This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close a Wikipedia discussion. Do so when consensus appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our policies or guidelines).
Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.
Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, it is appropriate to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.
Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.
On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.
There is no fixed length for a formal request for comment (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.
When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.
Include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing easier. Move discussions go in the 'other types' section.
Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.
Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if the area is contentious. You should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the discussions for discussion page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.
Non-admins can close most discussions. Admins may not overturn your non-admin closures just because you are not an admin, and this is not normally in itself a problem at reviews. Still, there are caveats. You may not close discussions as an unregistered user, or where implementing the closure would need tools or edit permissions you do not have access to. Articles for deletion and move discussion processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.
Technical instructions for closers
|
---|
Please append |
If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
Other areas tracking old discussions
edit- Wikipedia:Requested moves#Elapsed listings
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
- Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Awaiting closure
- Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Old discussions
- Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Old business
- Wikipedia:Proposed mergers/Log
- Wikipedia:Proposed article splits
Administrative discussions
edit(Initiated 16 days ago on 25 November 2024) Topic ban appeal that has been open for over two weeks. Discussion by uninvolved editors seems to have died down. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done by Just Step Sideways. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading
editRequests for comment
edit(Initiated 209 days ago on 15 May 2024) Discussion died down quite a long time ago. I do not believe anything is actionable but a formal closure will help. Soni (talk) 04:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 64 days ago on 7 October 2024) Tough one, died down, will expire tomorrow. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Talk_page_guidelines#Request_for_comment:_Do_the_guidelines_in_WP:TPO_also_apply_to_archived_talk_pages?
edit(Initiated 55 days ago on 16 October 2024) Discussion seems to have petered out a month ago. Consensus seems unclear. Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 63 days ago on 8 October 2024) Expired tag, no new comments in more than a week. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This is a contentious topic and subject to general sanctions. Also see: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard topic. Bogazicili (talk) 17:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 44 days ago on 28 October 2024) Participation/discussion has mostly stopped & is unlikely to pick back up again. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This is a contentious topic and subject to general sanctions. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Archived. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 39 days ago on 1 November 2024) Needs an uninvolved editor or more to close this discussion ASAP, especially to determine whether or not this RfC discussion is premature. George Ho (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 31 days ago on 10 November 2024) Discussion is slowing significantly. Likely no consensus, personally. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Option 2 was very clearly rejected. The closer should try to see what specific principles people in the discussion agreed upon if going with a no consensus close, because there should be a follow-up RfC after some of the details are hammered out. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 03:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 23 days ago on 17 November 2024) It probably wasn't even alive since the start , given its much admonished poor phrasing and the article's topic having minor importance. It doesn't seem any more waiting would have any more meaningful input , and so the most likely conclusion is that there's no consensus on the dispute.TheCuratingEditor (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- No. That's not a "no consensus". The consensus is neither. Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way.—S Marshall T/C 09:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 9 days ago on 1 December 2024) This might qualifiy for SNOW, as there is no support for inclusion. However, the RfC statment appears to be not neutral, and one party claimed that the RfC was premature. The main disagreement that inspired the RfC seems to have been resolved elsewhere.[1] Tinynanorobots (talk) 09:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- That doesn't need closing, Tinynanorobots. It's blindingly obvious and near unanimous.—S Marshall T/C 09:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading
editDeletion discussions
editV | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 14 | 15 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 12 | 7 | 19 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 46 | 4 | 50 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 17 |
(Initiated 52 days ago on 20 October 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Category:Wikipedia Medcab category cases
edit(Initiated 9 days ago on 2 December 2024) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 9 days ago on 2 December 2024)
I think consensus is fairly clear on this one. The log page can be removed after this is closed. Cheers, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 01:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done by Patar knight. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading
editOther types of closing requests
editTalk:LGBT history in Georgia#Proposed merge of LGBT rights in Georgia into LGBT history in Georgia
edit(Initiated 65 days ago on 7 October 2024) A merge + move request with RM banners that needs closure. No new comments in 20 days. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 20:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 56 days ago on 16 October 2024) Experienced closer requested. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 54 days ago on 18 October 2024) This needs formal closure by someone uninvolved. N2e (talk) 03:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 49 days ago on 23 October 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 49 days ago on 23 October 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Don't Worry Kyoko (Mummy's Only Looking for Her Hand in the Snow)#Requested move 24 October 2024
edit(Initiated 47 days ago on 24 October 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 43 days ago on 28 October 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 35 days ago on 5 November 2024) RM that has been open for over a month. Natg 19 (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
(Initiated 29 days ago on 12 November 2024) Formal close needed. No new comments for two weeks. FOARP (talk) 09:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)