:08, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 718 days ago on 13 May 2022) Considering that several categories here have been populated since the beginning of the nomination, I'd close as procedural keep per the WP:TRAINWRECK principle. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 14:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) Clear consensus, please close this is a high visibility page. Venkat TL ( talk) 13:39, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 30 June 2022) RfC tag expired a few hours ago, and the last contribution to it was on 13 July. Requesting closure please. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 01:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 643 days ago on 27 July 2022) Clearly as there is no consensus. please close this discussion per WP:SNOW. HurricaneEdgar 07:40, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 648 days ago on 23 July 2022)
As has historically been done for other highly contentious and large AfDs, I would like to request a panel closure of this one. It is at 176 kb and rising, with dozens of 'votes'. It would be quite helpful I feel.
It still has about another day to run, but I'm posting it now to give time to make the arrangements and for people to volunteer.
I also posted about this at WP:AN but some editors said I should list it here. Crossroads -talk- 04:28, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 759 days ago on 2 April 2022) Consensus is clear but needs top section closure so that we can move on czar 16:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 702 days ago on 30 May 2022) I request that this be formally closed. It appears that there may be a consensus here, but the result of the discussion needs to be logged. Thank you.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 17:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) - RFC tag has expired & activity ended weeks ago. GoodDay ( talk) 21:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 657 days ago on 14 July 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 820 days ago on 31 January 2022) Please review Talk:Death_of_Michelle_Go#"Alleged". -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 08:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
{{ Close}} - The Gnome ( talk) 13:12, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 28 July 2022) A consensus for an American politics TBAN has been reached. Needs closure and implementation. Thank you! -- Kbabej ( talk) 04:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 737 days ago on 24 April 2022) RFC tag expired two days ago, and discussion has stopped since weeks, so it needs a formal closure. Already the OP took initiative and decided the RFC result without a proper closure, and they might try to do this again soon. Yakme ( talk) 13:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1008 days ago on 28 July 2021) Major backlog of requests needing closure czar 17:58, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 668 days ago on 2 July 2022) - Been little activity in the last roughly two weeks. GoodDay ( talk) 20:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 667 days ago on 4 July 2022) - The RFC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 06:08, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 665 days ago on 5 July 2022) The RfC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 20:13, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) No further contributions or comments are being submitted since 6 July 2022. A clear consensus seems to have been reached. All that remains is the formal closure. - The Gnome ( talk) 12:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 659 days ago on 11 July 2022)
RfC expired, closure is requested. Crossroads -talk- 20:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) Open more than two weeks and discussion seems to have tapered off. -- Vaulter 20:35, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) Speedy keep requested here. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 664 days ago on 6 July 2022) Consensus appears clearly in support of split, but I cannot close myself due to my COI. Can an uninvolved editor please close it? Thank you, Bkenny44 ( talk) 13:06, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 631 days ago on 8 August 2022) - The move request has been up for a week. Clear consensus to move although number of contributors is small. Please note also a consensus that the move should actually be to "Unboxed: Creativity in the UK." (i.e. not all upper case). I claim the IP edits and am therefore involved. Many thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 13:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 683 days ago on 17 June 2022) Nobody's added anything for a week, so it's time to wrap this up. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 679 days ago on 21 June 2022) I really don't think it's fair to the appellant for a ban appeal to remain open for so long, regardless of the outcome (disclaimer: I participated) -- Dylan620 (he/him · talk · edits) 23:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 666 days ago on 4 July 2022) It was archived without closure or administrative resolution. The concern was brought up again at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:84.250.14.116 reported by User:Yae4 (Result: ) on 23 July 2022. 84.250.14.116 ( talk) 13:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 728 days ago on 3 May 2022) No new comments since 1 June. Clear majority favoring the inclusion of the category, with a minority dominated by editors that appear to be in favor of looking at the Book of Mormon as a factual historical document. JimKaatFan ( talk) 20:46, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here. Nice. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 12:36, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 748 days ago on 14 April 2022) No clear consensus has been reached, and with no comments since July 4, one is not likely to happen anytime soon. I have already messaged the editor who submitted the initial request about creating a draft article instead. SmartAn01 ( talk) 04:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) Previous closure was undone. –– FormalDude talk 16:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 19:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 651 days ago on 20 July 2022) RfC tag has expired and all the discussion has mostly run its course. Iamreallygoodatcheckers t@lk 05:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 647 days ago on 23 July 2022) - Seeing as the RFC tag, has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 18:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 815 days ago on 5 February 2022) Keep, delete per WP:TNT, or close as no consensus? – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 14:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 789 days ago on 3 March 2022) This GAR has been open since March and has been completely stale since the end of April. Skimming through it, there does seem to be a loose consensus to delist or at the worst, intervene to see if disputes have been resolved. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 14:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 722 days ago on 9 May 2022) Open since May and has had a reasonable amount of participation. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 01:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 665 days ago on 5 July 2022) The RfC tag has expired. Kpddg (talk) 07:19, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 657 days ago on 13 July 2022) Request for Comment rooted in WP:SYNTH, on whether examples of use should require a reliable source to verify that they are notable examples, or whether editors can search the web and select any examples of its use and cite those directly as examples.
There have been eight (by my count) contributors, but no comments have been added for almost six days, and one of the main contributors has been indefinitely blocked in the meantime, the IP contributor has not edited since, and one contributor commented only on an unasked question.
The issue is quite contentious, and as the outcome would seem to rely on WP:SYNTH interpretation, I favour an uninvolved close please. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:49, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 656 days ago on 15 July 2022) - The RfC tag has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 01:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Isabelle Belato: would you do the honour of closing? GoodDay ( talk) 23:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 650 days ago on 21 July 2022) The RFC tag, has expired. GoodDay ( talk) 07:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
May we please have someone 'close' this RFC, in order avoid any edit-warring? GoodDay ( talk) 16:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
|
@ ScottishFinnishRadish: Would you do the honour of closing? GoodDay ( talk) 23:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 641 days ago on 29 July 2022) This is relatively straightforward phrasing change, but lots of different opinions on a high-profile political controversy in the U.S. New comments have peetered out. A timely close would be helpful to get the talk page down to a reasonable size, and unblock some improvements to the intro. -- Beland ( talk) 21:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) Please relist or review this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 11:46, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 640 days ago on 30 July 2022) – I made this move request just over 2 weeks ago. There has been a good and full discussion and the last legitimate comment was posted 4 days ago so it seems to have reached a conclusion. I wonder if an admin or editor could assess consensus and close? This is the first time I have completed a move request so I hope I have this procedure right. All the best, Emmentalist ( talk) 15:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Further to the request above, there seems to be a clear consensus and all it really seems to need is closing by an uninvolved editor. All the best, Emmentalist
(Initiated 648 days ago on 22 July 2022) - Requesting closure from an uninvolved editor for this expired RfC. — Golden call me maybe? 19:36, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 630 days ago on 9 August 2022) Need uninvolved closure on stale discussion. -- George Ho ( talk) 18:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 644 days ago on 27 July 2022) RFC expired, please evaluate for consensus on both Aon’s general reliability and how it compares to NOAA. 69.118.232.58 ( talk) 23:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 645 days ago on 26 July 2022) - RFC tag expired, days ago. GoodDay ( talk) 14:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) RFC has been open 11 days, discussion has slowed. Please note additional discussion in preceding section which may help to gauge consensus. Polyamorph ( talk) 18:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 638 days ago on 1 August 2022) No comments since August 7th. Don't know if this is the correct place to put this merger request closure but oh well.. Peralien ( talk) 01:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 704 days ago on 27 May 2022) This is an RFC about a fairly minor editing matter that may have been better off being discussed in a normal talk thread. The proposer presented a question that was neither a simple yes/no question, nor a clear set of options, but rather is a compound, open-ended question (and on a conflict area page no less). At least one editor called for procedural close precisely because of the lack of clear options. The resulting unresolved mess has been open for three months. Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
"If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here."¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Fad Ariff ( talk) 11:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 675 days ago on 25 June 2022) This went through a Request for comment, upon which after the RfC time expired, the tag was removed ( diff). Requesting a formal closure of the discussion by an uninvolved user. North America 1000 12:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 29 July 2022) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at this usability-related discussion? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 20:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 637 days ago on 2 August 2022) – Requesting closure of the above RfC from an uninvolved editor. A fair bit of diverging views, the result seems fairly simple to me but I can foresee significant edit warring without a formal closure. Thanks very much. Poketama ( talk) 09:03, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 626 days ago on 13 August 2022) – Appears to have achieved a consensus. –– FormalDude (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) Glitchy trainwreck nomination; breaks XFDCloser. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 06:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 613 days ago on 27 August 2022) Appears to be WP:SNOW. Unanimous consensus to merge in a week. 47.21.202.18 ( talk) 18:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 622 days ago on 18 August 2022) Rfc for The question: In an article about an organism, should the scientific name of the organism always be presented in boldface (as well as italics) when it is introduced?
The consensus seems (very) clear, and I suggest closure before the bot automatically removes the tag in 11 days. — BarrelProof ( talk) 16:16, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 682 days ago on 18 June 2022) RFC on how the Republic of Artsakh should be described in the articles requires formal closure. The last comment was made on 19 July 2022. -- Abrvagl ( talk) 16:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) {{ ndash}} This RfC is not very old, but consensus is very clear. An editor ( Hob Gadling) has already mentioned WP:SNOW, but as the initiator I feel uncomfortable in closing it myself. – LordPickleII ( talk) 14:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 629 days ago on 11 August 2022) Please review this discussion, which has been relisted thrice. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 00:55, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 669 days ago on 2 July 2022) RfC has been open for over a month and seems ripe for closure. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 635 days ago on 5 August 2022) — Despite my own involvement in this RfC, this is an obvious closure since consensus is near-unanimous on deprecating this site. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 04:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) – This RfC is not very old, but consensus is very clear. An editor ( Hob Gadling) has already mentioned WP:SNOW, but as the initiator I feel uncomfortable in closing it myself. Note: This had previously been archived by mistake, because I had messed up formatting, so here it is again. – LordPickleII ( talk) 07:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 821 days ago on 30 January 2022) Seems to have a consensus, ongoing for a while. 2601:185:8300:42EF:6149:B579:AF6A:2807 ( talk) 12:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 720 days ago on 12 May 2022) No comments since May. Involved editors do not seem to have any interest in addressing GAR issues present and have not commented in the GAR. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 21:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 646 days ago on 24 July 2022) Given that this requested move already had one closure reversed nearly two weeks ago, it could probably do with having another uninvolved administrator take a look. Graham ( talk) 00:39, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 600 days ago on 8 September 2022) There appears to be disagreement among some editors regarding whether or not there is a firm consensus against using the image of the Queen from 2015, which is resulting in a slow-motion edit war in the infobox. Uninvolved closure by an administrator would be helpful in putting an end to this. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 623 days ago on 17 August 2022) We're about 4 weeks into this and I think we need an uninvolved editor to close. I would recommend the closer also notes the similar discussion that recently occurred at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titus (dinosaur) CT55555 ( talk) 12:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 603 days ago on 6 September 2022) – Honestly, I should have probably just boldly moved this, rather than opening a discussion. The current title is objectively incorrect, according to all the standard books on the material. Only two comments, one in complete agreement, and the other agreeing that it should be moved, but speculating as to the best target. The relevant WikiProject ( WP:WikiProject_Music_theory) was notified at the start of discussion. Thanks! PianoDan ( talk) 22:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 602 days ago on 6 September 2022) Could do with an uninvolved close. Thanks. Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 20:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 642 days ago on 28 July 2022) This was relisted by the originator on 30 August 2022. It drew another few "summoned by bots", but there have been no further edits to the page for over seven days. Scolaire ( talk) 15:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
{{ Done}} Thparkth ( talk) 21:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 606 days ago on 2 September 2022) This discussion has been going on for a bit, has had decent levels of participation, and seems ripe for closure. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 650 days ago on 20 July 2022) – Seems like discussion has petered out. At question is WP:SHORTDESC and WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE DolyaIskrina ( talk) 22:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 629 days ago on 11 August 2022) – Would request closure of the above RfC from an uninvolved editor. Their has been a fair few comments however consensus is not clear with lots of divergent views. Note that I am making this request on behalf of the initiator of the RfC, @ Gitz6666: who agrees with this request, refer discussion on his Talkpage. Ilenart626 ( talk) 09:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 621 days ago on 18 August 2022) Request closure by non-administrator. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 14:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 603 days ago on 5 September 2022) Bit of a backlog of DRVs to get through. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 04:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
{{ Resolved}}
(Initiated 595 days ago on 14 September 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 595 days ago on 14 September 2022) Please review or relist this discussion. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 22:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 721 days ago on 11 May 2022) It appears this RFC didn't get listed for closure sooner due to people fiddling with the RFC template and timestamps. Alsee ( talk) 16:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 640 days ago on 30 July 2022) Won't expire for another 3-4 days EDT, but might as well get this request out of the way now per GoodDay. 100.7.36.213 ( talk) 19:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Tag expired days ago. GoodDay ( talk) 17:26, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Willing to be in the panel but wise to have at least a couple of admins. TrangaBellam ( talk) 06:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 697 days ago on 4 June 2022) Article was merged, so GAR may be closed. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 14:33, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 591 days ago on 17 September 2022) Is a snow-close appropriate here? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 07:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 678 days ago on 22 June 2022) – This merge discussion should be easy to close. Fad Ariff ( talk) 11:47, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 598 days ago on 10 September 2022) – A total waste of time. Please close it with prejudice. tgeorgescu ( talk) 15:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC) One IP is now blocked, but another IP popped up with the same story. Please close it with prejudice. tgeorgescu ( talk) 18:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) - Technically this WP:RM has already been closed, but it was closed by the person who made the request. This page move might've actually been OK per WP:RMNOT; however, since an RM was started, it probably would've been better for someone other than the requester to do the close per WP:RMCLOSE#Who can close requested moves. There may also be a conflict of interest involved since the RM requester is listed as a {{ Connected Contributor}} at the top of the article's talk page. For reference, I've also asked about this at WT:ESPORTS#British Esports. I only came across this move after seeing that File:British Esports Association logo.svg had been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:F5. I don't think the close was made in bad faith, but only perhaps by a fairly new WP:SPA user who might have a COI and who might not be very familiar with relevant policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 21:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 694 days ago on 6 June 2022) The last post was made back in June 2022, while a strong consensus had already been formed. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 770 days ago on 23 March 2022) No comments since May. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 09:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 636 days ago on 3 August 2022) – closure is long overdue. Thanks in advance! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 05:49, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 743 days ago on 19 April 2022) The renewed discussion in 2022 seems to have died out, nor have any support. Time to end this formally. 67.82.182.94 ( talk) 23:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 622 days ago on 17 August 2022) – No discussion in the last ten days. Bit of a tough call given all the options. –– FormalDude (talk) 08:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 777 days ago on 16 March 2022) Discussion about a change in the general notability decline message for AfC. There is disagreement about whether consensus was found for the last (bulleted) proposal, and a template edit request was declined. I started a discussion to address the open question (what to do with the decline messages for topics with an SNG), unaware of this declined edit request. Would be good to have a formal closure, so that the new discussion can build on that. Femke ( talk) 20:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 620 days ago on 19 August 2022) nableezy - 18:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 28 August 2022) This RfC has now expired. Could an uninvolved editor or administrator please close it. TFD ( talk) 18:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) — One user who, from the start, disagreed with the majority requested that a RfC be started. There was consensus prior to the RfC that, generally, combined regular season and playoff stats should not be included in lists or articles, aside from 1 notable exception. The RfC did not generate any opposition to the consensus that had already been found. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 594 days ago on 14 September 2022) Seems to have a pretty clear consensus after over a week and a half. 173.68.184.70 ( talk) 19:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 671 days ago on 29 June 2022) Discussion has petered out many weeks ago, without a clear consensus. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 663 days ago on 7 July 2022) - I was asked on my talk page to close "the Redux of the Redux discussion section and the active RfC" [1] but having taken a look I don't understand what is being proposed enough or enough of the comments to properly assess consensus. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 617 days ago on 22 August 2022) nableezy - 15:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 835 days ago on 17 January 2022) Conversation finished in March and has since been archived - some involved users have differing views on whether a consensus has been reached (and what that consensus is), which has since resulted in further disagreements on affected article pages. Would be good to have an outside take, if possible given the archived nature of the discussion. Turnagra ( talk) 09:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 585 days ago on 23 September 2022) Would an admin please clean up this section? Erpert blah, blah, blah... 12:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 29 September 2022) The RM was initiated by a WP:SOCKPUPPET and goes against Wikipedia's conventions and guidelines and particularly WP:MOSMAC, and particularly this provision: [2]. Therefore, the RM requires a speedy closure per WP:SNOWBALL. The initiator got banned. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ( talk ✉ | contribs ✎) 17:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 621 days ago on 19 August 2022) There has been several AN/I filings surrounding this issue, lengthy discussions aside from simple !votes and policy implications of some arguments presented. I believe the closure needs to be undertaken by an admin or an experienced user with good knowledge of policy. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 23:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 633 days ago on 6 August 2022) The discussion for this RfC has ended and has been archived. IMHO, a closure is desired. Many thanks! VickKiang 21:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 611 days ago on 29 August 2022) Magnolia677 ( talk) 18:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 30 September 2022) – Clearly, many users favor not moving this page. please close this discussion. HurricaneEdgar 02:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 608 days ago on 1 September 2022). — xaosflux Talk 00:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 607 days ago on 1 September 2022). Discussion is stale and tag has been removed. Requesting formal close since this RfC is attempting to change an existing formally closed RfC, and the subject is contentious. Tartan357 ( talk) 04:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 614 days ago on 25 August 2022). Expired at Special:Diff/1112134888. — andrybak ( talk) 20:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 582 days ago on 27 September 2022) Please review Talk:Willow Smith#Coping Mechanism (album). -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 14:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 586 days ago on 22 September 2022) Move initially requested 13 days ago by an account that has been discovered to be a sockpuppet and blocked. Consensus seems to be in support of a name change, but not for the particular name change proposed. I propose we close this current move request so a new one can be started with a name that is more supported based on the consensus that currently exists, and then continue from there. Annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts and Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts are two possible consensus names, though I ask whichever person looks at this closure request to make their own determinations based on the discussion as well. Criticalus ( talk) 02:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 615 days ago on 24 August 2022) May need an experienced closer to close this discussion. There haven't been any new comments in over a week. Steel1943 ( talk) 18:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 670 days ago on 1 July 2022). It has been four months, discussion has come to a stop, and there is relatively clear support for including both terms in question. Cpotisch ( talk) 00:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 604 days ago on 5 September 2022). Probably want an admin or experienced non-admin closer for this one, as it's a bit of a contentious RfC and (in my biased/involved opinion) the opinions offered seem to have shifted over the course of the RfC, so I don't think it would be a trivial close. Endwise ( talk) 05:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 596 days ago on 13 September 2022) I would be grateful if someone could close this discussion, which has attracted no additional comments for the past eleven days. I would like a formal closure as it is holding up the closure of an FAC nomination. Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 597 days ago on 11 September 2022) I called the RfC after reading years of discussion surrounding this thorny and potentially NPOV issue. We needed a more rational and ordered conversation with contributions from less-involved, less-invested editors. The survey and discussion are lengthy but coherent and I have prepared a summary for any uninvolved editor willing to end the RfC. There now seems to be a happy consensus in favour of the change, but I'd be glad if a third party editor could close, preferably with a brief statement confirming the consensus and the legitimacy of the discussion. Thank you! Angry Candy ( talk) 12:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 615 days ago on 24 August 2022) – If there exists consensus to merge, may I kindly ask closer to do so? Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 04:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 988 days ago on 16 August 2021) Split request was started over a year ago without any new discussion in months. ZLEA T\ C 13:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 559 days ago on 19 October 2022) Apparent WP:SNOW? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 23:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 559 days ago on 19 October 2022) Also apparent WP:SNOW over here. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 23:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 567 days ago on 12 October 2022) – Many users had agreed to move this page. This discussion is now 7 days so we need closure this discussion. HurricaneEdgar 02:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 627 days ago on 13 August 2022) - The RfC tag has expired since a month, though I decided to wait until the user who uploaded the map that was the original cause of dispute made a comment on it, but he hasn't edited on Wikipedia since months. Its time to close it. 2804:248:FB6F:4400:B021:971A:800D:7D10 ( talk) 03:23, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 619 days ago on 20 August 2022) Discussion ended about a month ago, well ripe for closure now. Iffy★ Chat -- 18:05, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 598 days ago on 10 September 2022) In my view, there is not clear enough consensus for an involved participant to close the discussion. Not a super long one. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 16:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 600 days ago on 9 September 2022) The RFC was archived without closure. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 713 days ago on 19 May 2022) Needs uninvolved editor to evaluate consensus. -- George Ho ( talk) 07:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 579 days ago on 29 September 2022) As far as I know, closure reviews at AN don't have a suggested time frame. This one has been open since 29 September, and it's been five days since the last substantive comment on the central question. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 15:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
Already {{ Done}} by Floquenbeam. Szmenderowiecki ( talk) 11:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 1155 days ago on 2 March 2021) Could any uninvolved editor examine the consensus for a merge of User-in-the-loop into Human-in-the-loop, involving a discussion where I have been a participant. Klbrain ( talk) 12:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 565 days ago on 13 October 2022) Hi. An AfD tag was placed on The Iceman (performer) (a page I created/started) on 13 October 2022. I did not agree that it failed WP:GNG and argued the case (resulting in no further comments). I have since worked to increase the article's integrity by adding quality references to The Independent, the Evening Standard, The Stage, and The List. Nobody else contributed to the discussion until the AfD was relisted on 20 October. Since then, one other editor has suggested we keep it. I've tried to engage further but nobody else is contributing in either direction. I also tried to remove the AfD myself but it was reinstated by the editor who originally placed it. Can an uninvolved editor assess the situation and help to make a decision? Personally I'd like to see the article saved from deletion and the deletion discussion closed but I remain open to further discussion/guidance if necessary. Thanks. Angry Candy ( talk) 14:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
(Initiated 574 days ago on 5 October 2022) Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stereo Satellite (2nd nomination) -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 15:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)