Noticeboards

Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard.

General	Administrators main incidents Bot owners Bureaucrats Closure Education main incidents Importing pages Main Page errors Open proxies OTRS Oversight User permissions

Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights questions on media problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Reliable sources Resource requests Spam blacklist whitelist Titleblacklist Translation

Page handling	History merges Mergers Moves Protection XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion

User conduct	Long-term abuse Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring & 3RR Sanctions Personal sanctions General sanctions New pages patrollers Paid editing Sockpuppets Usernames Vandalism

Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard requests enforcement Edit filters Mediation New contributors Teahouse Questions Editor assistance Help desk Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump ideas policy proposals technical miscellaneous

Category:Wikipedia noticeboards

WP:RFC/A

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

This page transcludes multiple pages: click Purge if out of date.

DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE TO ADD REQUESTS! Please put requests on the appropriate subpage.

Biographies

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies

Talk:Dallon Weekes

Is info relevant although it is prior to the subject? I added info on Dallon Weekes stating why and when the he was recruited into the band, Panic! at the Disco. [1] Although referenced by in-line citations, a user is reverting the edits due to the info being prior to the subject's recruitment, to which he says is irrelevant to the subject due to the info being prior to is association with the group. Although it is prior to the subject's recruitment, it gives valid, referenced info of the reasons the subject was recruited. Nowhere is info prior to a subject's history with a group forbidden in an article page, especially when it is relevant to the topic. Sekyaw (talk) 22:42, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Marriage

John Smith
Born	1892
Died	1942
Spouse(s)	Joan Smith (m. 1916; wid. 1942)

This template uses a parameter, "end", to display a reason for the termination of a marriage. The template documentation advises that the end date should be the date a marriage was dissolved or the date that the spouse of the article subject died. However, in the event of a marriage ending by the death of the article subject, it is possible to signal that by using "end=widowed", for example {{marriage|Joan Smith|1916|1942|end=widowed}} produces the output "Joan Smith (m. 1916; wid. 1942)", attempting to indicate that Joan Smith was widowed in 1942. Should this functionality be kept or removed? DrKay (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:The Matrix

How should the directors of this film be presented in the lead of the article?

"The Matrix is a [...] film written and directed by..."

A - "the Wachowski Brothers"
B - "the Wachowski Brothers (now known as the Wachowskis)"
C - "the Wachowskis"
D - "the Wachowskis (credited as the Wachowski Brothers)"

For context, the Wachowski Brothers have both come out as transgender women in the time since The Matrix was released. They are now credited as the Wachowskis, not the Wachowski Brothers.

This is a matter that has been argued over extensively. A 2012 discussion at WikiProject Film ended with the determination that the infobox should reflect names as they appear in the credits, but I have not been able to find any such consensus for anything outside of the infobox. After many threads and many edits back and forth, a more formal RfC seems useful. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:27, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Erfurt massacre

We currently have a list of victims of the massacre in the article, most of them teachers and some students. WP:NOTMEMORIAL normally discourages emphases on non-notable people. In this case, shall we remove or retain the list? --George Ho (talk) 08:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Joseph Conrad

How should this article describe Conrad's nationality? I don't just mean in the info box.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Full Service (book)

Is the author of his memoir, Full Service, notable? Why or why not? If not, shall the biography be merged into the other article? George Ho (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Stanley Milgram

Should the parameter "Religion: Jewish" be included in the infobox of this article? Ravpapa (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Ted Cruz

Should this article have a section for just "Accolades", be comprehensive and have a section named "Accolades and criticisms", or leave such a section out entirely? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Jean Lapierre

The crash article seems short enough to fit into another article. Shall we merge the private airplane crash incident into the biography of the Canadian politician? George Ho (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:United States presidential election, 2016

Should current and recent candidates in the 2016 US Presidential election include politician among their notable occupations in the lead of their biographical articles, even if the candidate eschews the term? (This is intended to be a structured RfC. For a recent unstructured, and unresolved, discussion of this question as it pertains to Donald Trump, see Talk:Donald Trump#Is Trump a politician?) General Ization ^Talk 12:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Princess Beatrice of York

Should the following section be included in personal life? (The sources The Independent, Belfast Telegraph, Yahoo News, etc. have been deleted here for ease of consumption but are included in this diff: [2])

"Beatrice has long struggled with maintaining a healthy weight. At the age of eight, according to reports, she was put on a diet, her mother at the time explaining that "over-eating sort of runs in the family". As an adult, in 2008, she was "castigated in the British press" over her weight after appearing in a two-piece swimsuit in the Caribbean. In the aftermath of that, Beatrice said she promised herself she would lose weight. By 2011, the Daily Beast noted that she'd "lost a ton of weight", quoting one London stylist who noted that "Beatrice can actually fit into many more clothes now".

LavaBaron (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Axl Rose

Singer Axl Rose briefly dated model Stephanie Seymour in the 1990s. Opinions are needed on whether or not the article should include any variation of the following regarding their breakup:

1. "Seymour's infidelity lead to a break-up of her lover's marriage of 23 years that included 5 kids. Regarding her current marriage and the 22 year age difference, “Stephanie was searching for a father figure". Notoriously, Seymour was only 15 when she dated and subsequently moved in with her 41 year old modeling agent John Casablanca. In 2009, the couple's divorce proceedings revealed her being violent and her husband called her an "unfit mother" also claiming infidelity as the cause of divorce in a deposition."

2. "Rose ended the relationship upon learning of an affair Seymour had started which resulted in the birth of a son later that year." (EDIT: To clarify, the child was born 10 months later; there was no overlap between the relationship and the pregnancy.)

3. "Rose ended the relationship shortly after amid accusing her of infidelity and by December 1993, Seymour gave birth to a son with someone else."

07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Erwin Mortier

Dispute about how a writer should be categorized: if he published writing in multiple genres of literature, then does he belong in the specific subcategories for each genre of literature that he wrote, or should he be excluded from the subcategories and left only in the overarching category for general non-specific writers? Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Time Person of the Year

Which country(s) should we show in Elizabeth II's notes?

A) United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Ceylon, New Zealand, Pakistan & South Africa? which is the status-quo.
B) United Kingdom
C) United Kingdom, with a footnote for the other six countries
D) No countries.
GoodDay (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kanye West

Opinions are needed on whether or not material about West's marriage to Kim Kardashian, seen here, belongs in the lead. If seeing this from the RfC page or your talk page via an RfC alert, the discussion on the matter can be found above at Talk:Kanye West#Mentioning marriage to Kim Kardashian in the lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:51, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Laura Branigan

The decision taken in the above Consensus discussion has been challenged. Additional sources have been presented suggesting a 1952 birth date. As such, the community is asked to decide whether the additional sources now listed in Talk:Laura_Branigan#1952_sources are reliable to the extent that the previous decision of "1957 with a footnote" should be overturned.

As there are two options that could replace that decision (no date at all, footnoted or both dates, footnoted) I would suggest that to keep the discussion simple, editors should respond with "support" or "overturn" the consensus found above.

Whichever decision is taken, appropriate text will have to be crafted. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:02, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Economy, trade, and companies

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Economy, trade, and companies

Talk:Hilton Worldwide

Should this article's infobox include Blackstone Group in the "owner" parameter?

I submitted a request to remove Blackstone Group from the infobox (see the Request for updates to infobox section above, or more specifically, the Re: Blackstone Group subsection). Hilton Worldwide is a publicly traded company. According to infobox template documentation (bold emphasis mine), we should "Use [the owner] parameter to list ownership percentages for private companies owned by a few key individuals or to list ownership percentages for joint ventures, if applicable. Do not use this field for publicly traded companies. When listing a company as an owner, use the full legal name of the entity that holds the ownership stake in the article's subject company."

User:Toohool disagrees with the infobox documentation. User:Altamel does not feel strongly either way, but offered the following compromise: "perhaps Blackstone Group could be removed from the infobox while writing a sentence in the introduction about Blackstone's plurality ownership stake". I agreed to this compromise. User:Toohool did not accept the compromise, and User:Altamel closed the edit request saying there is no consensus for update the article accordingly.

I think template documentation supports my argument, but Blackstone Group remains in the infobox and I am not willing to edit the article myself given my conflict of interest (see multiple sections above). I would like for more editors to weigh in on this discussion. Thank you in advance. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Multi-sport event

Is there a valid scope for Category:Sports festivals distinct from Category:Multi-sport events? – Fayenatic London 16:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:European Graduate School

Shall we update the accreditation section (including the header) with the following? If we fail to reach consensus, the outcome should be removal of the section since we cannot agree on anything to say; if you disagree with that please say so.

Licenses and recognition

EGS is licensed as a university in Malta^[1] and is recognized in the Swiss canton where it operates,^[2] but is not recognized by the Swiss University Conference, the main regulatory body for universities in Switzerland.^[3] In the US, the State of Texas includes the European Graduate School on its published list of institutions that issue "fraudulent or substandard degrees" and notes that it is illegal to use an EGS degree to obtain employment within the state.^[4]

References

^ "List of Licensed Institutions and Accredited Courses > Universities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ Canton du Valais Formation et recherche universitaires Page accessed April 7, 2016
^ "swissuniversities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ "Institutions Whose Degrees are Illegal to Use in Texas". Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Retrieved 18 February 2016.

- Jytdog (talk) 15:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Internet fraud

While reading this detailed article, I wondered whether articles like this one contribute to fraud. For example, what is the purpose of providing six form letters involved in committing a particular type of fraud? It seems to me that someone with no scruples looking for money could use a WP article like this as a "how-to" for launching a fraudulent business. Would editors please respond with disagree/agree? Thanks. David Spector (talk) 11:37, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kosher tax (antisemitic canard)

Does this article comply with the neutral point of view policy? (permalink to the version of this article at the start of this RfC) 05:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:YouTube

The lists of countries that use YouTube and of media encoding options are now collapsed. MOS:COLLAPSE normally discourages collapsing the tables. The question is not to either keep the tables collapsed or expand them. Actually, someone said that these tables are too long for an average reader. Shall we retain those tables or remove them? --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1982 in film

There have been disputes on several articles changing the grosses in charts to the all-time grosses (thus incorporating reissue grosses). For example, on its original 1982 release E.T grossed $359 million, but that rose to $435 million thanks to two re-releases in 1988 and 2002. The question here is which figure should ideally go in this chart? Option 1: $359 million from the 1982 release; or option 2: $435 million collated from the 1982, 1988 and 2002 releases? This question doesn't just relate to this article but the whole family of year articles. Betty Logan (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Anarchism sidebar

Does anarcho-capitalism belong in this template and, if it does, what is its appropriate place? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:CinemaScope

Despite technical differences between two CinemaScope formats, both belong to the same movie studio, 20th Century Fox. Does CinemaScope 55 meet WP:PRODUCT guideline? Shall we merge Cinemascope 55 into this article? Why or why not? George Ho (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:United States

Post-World War II private domestic investment and corporate profits after tax, both per Gross Domestic Product. Private investment is a source of consumer spending which is in turn a source of corporate profits.

Should the graph with the more explanatory caption shown at right be included adjacent to the passage on the size of the consumer spending proportion of the economy, as per [3]? 22:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Monowheel tractor

Should a link or reference to Tractors Wikia be included in this article? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Biodynamic agriculture

We should examine the proposed edits (see diff for details:

however, it goes further in a few respects. Most importantly, biodynamic farmers see their farm as an enclosed, self-sustaining organism, so emphasis is on creating soil fertility and preserving health from within Should be restored

and compost and field preparations meant to harness healing life forces which are said to positively effect fertility on the farm. could be simply: “and compost and field preparations”

As of February 2016, biodynamic techniques were used on 164,323 hectares in 64 countries with Germany accounting for 44% of the global total^[1]. Should be restored; valid source and in line with 2011 figures.

Biodynamic agriculture has only become the subject of scientific research within that last few decades, making scientific understanding of this farming method infant at best. Thus far, only preliminary beneficial outcomes have been scientifically established. Critics continue to Do not restore

which highlights the importance of further scientific study.^[2] Restore, sourced and unoffensive

This organization is a non-profit, international organization with certifying systems in 45 countries.^[3] Restore

biodynamic farms certify through independent certifying agencies which interpret Demeter Farm Standards when certifying a farm. To transition to biodynamic, conventional farms must follow The Farm Standards for three years before being able to market their products as biodynamic, while certified organic farms only need to follow biodynamic standards for one. Restore

Restore table of acreage

Similarly to Organic farming, Biodynamic methods display... Restore in accordance with source

Further research on the biodynamic preparations… Continue discussion about primary studies.

References

^ http://www.demeter.net/statistics
^ Diver, Steve. “Biodynamic Farming and Compost Preparation,” February 1999.
^ ""Demeter Organization Biodynamic Farm Standard" (PDF)." (PDF).

HGilbert (talk) 17:12, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:John Carter (film)

{{Infobox film}} states "Insert the approximate production budget of the film. This is the cost of the actual filming, and does not include marketing/promotional costs (e.g. advertisements, commercials, posters) ... If there are conflicting estimates, do not cherry-pick; list each estimate either as an individual value or as a number range."

Film budgets are not usually released by film studios, but generally entertainment magazines and trade journals can obtain an approximate figure from industry insiders. The "budget" is usually taken to be the "negative cost" which is is generally defined as the costs incurred up to producing a negative, but will omit the distribution costs and profit participation for the stars. Sources will usually distinguish between the negative cost and the subsequent costs, such as Variety observing "the budget, which Disney quotes at around $250 million, with an additional $100 million to market the film worldwide". If different sources provide different figures then these figures are represented as a range.

What is not so clear is how to represent figures that incorporate a tax credit and it is this quandary that is the subject of several ongoing film related discussions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Film_budget_representation_in_infobox. For example, in the case of John Carter Forbes obtained financial documents from the UK treasury which revealed "Total costs came to $306.6 million ... The financial statements reveal that the British tax authority handed Disney $42.9 million (£27.1 million) to make John Carter ... The tax payment to John Carter gave the picture a net budget of $263.7 million which is far more than estimates predicted." Disney is on record as stating the budget is "around $250 million".

The question being posed by this RFC is what should go in the infobox? These seem like the viable options to me:

$250 million (EDIT: the cost as stated by Disney and widely reported at the time)
$306.6 million (the total costs filed at HMRC)
$263.7 million (the net budget, which is derived by subtracting the tax credit)
$306.6 million ($263.7 million after tax credit) (the bit in brackets could actually go in brackets or as a footnote to avoid clutter)
$263.7 million ($306.6 million before tax credit)
$250–306.6 million ($263.7 million after tax credit)
$250–306.6 million (the highest and lowest figure available)

Even though the discussions are spread over quite few articles they seem to be going in circles and would benefit from community input, which is the reason for the RFC. I think this article is the best "test case" for the RFC since it has some fairly concrete numbers and uses explicit terminology in how those numbers are delivered, such as an official statement on the finance by Disney, and exact details of the tax filings at HMRC. Betty Logan (talk) 00:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin

Should the "Ponzi scheme dispute" section be deleted? Ladislav Mecir (talk) 22:27, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

History and geography

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography

Talk:Erfurt massacre

Talk:Potato chip

Should potato chips have it's history changed by a telegraph article, which refers to tornado fries and not potato chips anyways? 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 23:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Scranton General Strike

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but Anmccaff has expressed some concerns above regarding the neutrality of the article and the choice of title. (I came here from Special:NewPagesFeed and just did formatting and general cleanup. I really have no knowledge of the subject matter.) TimothyJosephWood 12:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kosher tax (antisemitic canard)

Does this article comply with the neutral point of view policy? (permalink to the version of this article at the start of this RfC) 05:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Korea-related articles

Should the wording

In general, use the Revised Romanization system for articles with topics about South Korea and topics about Korea before the division. Use McCune–Reischauer (not the DPRK's official variant) for topics about North Korea.

be replaced with

In general, use the Revised Romanization system for articles with topics about South Korea. Use McCune–Reischauer (not the DPRK's official variant) for topics about North Korea and topics about Korea before the division.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Cayman Islands

Greetings my fellow Wikipedians,

I just stumbled on this article and wanted to request comments on an addition of a section to this article. I am in the process of reading The Firm by John Grisham. This book, and its film adaptation, makes frequent reference to the Caymans and its establishments; additionally, the book's plot revolves heavily around the islands. I'm also very certain that other books, shows, or movies at least make passing mention of the island. I have seen numerous "In Popular Culture" sections in other articles. For example, take many of the military rank articles. I don't see these, however, on many other kinds of articles, even though they may be beneficial. I feel that is the case here. I'd like to hear other editors' opinions, and would very much like to see this section added here.

Thank you for your time and comments,

Fritzmann2002 17:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Trump: The Art of the Deal

Should the following be included in the "Reception" sub-section?

In March of 2016, Peter Ross Range, a German specialist and author, made comparisons between Art of the Deal and Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf. (Source: Peter Ross Range (March 31, 2016). "There's a little 'Mein Kampf' in Trump's 'Art of The Deal': Column". USA Today.)

n the discussion space below please leave a comment or !vote Support for inclusion or Oppose. Per WP:RFC discussions usually remain open for about a month. -- GreenC 14:33, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Jean Lapierre

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups

Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups? Gerard von Hebel (talk) 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Armenian Genocide

Should we include the term 'Medz Yeghern' as an alternative name to the Armenian Genocide in the first sentence of this article? Please comment precisely whether you want to exclude or include the term. Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:CinemaScope

Talk:Yuan dynasty

I am from china and is interested in history. the map of Yuan dynasty is wrong. in our history textbooks, Goryeo is marked as a country instead of a part of yuan. in Historical Atlas of China (1982) (it is regarded as an academic authority books of history in china), it also marked as an independent country. (the map was taken picture and upload here. Goryeo (高丽) marked as a country outside of yuan though it also marked as "Expand east province" (征东行省). in addition, some so-called "province" is exist in name only during yuan dynasty; such as "Jiaozhi province" (交趾行省) in Vietnam, "Champa province" (占城行省) in Champa, and "Myanmar province" (缅中行省 in Myanmar)). many we Chinese think Goryeo is a country instead of a part of yuan, these map of yuan are uploaded by Chinese users[4][5][6]. it prove what I said.

and I also noticed that there is an edit controversy in the map of yuan[7]. the user @Idh0854: from Korea and @Wengier: from china, think Goryeo is not a part of yuan in that time. And in Korean Wikipedia, article ko:원나라 also not use that file; them use [8], marked Goryeo as vassal. so Goryeo is considered as a country in both china and korea, we'd better adopted it. another discussion is started in Wikimedia commons here.[9]--122.90.84.169 (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1971 Bangladesh genocide

Should the changes in this diff be made to the article which includes addition of content about violence against Biharis, the edit also includes different figures regarding number of people killed and women raped and reason why Operation Searchlight was launched? Sheriff

Talk:Battle of Ia Drang

Please comment about whether South Vietnam should be included in the infobox as a belligerent. 113.190.165.78 (talk) 17:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Time Person of the Year

Which country(s) should we show in Elizabeth II's notes?

Talk:Ooty

Should the "History" section in the Ooty article contain 'various Tamil kingdoms ruled over Nilgiris' which include even Cheras and Pandyas for whose rule over Nilgiris, there is hardly any concrete proof in the form of inscriptions/manuscripts/works indicating ruler, date, area of Nilgiris ruled, etc.?

NitinBhargava2016 (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:State of Palestine

An RFC recently closed on Israel and it was determined that this article's lead should not describe State of Palestine as partially recognized.

Please respond whether in your opinion, the lead should say that State of Palestine:

is not a Sovereign state
has no defined borders
has no control over most of the territory it claims
is a de-jure state
is a proto-state
something else ?

“WarKosign” 11:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Language and linguistics

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Language and linguistics

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Korea-related articles

Should the wording

In general, use the Revised Romanization system for articles with topics about South Korea and topics about Korea before the division. Use McCune–Reischauer (not the DPRK's official variant) for topics about North Korea.

be replaced with

In general, use the Revised Romanization system for articles with topics about South Korea. Use McCune–Reischauer (not the DPRK's official variant) for topics about North Korea and topics about Korea before the division.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Panini (sandwich)

Within the article body, should the topic of this article be referred to as panino or panini? Please refer to prior discussion at #Is it a singular or a plural? for relevant arguments. Please note that this is not a request for comment on the article title, which was established above (#Proposed move to Panini (sandwich)). Ibadibam (talk) 21:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Maths, science, and technology

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, science, and technology

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy

Some editors feel that the use of the ESI score is unencyclopedic because it has no peer reviewed papers and is which has never been cited in any serious WP:MAINSTREAM literature. Relisted by Davidbuddy9 Talk 21:05, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Area of a disk

apparently, the article was titled "area of a disk" for a long time...was recently changed to "area of a circle" (the recent consensus is for this title) but was changed back to "area of a disk." See above talk section "move history" for this...policy arguments can be made for either title so I think it's going to come down to simple consensus/preference...

my vote: area of a circle (see earlier section for my reasoning, if interested) 68.48.241.158 (talk) 13:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:YouTube

Talk:Second law of thermodynamics

Which lead is better? Indicate option #1 or #2. 17:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Jean Lapierre

Template talk:Psychology sidebar

Inserting request for comment: should Behavioral Genetics be included in the psychology sidebar? Vrie0006 (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Electromagnetic hypersensitivity

The above discussion on popular culture has highlighted a fervent but inchoate mix of ideas among editors as to the status of EHS, a mess which is preventing progress in that discussion. The present RfC is aimed at clearing this up. The issue may also be complicated by the fact that claimed sufferers of EHS fall into two groups, those who have misdiagnosed some real symptom caused by something else and those who have worried themselves into developing adverse symptoms via the nocebo effect. I would ask for comments on two issues:

Is EHS a medical topic? Note that it is generally ~~accepted~~ classed as an alternative diagnosis, i.e. the condition has no medical recognition.
Is EHS pseudoscience? Note that several other alternative diagnoses based on unsound ideas such as Leaky gut syndrome, Drapetomania and Mucoid plaque are currently categorised as such.

— Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:MMR vaccine controversy

I see significant support above for a rename of this article. I think we need to agree the most appropriate title. Suggestions are:

MMR vaccine controversy (no change)
MMR vaccine safety
MMR vaccine and autism
MMR vaccine conspiracy theory
MMR-autism hypothesis
MMR-autism fringe theory.
MMR-autism hoax
MMR vaccine Lancet retraction

Apologies if I have forgotten any. Guy (Help!) 10:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Art, architecture, literature, and media

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Art, architecture, literature, and media

Talk:The Matrix

How should the directors of this film be presented in the lead of the article?

"The Matrix is a [...] film written and directed by..."

A - "the Wachowski Brothers"
B - "the Wachowski Brothers (now known as the Wachowskis)"
C - "the Wachowskis"
D - "the Wachowskis (credited as the Wachowski Brothers)"

For context, the Wachowski Brothers have both come out as transgender women in the time since The Matrix was released. They are now credited as the Wachowskis, not the Wachowski Brothers.

Talk:YouTube

Talk:Full Service (book)

Is the author of his memoir, Full Service, notable? Why or why not? If not, shall the biography be merged into the other article? George Ho (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:2016 Stanley Cup Finals

Shall the titles of the all the Stanley Cup series articles keep "FinalS", with an "S" at the end, or should they be moved to "Final", removing the "s". It has been almost eight years since the last major discussion, now archived at Talk:2008 Stanley Cup Finals#Page title. At the time, the WP:COMMONNAME still had the "s" even though the NHL started to officially use it without the "s". Has reliable sources changed since then to warrant such a massive page move? Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Top Model (Scandinavia)

I'm trying to reach consensus over which table should be used in the main article. The first, smaller table, includes only the finalists of the merged version. The second includes finalists from the merged version as well as the national finalists of each branch during the cycle. It would be very appreciated if other users would put their imput into this discussion. For the record, I choose Table B. My logic is that while I agree that tables should be kept consistent to each other, the format of this show itself was vastly different from most other versions. That in itself demands that information be presented differently for a better understanding of the show. It's a bit more information yes, but the presentation of the table (airtade, cycle, winner, runner-up, contestants, number of contestants, destination) is exactly the same. The addition of all the contestants in no way takes away from the validity or accuracy of the information.

2601:241:0:EA46:78D4:88EE:F3A6:47A1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Trump: The Art of the Deal

Should the following be included in the "Reception" sub-section?

Talk:1982 in film

Talk:Frank Auerbach

Based on the discussion at FFD, there is a policy-based consensus that the two non-free images at Frank Auerbach should be reduced to one. As discussed in the close, I'm organizing an RFC on the matter. I've organized a single discussion section at the bottom to discuss these works. Otherwise, I'm pinging @Cactus.man, Stefan2, Modernist, Finnusertop, Ceoil, Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, and Explicit: -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Time (Electric Light Orchestra album)

Dispute about whether the album should be considered a long-form narrative. See this revision and further discussion on talk page. OpenFuture has placed several "failed verification" and "unreliable source" templates, rationalizing that the journalist can't possibly know the songwriter's intentions, implying that the album's lyrics are too oblique for anyone to assess an accurate plot summary. I contest that the journalist is not interpreting the material, but rather summarizing it, also that the author has virtually admitted that the album does follow a semi-coherent narrative structure.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 08:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Axl Rose

Singer Axl Rose briefly dated model Stephanie Seymour in the 1990s. Opinions are needed on whether or not the article should include any variation of the following regarding their breakup:

3. "Rose ended the relationship shortly after amid accusing her of infidelity and by December 1993, Seymour gave birth to a son with someone else."

07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:To Pimp a Butterfly

In response to recent edit warring over the addition of conscious hip hop to the infobox, I am opening this RfC to determine a consensus. Can "conscious hip hop" be included/kept in the infobox as it is right now? Dan56 (talk) 02:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:List of films considered the best

Should the list name be changed to something more proper, encyclopedic-sounding? See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films considered the best (2nd nomination). What was brought up was "List of most highly-rated films" or something akin to that (not by me, I couldn't come up with anything). I recommend giving your own suggestions. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 19:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Erwin Mortier

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums

Should the title for a soundtrack article be "<name of release> (soundtrack)" even if a more accurate, albeit longer title in the form of "<name of release>: Original <whatever> Soundtrack" exists? Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music) and MOS:FILM#Soundtrack don't mention anything specific. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 15:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kanye West

Talk:John Carter (film)

The question being posed by this RFC is what should go in the infobox? These seem like the viable options to me:

$250 million (EDIT: the cost as stated by Disney and widely reported at the time)
$306.6 million (the total costs filed at HMRC)
$263.7 million (the net budget, which is derived by subtracting the tax credit)
$306.6 million ($263.7 million after tax credit) (the bit in brackets could actually go in brackets or as a footnote to avoid clutter)
$263.7 million ($306.6 million before tax credit)
$250–306.6 million ($263.7 million after tax credit)
$250–306.6 million (the highest and lowest figure available)

Talk:2016 Stanley Cup playoffs

This is an edit request to change Conference Quarterfinals and Semifinals to First and Second Round for the following articles: 2014 Stanley Cup playoffs, 2015 Stanley Cup playoffs, and the current project; this includes the brackets associated with their respective articles. This change was done by the NHL in 2014, but some editors say we should not change, but do not put a clear argument. So should we keep the status quo or adhere to the NHL's round names? Does Wikipedia allow secondary sources to trump the primary source? For more info please visit the talk pages for articles mentioned above, as well as the discussion currently in progress. Conyo14 (talk) 05:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Politics, government, and law

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law

Talk:Jeremy Searle

Should the recent comments by Jeremy Searle on "Jewish guilt" be included in this page? | MK17b | (talk) 06:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Iran

Should the Lead contain the statement "also known as Persia"? Bromley86 (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kosher tax (antisemitic canard)

Does this article comply with the neutral point of view policy? (permalink to the version of this article at the start of this RfC) 05:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:United Kingdom general election, 2015

Should this page use either the Template:Infobox election with the details of four parties (Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats, SNP) displayed, or the all-party version of Template:Infobox legislative election? In the absence of an agreed permanent alternative, editors have agreed that these options are the two most enforcable as a consensus 'least bad option' while debate continues as to the best infobox for this article.

You can see what they look like here. Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Ted Cruz

Talk:Trump: The Art of the Deal

Should the following be included in the "Reception" sub-section?

Talk:Republic of Venice

This article (+ Wikipedia generally) need more background on the legal codes and history of Venice. One of the Tiepolo doges has a note on his personal page mentioning he finished a codification of the statutes begun under Enrico Dandolo but there's no other information anywhere in the encyclopedia. Help? — LlywelynII 09:03, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Jean Lapierre

Template talk:Anarchism sidebar

Does anarcho-capitalism belong in this template and, if it does, what is its appropriate place? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Recall of MPs Act 2015

I observe that the text of the External Link to the Act, which I added in conformity with the normal practice for such links, as requested in the header of the meme which I subsequently deleted, states that the text is the current and up to date version. This is generically incorrect in relation to all Acts of Parliament, legislation.gov.uk is kept as up to date as resources and the arrival of new legislation permit, but carries an alert when the Act in question has been altered in some way and the change has not yet been reflected in its pages. You should either detect that in loading the text and alter the wording accordingly, or alter the phrasing to include the word "recently", and possibly add another rider to the effect that the site itself may qualify that.

What provisions exist in respect to legislation from other countries I cannot comment on, I was simply a member of the beta-test panel which vetted the first incarnation of legislation.gov.uk as StatuteLaw.gov.uk. 176.253.252.93 (talk) 12:57, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:United States presidential election, 2016

Talk:Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016

Just for the record:

CNN [10] Clinton: 502 Sanders: 42
AP/NYT [11][12] Clinton: 520 Sanders: 39
Huffington Post [13] Clinton: 502 Sanders: 38
CBS [14] Clinton: 502 Sanders: ??
LA Times [15] Clinton: 502 Sanders: 38
Us (Wikipedia) List of Democratic Party superdelegates, 2016 Clinton: 487 Sanders: 41

There is something wrong when a majority of sources have Clinton's super delegate lead above 500 but we don't. My proposal is that we stop relying on our list, and do what is normally done on Wikipedia by following what the majority of reliable sources say. So I ask the community to please choose on what we should do going forward:

Option A: Retain our list of super delegates (for reference), but go by what a majority of reliable sources are saying as a total.
Option B: Status Quo, continue updating our list of super delegates with info as it becomes available for the total.

- Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Lyndon LaRouche

In February, a large amount of material was deleted from Lyndon LaRouche. The only explanation offered, in one of the edit summaries, was that the sources were "sketchy". Among the sources for the deleted material were the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune, Corriere della Sera, and Xinhua. Other material sourced to these same publications was retained in the article. The deleted material depicted the subject in a relatively favorable light, while the retained material was unfavorable. Requests for an explanation on the talk page have gone unanswered. Should this article be considered non-neutral and display the "neutrality dispute" message? 75.27.248.232 (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Education of the British Royal Family

In response to repeated blanking of this section this RfC has been opened. This is currently included in "Analysis" -

Monica Ali and Princess Michael of Kent have both criticized Diana, Princess of Wales as "uneducated" while Diana's immediate family members frequently referred to her as "the thick one". Diana repeatedly failed her O-level examinations (equivalent of a high school diploma) and later dropped out of school.[24] John Lanchester, however, has rebutted criticism of Diana by saying that, while failure on Diana's scale would normally mean one was "astoundingly stupid", Diana had intentionally avoided academic pursuits as part of a master plan not to "put a royal suitor off". (Diana's O-level exam notes were later discovered; in them she wrote about the "genious" [sic] of William Shakespeare and a philosopher she identified as "Aristocktile", but possibly meant Aristotle).

- should the final sentence (bolded) be included or deleted? Sources have been obfuscated for ease of reading but can be viewed here [16]. (Please do not delete content under active RfC until the RfC has been closed.) LavaBaron (talk) 05:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:United States

Should the graph with the more explanatory caption shown at right be included adjacent to the passage on the size of the consumer spending proportion of the economy, as per [17]? 22:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions

Please change:

"In March 2016 the Israeli Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Yisrael Katz argued that Israel should employ “targeted civil eliminations” against leaders of the BDS movement. The expression puns on the Hebrew word for targeted assassinations.[48]"

to:

In March 2016 the Israeli Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Yisrael Katz argued that Israel should employ “targeted civil thwarting” (” סיכול אזרחי ממוקד “) against leaders of the BDS movement. The expression is a play on the Hebrew term for targeted assassinations^[1]. When the moderator of the conference interview asked Yisrael Katz to elaborate on the use of the words “targeted civil thwarting”, Katz goes on to say:

"“Targeted civil thwarting” means to expose those activities, people, systems, and mechanisms, and their ties with organizations which have already crossed the line towards militaristic terrorist activity. And indeed by exposing that we will know how to act against them, isolate them, and transfer information (on them) to different intelligence agencies in the world."

— Yisrael Katz - "Against the Boycott" Conference in Jerusalem' (March 28th, 2016)^[2]

References

^ Mairav Zonszein, 'In Israel, BDS is winning,'+972 magazine 28 March 2016.
^ Yisrael Katz, 'Video Interview: "Against the Boycott" Conference in Jerusalem'Ynet (28 March 2016).

This should be changed because:

1. 972mag.com grossly misquoted both the source it refrences in its own article, and the minister himself by mistaking the hebrew word for “thwarting” ” סיכול “, for the word “elimination” ” חיסול “. Therefore the source should be removed completely and changed to the original source Ynet so to maintain the integrity of this wikipedia article.

2. The source should be changed from the 972mag.com to the actual video recording of the quote in question. Reference to quotes are not subject to interpretation when they are in their original context, and thus should be made directly to the source if available, in order avoid violating the Wikipedia.org sourcing policy.

3. Changed "puns on the Hebrew word" to "play on the Hebrew term...".

4. Added context for the full quote by Yisrael Katz, where he elaborates on his use of the term.

5. References to Yisrael Katz wiki page, so not to be confused with former Minister of Labour and Social Welfare also of the name Yisrael Katz.

NOTE: An English translation is available in the following youtube video belonging to the user "boycott apartheid" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukXAFxI8Ix4

Phibins (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1971 Bangladesh genocide

Talk:Education of the British Royal Family

Should these passages be included in the "criticism" section (sources obfuscated below for ease of reading, but contained here [18]) as representative of significant criticism this topic as received?

David Starkey has described Elizabeth II as poorly learned, comparing her cultural refinement and intellectual curiosity to that of a "housewife". The criticism was rejected by Marco Houston, editor of Royalty Monthly Magazine, who said that Elizabeth "may not have had the best formal education, but she has had the best education at the university of life".
The decision to admit William, Duke of Cambridge to a non-degree agriculture program at the University of Cambridge met with criticism from some who declared his entry as a "free pass" and "insult" to other Cambridge students, however, others noted the vocationally-oriented course was open to anyone with sufficient funds from the "posh set" and not just royalty. Cambridge's student newspaper The Tab initially criticized William's admission, questioning whether his grades were sufficient to attend the university, but later backtracked, noting that the course was a short vocational certification and that the university customarily admitted pretty much anyone to it.

LavaBaron (talk) 04:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Time Person of the Year

Which country(s) should we show in Elizabeth II's notes?

Talk:Education of the British Royal Family

Should the table in this article remain in its current format and layout, be changed to a different format or layout, or be deleted? LavaBaron (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Flag of Northern Ireland

Should Flag of Northern Ireland state at the start that there is currently no national flag of Northern Ireland? I am not disputing the main coverage should be of the Ulster Banner as the former flag and because of its current uses. Dmcq (talk) 11:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Genocides in history

Should this page include only cases that satisfy mainstream definition of genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group"? My very best wishes (talk) 20:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:State of Palestine

An RFC recently closed on Israel and it was determined that this article's lead should not describe State of Palestine as partially recognized.

Please respond whether in your opinion, the lead should say that State of Palestine:

is not a Sovereign state
has no defined borders
has no control over most of the territory it claims
is a de-jure state
is a proto-state
something else ?

“WarKosign” 11:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Religion and philosophy

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy

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

WikiProject
Philosophy

article · category · portal

· Join the project
· Main Φ discussion	w
· Categories
· Style guide
· Article alerts
· New articles
· Articles for deletion
· Open tasks
· RFC
· Requested articles
· Reference desk
· Featured content
· Star of Sophia
· Reference Resources
· BLPs

Task forces
Philosophers	log join
Literature	log join
Aesthetics	log join
Epistemology	log join
Ethics	log join
Logic	log join
Metaphysics	log join
Social and political	log join
Language	log join
Mind	log join
Religion	log join
Science	log join
Analytic	log join
Continental	log join
Eastern	log join
Anarchism	log join
Ancient	log join
Medieval	log join
Modern	log join
Contemporary	log join

Assessment
· Project banner
· Statistics
· Articles needing attention
· Peer review

Articles by quality
· FA	41
· FL	5
· GA	125
· B	648
· C	1415
· Start	6454
· Stub	6547
· Unassessed	235

Articles by importance
· Top	74
· High	936
· Mid	2711
· Low	8262
· Unknown	3608

Article lists
· Philosophers
· Philosophical literature
· Aesthetics
· Ethics
· Epistemology
· Logic
· Metaphysics
· Soc+Pol
· Philosophy of language
· Philosophy of mind
· Philosophy of religion
· Philosophy of science
· Analytic philosophy
· Continental philosophy
· Eastern philosophy
· Anarchism
· Ancient philosophy
· Medieval philosophy
· Modern philosophy
· Contemporary philosophy

Logs
· Philosophers
· Literature
· Aesthetics
· Epistemology
· Ethics
· Logic
· Metaphysics
· S+P philosophy
· Philosophy of language
· Philosophy of mind
· Philosophy of religion
· Philosophy of science
· Analytic
· Continental
· Eastern
· Anarchism
· Ancient
· Medieval
· Modern
· Contemporary

Popular pages
Philosophers
Literature
Aesthetics
Epistemology
Ethics
Logic
Metaphysics
Social and political
Language
Mind
Religion
Science
Analytic
Continental
Eastern
Anarchism
Ancient
Medieval
Modern
Contemporary

Indices
· Philosophers
· Literature
· Aesthetics
· Epistemology
· Ethics
· Logic
· Metaphysics
· Social and political
· Language
· Mind
· Religion
· Science
· Analytic
· Continental
· Eastern
· Anarchism
· Ancient
· Medieval
· Modern
· Contemporary

Portals
Philosophy	talk
Aesthetics	talk
Ethics	talk
Epistemology	talk
Logic	talk
Metaphysics	talk
Philosophy of science	talk
Mind and Brain	talk
Thinking	talk
Anarchism	talk
Existentialism	talk
Social and political	talk

Templates
General
· {{WikiProject Philosophy}}
· {{Philosophy topics}}
· {{Infobox philosopher}}
· {{PhilCOTW}}
· {{PhilosophyTasks}}
· {{PhilosophyTasksBox}}
· {{PhilInvit}}
Navigation
· {{Aesthetics}}
· {{Epistemology}}
· {{Ethics}}
· {{Logic}}
· {{Metaphysics}}
· {{Social and political philosophy}}
· {{Philosophy of language}}
· {{Philosophy of mind}}
· {{Philosophy of religion}}
· {{Philosophy of science}}
· {{Analytic philosophy}}
· {{Continental philosophy}}
Stubs
· {{Philo-stub}}
· {{Philosopher-stub}}
· {{Philo-book-stub}}
· {{Hindu-philo-stub}}
· {{Philos-novel-stub}}
· {{ethics-stub}}
· {{logic-stub}}
Userboxen
· {{User WP Philosophy}}
· {{User WP Philosophers}}
· {{User WP Philosophical lit}}
· {{User WP Aesthetics}}
· {{User WP Epistemology}}
· {{User WP Ethics}}
· {{User WP Logic}}
· {{User WP Metaphysics}}
· {{User WP Soc+Pol Phil}}
· {{User WP Continental Philosophy}}
· {{User WP Anarchism}}
· {{User WP Analytic Philosophy}}
· {{User WP Eastern Phil}}
· {{User WP Ancient Phil}}
· {{User WP Medieval Phil}}
· {{User WP Modern Phil}}
· {{User WP Contemporary Phil}}
· {{User WP Phil of religion}}
· {{User WP Phil of mind}}
· {{User WP Phil of science}}
· {{User WP Phil of language}}

Related WikiProjects
· Alternative views	talk
· Arts	talk
· Atheism	talk
· Biblical criticism	talk
· Biography (academians)	talk
· Hindu Philosophy	talk
· History of Science	talk
· History	talk
· Islamic philosophy	talk
· Linguistics	talk
· Literature	talk
· Mathematics	talk
· Middle ages	talk
· Mythology	talk
· Physics	talk
· Skepticism	talk
· Religion	talk
· Science	talk
· Spirituality	talk
· Christian theology workgroup	talk

Reference resources
· PhilPapers
· Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
· Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
· Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project
· Perseus Digital Library

Tools
Grep
CatScan 2.0
WikiYanker
Intersection search
WikiChecker
WikiWatcher
Edit war
Article Blamer
Red link recovery
Traffic statistics
Project summary tables
Article lists
CatGraph

Talk:Four Noble Truths

Is the word redeath (sanskrit punarmrtyu) commonly used in Buddhist texts and teachings, and is it an appropriate word to use in this article, and in the statement of Buddha's Four Noble Truths in the lede? Robert Walker (talk) 16:44, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kosher tax (antisemitic canard)

Does this article comply with the neutral point of view policy? (permalink to the version of this article at the start of this RfC) 05:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Stanley Milgram

Should the parameter "Religion: Jewish" be included in the infobox of this article? Ravpapa (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Four Noble Truths

Proposal: The lead and main article should go beyond introductory texts / websites for general readers on Buddhism, and summarize history, influences and commentary on Four Noble Truths – such as about rebirth, redeath – from scholarly secondary and tertiary references? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha

Please compare the edits https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bochasanwasi_Shri_Akshar_Purushottam_Swaminarayan_Sanstha&type=revision&diff=715965676&oldid=715609474 and provide your suggestion. Swamiblue (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Sunni Islam

There has been a long-running dispute relating to the status of the Zahiri school. It seems to have arrived at a consensus with respect to the Zahiri article, but we still have a disagreement about presentation in this template. There are two relevant areas of controversy:

Encyclopedias and general histories commonly refer to the Zahiri madhhab as "extinct" or "defunct", while other sources cited in the article note that the modern Ahl-i-Hadith movement "consciously identified themselves with Zahiri doctrine", and that the maddhab is "prominent" among Salafis, though it is "not formally operating today".
While there is argeement that the Zahiri school was historically considered part of the Sunni legal community, some sources state that it was then "excluded from the Sunni consensus". It was conspicuously listed apart from the Sunni madhhabs in the Amman Message, and we haven't been able to find a RS that explicitly refers to its modern form as "Sunni".

The question is how the Sunni Islam template should be designed in view of the above. Here are the options which have been floated:

Leave the template as it is.
Move Zahiri under "extinct"
Move Zahiri on its own line with "disputed" in parentheses.
Rename the "extinct" subsection to "other" and move Zahiri there.
Remove Zahiri from this template altogether.

Thoughts? Eperoton (talk) 03:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Timothy Leary

Was "philosopher" an actual occupation (rather than just an avocation) of Timothy Leary and should he be described as such in the lead sentence and infobox? Skyerise (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Society, sports, and culture

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture

Talk:Penn State child sex abuse scandal

1. I ask a WP:RFC to discuss the support or oppose the inclusion of the new information about the reports regarding Penn State coaches' acknowledge about Sandusky's actions. The investigations about the whole case have involved Paterno so it's not WP:RECENTISM.

Here are the WP:RS:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sandusky-case-bombshell-did-6-penn-state-coaches-witness-abuse-n569526

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/06/us/jerry-sandusky-victims-paterno-penn-state/index.html?sr=twCNN050616jerry-sandusky-victims-paterno-penn-state0957PMStoryGalPhoto&linkId=24234146

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/798fbba86c834439bb627254f1ab138a/passion-pain-reignited-over-new-penn-state-abuse-claims

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/8c8b42f1f7a24069b703f21c06645b28/penn-state-president-decries-new-joe-paterno-allegations

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/7cfe4bb82dd84110adae6643033abfb6/paternos-son-supposed-1976-allegation-vs-father-bunk

2. Given the new information and due to there are no mention of more aftermath after 2013, this article might be tagged as WP:OUTDATED not because deletion risk but because WP:V.

Leo Bonilla (talk) 08:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Erfurt massacre

Talk:Multi-sport event

Is there a valid scope for Category:Sports festivals distinct from Category:Multi-sport events? – Fayenatic London 16:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:European Graduate School

Licenses and recognition

References

^ "List of Licensed Institutions and Accredited Courses > Universities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ Canton du Valais Formation et recherche universitaires Page accessed April 7, 2016
^ "swissuniversities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ "Institutions Whose Degrees are Illegal to Use in Texas". Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Retrieved 18 February 2016.

- Jytdog (talk) 15:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:World Open (snooker)

This article up until March used to include the World Grand Prix results (the 2015 and 2016 entries in the table) until this was contested by Armbrust. Armbrust contested the view that the World Grand Prix was not a rebranded continuation of the World Open, but a new tournament and removed the WGP results. He provided sources that referred to it as the "inaugural" tournament. This was contested by several editors who pointed out that World Grand Prix held the same spot on the calendar, had the same broadcaster and also used the historic Grand prix/World Open trophy which had the previous winners engraved on the trophy alongside those of the World Grand Prix. An IP editor initiated a cut and paste move which was subsequently reverted. This led to me proposing a rename at #Requested move 11 March 2016 for the article (to move the article to the World Grand Prix page) but the proposed move resulted in a "no consensus".

The question remains over what to do with the World Grand prix results. An IP is persisting in removing the results, effectively splitting the World Grand Prix content to its own article. The problem with this is that it has implications for performance table in the player articles. Case in point: if you look at Judd_Trump#Performance_and_rankings_timeline, you will see there is an entry for the World Grand Prix twelve tournaments down the list. This entry combines the World Open and World Grand Prix results as this article did: the problem though is that if a completely new article is created to house the World Grand Prix results the World Open/World Grand Prix entries in the performance tables need to be also split into separate entries too, otherwise the performance tables link to the wrong tournament. Up to 250 articles are affected in all.

So there are two options:

No split - We retain the status quo in accoridance with the "no consensus" result from the move discussion and house the World Grand Prix results at the World Open article, and thus retaining the internal link integrity.
Split - We split out the World Grand Prix results to its own article, but this will necessitate the fixing of the entries in the performance tables at the player articles that are effected by the split.

Betty Logan (talk) 13:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:List of world snooker champions

An editor altered the meaning behind the highlighting in the "multiple champions" table: [19]. Specifically, the highlighting used to indicate that the player will be competing in the next world championship (once the draw is made), is competing in the current world championship once it begins, and competed in the most recent world championship once it ends. And thus the cycle begins again with the next draw. The changes have altered the highlighting to indicate whether a player is now retired or not. The two meanings are not tautological because a retired player can compete in the world championship, and it is possible that a non-retired player does not compete in the world championship (through suspension/illness). Should the highlighting refer to option 1: the player is competing in the current (or most recent) world championship; or option 2: the player is merely "active" on the circuit? I suppose there is also an option 3, which is simply to drop the highlighting altogether. Betty Logan (talk) 01:30, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Full Service (book)

Is the author of his memoir, Full Service, notable? Why or why not? If not, shall the biography be merged into the other article? George Ho (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Highland High School (Palmdale, California)

To me, it's pretty obvious that User:Therealbono's recent edit needs to be undone, but at the same time, it's not blatant vandalism, so I don't want to be accused of edit warring. So here we are. PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Growing tired of the bullshit day by day.} 06:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:2016 Stanley Cup Finals

Talk:Trump: The Art of the Deal

Should the following be included in the "Reception" sub-section?

Talk:Flying disc

There has a been string of comments on the Talk page discussing the nonsense of the current page name for the frisbee, given that frisbee, while originally a brand name, continues to be the universally accepted generic word for thrown toy discs. (The article was originally called Frisbee, but changed in an apparent attempt to help influence real world adoption of the term 'flying disc'. That hasn't happened, but in any case, Wikipedia articles should not be edited in an attempt to influence external circumstances. Consequently I propose RENAME. Engleham (talk) 11:55, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Anarchism sidebar

Does anarcho-capitalism belong in this template and, if it does, what is its appropriate place? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 21:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Panini (sandwich)

Talk:Princess Beatrice of York

LavaBaron (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:List of youngest birth mothers

I propose the removal of the following category: "Teenage pregnancy". I feel it does not make sense here because of the five subsections on this page, the oldest age is 10. Ten year olds are three years away from being teenagers, so it makes no sense to tag them as teenagers. 92.9.157.202 (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Resting bitch face

Should we include pictures of Kristen Stewart and Kanye West as examples of people with resting bitch face? ~ Rob^Talk 04:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Axl Rose

Singer Axl Rose briefly dated model Stephanie Seymour in the 1990s. Opinions are needed on whether or not the article should include any variation of the following regarding their breakup:

3. "Rose ended the relationship shortly after amid accusing her of infidelity and by December 1993, Seymour gave birth to a son with someone else."

07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Monowheel tractor

Should a link or reference to Tractors Wikia be included in this article? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Kanye West

Talk:2016 Stanley Cup playoffs

Wikipedia style and naming

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia style and naming

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles

Should all numerals (whether it's written in kanji, hiragana or Arabic/Roman numerals) be romanized when they occur in Japanese terms on articles? For example, … 1 … (…1… … ichi …^?) as if one (一 ichi^?) were used instead. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:53, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Panini (sandwich)

Talk:Glossary of video game terms

Should glossary items use level-two headers as opposed to pseudo-headers (bolded text)? G752V (talk • contributions) 08:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Collapse top

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility have been notified of this discussion.

Should this template be centered or left-aligned by default? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 13:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums

Wikipedia policies and guidelines

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines

Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion

Currently, the policy states the following about appealing RevDel.

"Actions performed using this tool remain visible in the public logs. They are subject to review by other administrators (who can see redacted material), and to reversal upon clear, wider consensus. As with other administrative tools, good judgment and appropriate use are expected; improper use can lead to sanctions or desysopping."

Additionally, the section on misuse reads:

"Material must be grossly offensive, with little likelihood of significant dissent about its removal. Otherwise it should not be removed."

There was disagreement surrounding a recent discussion at ANI about how RevDel appeals should take place, and this RfC seeks to make the process more clear. ~ Rob^Talk 23:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch

I would like to propose adding the following sentence (or a variation thereof) to some place in the article: "You should try to avoid using a word that is in the religious slurs or ethnic slurs articles in a prominent place, such as the first sentence or as a subsection heading title as a description". Ninefive6 (talk) 12:49, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Username policy

As is well known, our rules are supposed to codify existing practice. The existing practice for WP:NOSHARE seems somewhat up in the air, and I'm wondering if the community wants codify this, or double down on the old practice, or what. Therefore I'm raising the a proposal for a change. This is an advisory RfC in that I don't have a strong opinion either way, I am just wanting to gauge the current state of community opinion on a rule that probably was written some time ago, and may have drifted from current practice. WP:NOSHARE currently reads:

Any user account should represent an individual and not a group (and an individual should normally only have one user account; see next section). Sharing an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so will result in the account being blocked. For accounts being used to represent a group or organization, see Promotional names and Usernames implying shared use above.

Exceptions to this rule can be made for non-editing accounts approved to provide email access, accounts approved by the Wikimedia Foundation (see list), and bot accounts that are maintained by more than one contributor, provided the existence of such an arrangement is made clear and has consensus.

Here is the proposed change, based on what may be new practice. I've bolded the changes just to highlight them for this RfC, I'm not proposing that they actually be bolded in the text of the rule.

Any user account should represent an individual and not a group (and an individual should normally only have one user account; see next section). Sharing an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so ~~may~~ will result in the user being asked to stop the practice and change their password, or in sanctions (up to and including the account being blocked), depending on circumstances. For accounts being used to represent a group or organization, see Promotional names and Usernames implying shared use above.

Herostratus (talk) 01:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups

Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups? Gerard von Hebel (talk) 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Glossary of video game terms

Should glossary items use level-two headers as opposed to pseudo-headers (bolded text)? G752V (talk • contributions) 08:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Special:Preferences

Hi, I stopped looking at this page after my previous WP:RFC ended because there were not enough people to warrant any change. I am now aware that multiple people have commented asking me to extend this WP:RFC and that it has been put on Phabricator ( ). I see on Phabricator that they are waiting for some new system to be made that will work better and be deployed be default on all wikis. It has been suggested to advertise in more places. I propose that we don't wait for Phabricator and change it on our wiki now. I am posting two surveys one for now waiting for Phabricator and one for the overall topic. Please see above for the previous discussion and background information. Here are some pictures of what MathML vs. PNG looks like in my browser (Google Chrome 52.0.2715.0 (Official Build) canary (64-bit))

Math from Quadratic Equation in MathML on a browser that supports MathML (although many browsers do not, see below for an example).

Math from Quadratic Equation in PNG.

(Also feel free to fix my spelling, grammar, wording or whatever to improve this WP:RFC) Hungryce (talk) 16:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Page mover

With thanks to everyone who provided input and insight, I would like to put forth a proposal to create the Wikipedia:Page mover permission. My suggestion is that page movers would receive

suppressredirect (The ability to move pages without leaving behind a redirect)

move-subpages (The ability to move subpages when moving their parent pages)

tboverride (The ability to override the title blacklist)

modified $wgRateLimits, allowing them to move pages more frequently than most users

Add the ability for administrators to add/remove members from this new group.

~~Add the ability for bureaucrats to add/remove members from this new group (corollary of previous).~~

This userright would be especially useful to editors who assist at Wikipedia:Requested moves. –xeno^talk 00:17, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

WikiProjects and collaborations

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiProjects and collaborations

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles

Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace

I suggest creating one made for visual editor as the editing summary box is in a different location then the source editors (the one this template was more or less based off of) Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Collapse top

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility have been notified of this discussion.

Should this template be centered or left-aligned by default? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 13:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia proposals

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals

Wikipedia talk:Page mover

With thanks to everyone who provided input and insight, I would like to put forth a proposal to create the Wikipedia:Page mover permission. My suggestion is that page movers would receive

suppressredirect (The ability to move pages without leaving behind a redirect)

move-subpages (The ability to move subpages when moving their parent pages)

tboverride (The ability to override the title blacklist)

modified $wgRateLimits, allowing them to move pages more frequently than most users

Add the ability for administrators to add/remove members from this new group.

~~Add the ability for bureaucrats to add/remove members from this new group (corollary of previous).~~

This userright would be especially useful to editors who assist at Wikipedia:Requested moves. –xeno^talk 00:17, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Unsorted

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Unsorted

Talk:European Graduate School

Licenses and recognition

References

^ "List of Licensed Institutions and Accredited Courses > Universities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ Canton du Valais Formation et recherche universitaires Page accessed April 7, 2016
^ "swissuniversities". Retrieved 15 March 2016.
^ "Institutions Whose Degrees are Illegal to Use in Texas". Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Retrieved 18 February 2016.

- Jytdog (talk) 15:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Top Model (Scandinavia)

2601:241:0:EA46:78D4:88EE:F3A6:47A1 (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Flying disc

User names

Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names

Shortcuts:

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be inappropriate under Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:

For blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, post to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

DO NOT post here if:

the user has made no recent edits, as there is no need to take any action.
you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator. Generally, see Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Unblocking.

Before adding a name here YOU MUST ensure that:

the user in question has been notified and allowed time to discuss the concern on their talk page. You may use the {{subst:uw-username}} template for this purpose. Only post the issue here if they have refused to change their username or have continued to edit without reply.
the user in question has not already been blocked prior to bringing their username here.

If, after having followed all the steps noted directly above, you still believe the user has chosen an inappropriate name under Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion, possibly with the {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}} template. You may also invite comment from others who have expressed concern on the name by use of this template.

Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|reason ~~~~}}.

Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList

Reports

Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.

Place your report below this line. Please put new reports on the top of the list.

User 86'48'37'789

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: Blocked. The name is an obvious attemot to game the requirement that usernames not resemble IP adresses. "Resemble" being the operative word, introducing a few minor differences, apparently exactly because they were perfectly aware of the policy, doesn't cut it. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:01, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

User 86'48'37'789 (talk · contribs)

Username seems similar to that of an IP address. I made contact with the user, but their explanation of their name suggests to me that it was meant to be as close to an IP as possible without actually being one; I'm not sure if the differences are enough. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Diff of user's post. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I disagree with 331dot. My User name does not resemble an IP due to the inclusion of letters (User:) and furthermore IP address numbering would follow the dot-decimal notation("." rather than my " ' ") and my user name uses numbers outside the possible range for IP addresses (789). The . vs ' makes it emminently clear that this is not an IP address format and is easy to spot. User 86'48'37'789 (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

267.I854.209

The result was: This is a pretty blatant violation, but the user was indef blocked for disruptive editing, so it's moot. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

267.I854.209 (talk · contribs)

Username resembles an IP address. Name seems to be designed as an attempt to circumvent IP address names. Rockypedia (talk) 15:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Poepkop

The result was: username changed. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Poepkop (talk · contribs)

Hello, I am reporting myself here, as occasionally there is someone who finds my name, say, inappropriate in Dutch (The Netherlands), though this is the English WP. Has been at UAA already in December, was dismissed there, was recently added by another editor. In about 2 years there were 2 people who found it inappropriate, another one said something about it but did not think I must change it. Old UAA entry with long discussion here (including my motivations) [21] (left side), some more discussion at my archived Usertalkpage, this section in particular [22] and some more sections when scrolling down there; latest UAA entry [23] with comment (left side). For all good order, I did or do not intend my name to be violating any policies, if so. Poepkop (talk) 20:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC).

Add.: Shorter version: the offensive part for Dutch people is surely the "poep" part (litt.: "poo"), when reading the name literally only, but not really "getting" the compound meaning. IMHO it means Foghead or Dunghead, at best, and we used it when someone did something silly.

Add.2: There are globally some 341 accounts containing "Poep" in them, of which some est. 80-90 "exist locally" on the English WP [24] of which only very few are blocked (likely vandals), which brings about the question: will they all be required to rename (if still active here)? Likely there are more such accounts, but I can only search with "Poep" at the beginning of the Username, not at the end of it. Poepkop (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC).

Comment - 2 Questions - What made you think of the name "Poepkop"? ... and was you aware "Poepkop" meant "shit head" upon registering ? .... Although you've been here a long time many users (myself included) would have no idea there's a negative translation to it and as you've had 2 1 reports at UFAA already I'd say it should probably be changed but maybe I'm over-thinking it!... –Davey2010^Talk 21:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I will point out that the first report was from an anonymous IP, likely in response to them being reported to AIV by Peopkop. The most recent report was the only one that appears to have been made in good faith. HighInBC 22:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Davey2010: the answers to both your questions are in the first two references I gave (1 and 2), but anyway I have already applied for - but not yet gotten - a name change at [25]. As I prefer to focus on vandalism instead of explaining the background of my Username over and over again (even if consensus here would be "allow") that would seem best. Also ping @HighInBC: Poepkop (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC).

HighinBC - Whoops thanks for that I've amended it,

Poep - So wouldn't it of been a good idea to have put some sort of note on your userpage?, Ah well all redundant as you've changed it (thanks for changing it anyway), –Davey2010^Talk 16:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay, it has been done already [26]. @HighInBC: I am not sure I understood correctly, should I now recreate my old "Poepkop" account and ask an admin to block it, to prevent future misuse? Cheers, Horseless Headman (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC).

Yes it is a good idea to recreate your old name to prevent someone else from using it. No you don't need to have it blocked, just use a good password. HighInBC 16:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Done. Horseless Headman (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC).

Liberalarmb

The result was: allow. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 14:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Liberalarmb (talk · contribs)

I issued a {{uw-username}} warning on September because I noticed this username seemed too similar to that of User:Liberalartist. The user has now recently edited, so I thought I would bring it here. --TL22 (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Allow The two names are easily distinguishable. I believe that criteria is only for names that are so close that one appears to be imitating the other, or where it is reasonable that they would nearly always be mistaken for the other user. For example, if it was "Liberalart1st" I'd agree it was probably no good. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Allow - Usernames are not too similar, no issue. Mlpearc (open channel) 22:59, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Allow - Sufficiently distinct. HighInBC 15:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Disallow - I wrote this in October in response to User:ToonLucas22's {{uw-username}} warning from September: "I want to presume good faith, but I think User:ToonLucas22 was right to have some concern. Since your first edit to Wikipedia seems to have been the AfD proposal for 8x8, and I had objected to the PROD of 8x8 shortly before that, it seems like the similarity of our usernames might confuse people. Perhaps you could explain your thoughts?"
User:Liberalarmb has not responded. I might be persuaded to change my view if Liberalarmb does explain any significance they attach to the name (e.g. my user name is partially a play on the liberal arts) and/or engage in discussion about ways to mitigate confusion, but in the absence of that, my concerns still stand.
In particular, I would note that the recent editing ToonLucas22 refers to above seems to have been, according to User talk:Liberalarmb#About PRODs (again), "revert[ing] [ToonLucas22's] procedural PROD removal recently … restor[ing] the PROD added 2 months ago along with its timestamp." According to Special:Contributions/Liberalarmb, this was the only edit Liberalarmb has made, ever, other than on September 19, which (to repeat myself) was shortly after I had objected to the PROD in question on August 23.
I want to be sure that Liberalarmb, especially as a new user, has every opportunity to explain their thoughts, but I think the circumstances may indicate a somewhat heightened level of review. LiberalArtist (talk) 22:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Just noting that this user has not edited since the day this was opened nearly a month ago. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Allow. They aren't close enough to worry about. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:00, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Notes

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20160511085634/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All

THC Science

Bringing Science to the Cannabis Conversation!

Cannabis Indica

Contents

Biographies

Economy, trade, and companies

History and geography

Language and linguistics

Maths, science, and technology

Art, architecture, literature, and media

Politics, government, and law

Religion and philosophy

Society, sports, and culture

Wikipedia style and naming

Wikipedia policies and guidelines

WikiProjects and collaborations

Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Wikipedia proposals

Unsorted

User names

Reports

User 86'48'37'789

267.I854.209

Poepkop

Liberalarmb

Notes

Leave a Reply