This is the
talk page for discussing
Requests for comment and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
NOTE: This talk page is not the place to post notices of disputes or requests for comment, or to ask questions about changes you would like to make to individual articles. Please follow Wikipedia:Requests for comment. |
Are you having trouble getting your RfC listed? Please make sure the bot hasn't been turned off. If the bot hasn't run in the last few hours, then please alert the bot's owner. If the bot is apparently running, then the problem is almost certainly with the template formatting. To get help with formatting the template correctly, please leave a message, including the name of the page where you want to start the RfC, at the bottom of this page. |
Dispute Resolution ( inactive) | ||||
|
Frequently asked questions
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 40 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hello,
I started the subject Naming the tragic event in the articles head title on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force a few months ago, and was suggested to start up an RFC. Anyone wants to help me out? Thoughts? Thanks in advance
Sincerely, Sidney.Cortez ( talk) 16:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
style
category from among the project-wide ones (because you're asking about a change to article naming conventions, which is a style matter. Specifically, this is not a "policy or guideline" question as far as the RFC categories are concerned).Twice in the last two days I've had to explain to editors that RFC tags are removed after 30 days. They looked at the top of an old discussion or the RFC listing pages, didn't see a tag, and said they believed that meant that it wasn't an RFC after all.
I could wish that we changed the RFC template/bot behavior (to keep the tag and the anchor to show that it was an RFC, but to make it 'inactive' somehow), but in the meantime, I'm wondering whether the FRS bot could include a rotating bit of advice on RFCs, like "You can find all the open RFCs here" or "If the result is unclear, you can request a closing summary" or "Compromises are important" or "RFC tags are automatically removed after a month, but you can shorten or extend this time" or whatever else might help. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 17:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
rfc}}
tag is more than thirty days ago, it removes that {{
rfc}}
tag and also removes the corresponding entries from the listing pages. This is not closure, and nor is it archiving: it is delisting, no more and no less. The discussion remains open, but it is not as broadly publicised as it had been.<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 15:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1714057272}}
just before the {{
rfc}}
tag when it adds the |rfcid=
parameter, and leaves that code alone when it removes the {{
rfc}}
tag. If you come across code like that at the top of a discussion thread that has no {{
rfc}}
tag, that may indicate that the thread did have an {{
rfc}}
tag at some point in the past. But the page history should be checked to be sure - the best thing to look for is edits by Legobot. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 22:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
In my experience, a large number of RFCs are frequently started after no discussion, or extremely minimal discussion. Is there a way to make WP:RFCBEFORE more prominent somehow? Aza24 (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I started an RfC with a neutral statement. Can I give my opinion on the subject below my first statement and timestamp? ☆SuperNinja2☆ TALK! 22:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I added references and it seems like an automatic block. How do I get this to go into RfC? OhioMD ( talk) 02:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing
Requests for comment and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
NOTE: This talk page is not the place to post notices of disputes or requests for comment, or to ask questions about changes you would like to make to individual articles. Please follow Wikipedia:Requests for comment. |
Are you having trouble getting your RfC listed? Please make sure the bot hasn't been turned off. If the bot hasn't run in the last few hours, then please alert the bot's owner. If the bot is apparently running, then the problem is almost certainly with the template formatting. To get help with formatting the template correctly, please leave a message, including the name of the page where you want to start the RfC, at the bottom of this page. |
Dispute Resolution ( inactive) | ||||
|
Frequently asked questions
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 40 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hello,
I started the subject Naming the tragic event in the articles head title on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force a few months ago, and was suggested to start up an RFC. Anyone wants to help me out? Thoughts? Thanks in advance
Sincerely, Sidney.Cortez ( talk) 16:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
style
category from among the project-wide ones (because you're asking about a change to article naming conventions, which is a style matter. Specifically, this is not a "policy or guideline" question as far as the RFC categories are concerned).Twice in the last two days I've had to explain to editors that RFC tags are removed after 30 days. They looked at the top of an old discussion or the RFC listing pages, didn't see a tag, and said they believed that meant that it wasn't an RFC after all.
I could wish that we changed the RFC template/bot behavior (to keep the tag and the anchor to show that it was an RFC, but to make it 'inactive' somehow), but in the meantime, I'm wondering whether the FRS bot could include a rotating bit of advice on RFCs, like "You can find all the open RFCs here" or "If the result is unclear, you can request a closing summary" or "Compromises are important" or "RFC tags are automatically removed after a month, but you can shorten or extend this time" or whatever else might help. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 17:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
{{
rfc}}
tag is more than thirty days ago, it removes that {{
rfc}}
tag and also removes the corresponding entries from the listing pages. This is not closure, and nor is it archiving: it is delisting, no more and no less. The discussion remains open, but it is not as broadly publicised as it had been.<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 15:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1714057272}}
just before the {{
rfc}}
tag when it adds the |rfcid=
parameter, and leaves that code alone when it removes the {{
rfc}}
tag. If you come across code like that at the top of a discussion thread that has no {{
rfc}}
tag, that may indicate that the thread did have an {{
rfc}}
tag at some point in the past. But the page history should be checked to be sure - the best thing to look for is edits by Legobot. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk) 22:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
In my experience, a large number of RFCs are frequently started after no discussion, or extremely minimal discussion. Is there a way to make WP:RFCBEFORE more prominent somehow? Aza24 (talk) 00:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I started an RfC with a neutral statement. Can I give my opinion on the subject below my first statement and timestamp? ☆SuperNinja2☆ TALK! 22:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I added references and it seems like an automatic block. How do I get this to go into RfC? OhioMD ( talk) 02:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)