Misplaced Pages:Closure requests

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cunard (talk | contribs) at 09:06, 5 October 2014 (→Requests for closure: close requests). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:06, 5 October 2014 by Cunard (talk | contribs) (→Requests for closure: close requests)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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.

v t e Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19	Archive 20	Archive 21
Archive 22	Archive 23	Archive 24
Archive 25	Archive 26	Archive 27
Archive 28	Archive 29	Archive 30
Archive 31	Archive 32	Archive 33
Archive 34	Archive 35	Archive 36
Archive 37	Archive 38	Archive 39

This page has archives. Sections older than 40 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Shortcuts

The Requests for closure noticeboard is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close a discussion on Misplaced Pages. Formal closure by an uninvolved editor or administrator should be requested where consensus remains unclear, where the issue is a contentious one, or where there are wiki-wide implications.

Many discussions do not need formal closure and do not need to be listed here.

Many discussions result in a reasonably clear consensus, so if the consensus is clear, any editor—even one involved in the discussion—may close the discussion. The default length of a formal request for closure is 30 days (opened on or before 18 December 2024); if consensus becomes clear before that and discussion has slowed, then it may be closed early. However, editors usually wait at least a week after an RfC opens, unless the outcome is very obvious, so that there is enough time for a full discussion.

If consensus is unclear, then post a neutral request here for assistance.

Please ensure that your request for a close is brief and neutrally worded. Please include a link to the discussion. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. Be prepared to wait for someone to review the discussion. If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. You can start discussion at the original page or request a Closure review at Administrators' noticeboard with a link to the discussion page and the policy-based reason you believe the closure should be overturned. See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Closure review archive for previous closure reviews.

Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.

Because requests for closure made here are often those that are the most contentious, closing these discussions can be a significant responsibility. Closers should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion. All closers should be prepared to fully discuss the closure rationale with any editors who have questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that those editors may have.

A request for comment discussed how to appeal closures and whether an administrator can summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus was that closures should not be reverted solely because the closer was not an administrator. However, special considerations apply for articles for deletion and move discussions—see Misplaced Pages:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions and Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Closing instructions for details.

Once a discussion listed on this page has been closed, please add {{close}} or {{done}} and a note to the request here, after which the request will be archived.

Requests for closure

Template talk:Citation#RFC: Same rules for CS1 and Citation

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Citation#RFC: Same rules for CS1 and Citation (initiated 30 April 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

As a side-effect of using Module:Citation/CS1 to render the Citation template, all the warning messages issued for Citation Style 1 will now be issued for Citation. (Many of these warning messages are not turned on by default yet.) This means that editors who use the Citation template will have to consult Help:Citation Style 1 to determine the acceptable parameter values. Does the user community ratify this change?

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

This does not appear to require administration, thus I recommend finding a template-editor to assess and close it. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 02:34, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment Now archived at Template talk:Citation/Archive 7#RFC: Same rules for CS1 and Citation. Armbrust 19:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 3

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 3 (initiated 26 June 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. In your close, please consider the previous discussions related to archive.is:

Misplaced Pages talk:Link rot#Archive.is (initiated 17 September 2012)
Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 104#Replacing WebCite citations with archive.is citations (initiated 24 July 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Bot owners' noticeboard/Archive 8#RotlinkBot approved? (initiated 18 August 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/RotlinkBot (initiated 18 August 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive812#Mass rollbacks required (initiated 17 September 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC (initiated 20 September 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive813#Sophisticated mass vandalism from IP ranges? (initiated 2 October 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)/Archive 119#Proposal to Reduce the API limits to 1 edit/30 sec. for logged out users (initiated 2 October 2013)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive255#WP:Archive.is RFC request for admin review of closure (initiated 31 October 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2014/03#archive.is/T5OAy (initiated 23 November 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/December 2013#archive.is (initiated 3 December 2013)
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Now what to do? and permanent link (initiated 27 February 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive261#Archive.is headache (initiated 8 May 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Archivedotisbot (initiated 10 May 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC 2 (initiated 2 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive263#Archive.is (initiated 25 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive845#Serious BLP violations by Kww, Hasteur, Werieth, and possibly others (initiated 30 June 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive846#New Account Using AWB to Remove Links to archive.is based "the RFC" (initiated 1 July 2014)
Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Δ/Werieth#Followup discussion about archive.is links (2 July 2014)

Here are discussions with the Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC closer:

User talk:Hobit#Archive.is RFC closure unclear and permanent link (initiated 31 October 2013)
User talk:Hobit#Question re: Misplaced Pages:Archive.is RFC and permanent link (initiated 11 November 2013)
User talk:Hobit#Archive.is and permanent link (initiated 12 February 2014)
User talk:Hobit#Archive.is matter and permanent link (initiated 19 May 2014)

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

There is discussion going on, but I think those can be moved to somewhere else.Forbidden User (talk) 08:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it might be best to wait a little bit more for results from Chris's email. I know I'm waiting to update my views based on it as well as the email correspondense link. I imagine I am not the only one. PaleAqua (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

It's been almost a week with no real discussion and no updates. Withdrawing my wait request. PaleAqua (talk) 06:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Will someone please close this? There is discussion going on, but it isn't going anywhere. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic Ban Review (2nd Attempt)

Will am administrator please assess the consensus on this request by User:HighKing to ease the topic ban? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment Now archived at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive853#Topic Ban Review (2nd Attempt) 2. Armbrust 09:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should the hidden navbar be removed from the base Stub and WikiProject banner templates?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC: Should the hidden navbar be removed from the base Stub and WikiProject banner templates? (initiated 30 July 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment Now archived at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 113#RfC: Should the hidden navbar be removed from the base Stub and WikiProject banner templates?. Armbrust 06:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 12

Even though this from over a month ago, there are still a couple of discussions here that haven't been closed yet. JDDJS (talk) 05:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Ronn Torossian#RFC: mention of commentary in lead

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ronn Torossian#RFC: mention of commentary in lead (initiated 4 August 2014)? Please consider Talk:Ronn Torossian#Relevance of political commentary in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Fields Medal#Table format

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Fields Medal#Table format (initiated 15 August 2014)? See the subsection Talk:Fields Medal#RFC (initiated 17 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown/Archive 14#Robbery in lede RFC and Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown#RfC: Should article mention Brown had no (adult) criminal record?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown/Archive 14#Robbery in lede RFC (initiated 2 September 2014) and Talk:Shooting of Michael Brown#RfC: Should article mention Brown had no (adult) criminal record? (initiated 8 September 2014)? WP:SNOW may be applicable for both discussions. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:ISO 8601#RFC: Does ISO 8601 use the Gregorian calendar?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:ISO 8601#RFC: Does ISO 8601 use the Gregorian calendar? (initiated 9 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

Does ISO 8601 use the Gregorian calendar? If so, does this edit by JMJimmy help readers understand that ISO 8601 uses the Gregorian calender, or hinder that understanding? If the Gregorian calendar is used, is the wording as of 7 August 2014 (UT), JMJimmy's wording, or some other wording best?

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Creation Museum#RfC A. A. Gill

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Creation Museum#RfC A. A. Gill (initiated 17 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Historicity of Jesus#Request for comments: Inclusion of more than "theological historical criticism" scholarship

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Historicity of Jesus#Request for comments: Inclusion of more than "theological historical criticism" scholarship (initiated 3 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment Now archived at Talk:Historicity of Jesus/Archive 35#Request for comments: Inclusion of more than "theological historical criticism" scholarship. Armbrust 13:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes#RfC: Inclusion of Simpsons Movie

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes#RfC: Inclusion of Simpsons Movie (initiated 22 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should The Simpsons Movie be included in this list of episodes?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Brazil v Germany (2014 FIFA World Cup)#RfC: Is the profanity in the article relevant?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Brazil v Germany (2014 FIFA World Cup)#RfC: Is the profanity in the article relevant? (initiated 13 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

The current version of the article uses very coarse language in the section dealing with social reactions to the match. The text at present is the following:
Current Text: "Meanwhile, pornographic website Pornhub had to ask its users to stop uploading video footage of the game to the website, after several videos with titles such as 'Young Brazilians get fucked by entire German Soccer Team' were uploaded."

I propose that this section should be written in a more professional tone, and consider the following an improvement:

Proposal: "Meanwhile, pornographic website Pornhub had to ask its users to stop uploading video footage of the game to the website, after several of these videos were transferred to their network with sexually suggestive titles."
Please let us know which of these two options are better and why.

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:WikiProject Biography#RfC: BDP in Biography template

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:WikiProject Biography#RfC: BDP in Biography template (initiated 20 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

Should the Biography template be adjusted to include the "bdp=" parameter?

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Move review/Log/2014 September#Budweiser

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Move review/Log/2014 September#Budweiser (initiated 9 September 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

This move review discussion opened on September 9 and hasn't had any new comment since September 17. Thanks.--Cúchullain /c 17:27, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/30 SW

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/30 SW (initiated 26 August 2014)? The last comment was made 31 August 2014‎.

The instructions for closing user conduct RfCs are at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Closing. After closing the RfC, please add the RfC to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Dan56

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Dan56 (initiated 28 July 2014)?

Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:2014–15 Glossop North End A.F.C. season

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:2014–15 Glossop North End A.F.C. season (initiated 10 September 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 July 14#Category:Literature by (X) women

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 July 14#Category:Literature by (X) women? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 July 20#Category:Fish of Great Britain

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 July 20#Category:Fish of Great Britain? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive264#Need a close and enforcement of consensus at a deletion review

Would an admin review Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive264#Need a close and enforcement of consensus at a deletion review (initiated 25 August 2014)? Based on the user's contributions, the user has spent a lot of time at IPhone 6. Although there is no consensus for a topic ban, would an admin let the user know about the concerns the community expressed in the discussion and give a final warning that further disruption will result in a block? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage for User:Oshwah

Would an admin please review and approve or decline this request for Oshwah. Previously commented by admin Graeme Bartlett, but still open since 26 August 2014. Thank you, — xaosflux 12:07, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#John Barrowman (BLPSOURCES vs CONTEXTMATTERS)

There's been a discussion which I think needs closed at Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Note to closing admin, preferably by an admin experienced in judging consensus regarding a matter of BLP sourcing. If I could request that the closer looks beyond head-counting and carefully weigh strength of argument, you'll forgive me, as this has been a problem in the past. Thank you, --John (talk) 21:25, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:2014 military intervention against ISIS#Requested move 3

This RM discussions needs to be closed. No new comments have been made in the past few days. Please close it. RGloucester — ☎ 22:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:South Yemen#Request for Comment

The RfC template has been removed because the RfC was over 30 days old, but the discussion has not come any nearer to a consensus. There are currently eight different ways the type of government might be described, each of which is opposed by a significant number of editors, and very few of which have even a bare majority in favour. Nevertheless, some neutral closer needs to come down in favour of one of these, otherwise it will be impossible to move forward. Scolaire (talk) 12:34, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Richard Negrin#Rfc: Possible copyright problem

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Richard Negrin#Rfc: Possible copyright problem (initiated 24 August 2014)? Is there a consensus that there is a copyright violation or a reasonable possibility that there is a copyright violation in which case the article should be listed at Misplaced Pages:Copyright problems? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Kevin Sorbo#Ferguson Controversy

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Kevin Sorbo#Ferguson Controversy (initiated 28 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#Inclusion of future job positions in infobox, list, etc.

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#Inclusion of future job positions in infobox, list, etc. (initiated 28 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

This dispute has to do with the appointment of Catholic bishops, but I am seeking a wider consensus, because in over three years none has been reached, and there has been no central place to discuss it exhaustively.

If there is no consensus in the discussion, perhaps the closer can offer the RfC's participants advice about how to better frame and publicize the discussion to encourage participation by more uninvolved editors. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Michelle Thomas#Seriously?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Talk:Michelle Thomas#Seriously? (initiated 17 September 2014)? There is a dispute about the consensus at Talk:Michelle Thomas#Consensus. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:OpenOffice.org#Second RfC, this time on NPOV

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:OpenOffice.org#Second RfC, this time on NPOV (initiated 31 August 2014)? Please consider the RfC close at Talk:OpenOffice.org#RfC on the topic in your close if it is relevant. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:OpenOffice.org#Requested moves

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:OpenOffice.org#Requested moves (initiated 28 September 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Second Boer War#Request for comment

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Second Boer War#Request for comment (initiated 19 September 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Should the nations from which foreign volunteers came be listed in the infobox?" Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#Request for comment and Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#Request for Comment 2

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#Request for comment (initiated 25 August 2014) and Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#Request for Comment 2 (initiated 31 August 2014)? The opening poster for the first discussion wrote: "Should this article be redirected to Ancient Macedonians?" The opening poster for the second discussion wrote:

Should the lead sentence of this article call the ancient Macedonian kingdom a "kingdom", without further specification, or a "Greek kingdom"?

Please consider the later related discussions Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#Request for CONSENSUS which respects history, reliable sources and common sense and Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)#REQUEST FOR A TRULY NEUTRAL CONSENSUS in your close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 47#Date ranges as titles and Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 48#Proposal/question: Should we disambiguate year-range work titles?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 47#Date ranges as titles (initiated 1 July 2014) and the RfC at Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles/Archive 48#Proposal/question: Should we disambiguate year-range work titles? (initiated 8 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Comics#RFC: Are fictional characters people or objects?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Comics#RFC: Are fictional characters people or objects? (initiated 23 September 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

When discussing fictional characters in a real world context, is it acceptable to refer to them with gendered prounouns, such as he and she, or should they be referred to as objects?
Example:

He is a superhero who was created by Simon and Kirby.

The character is a superhero that was created by Simon and Kirby.

One editor recommended WP:SNOW close. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Scientific opinion on climate change#RFC Controversy about the policy section

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Scientific opinion on climate change#RFC Controversy about the policy section (initiated 26 August 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Star Wars#RfC: Should the template be divided into canon/non-canon sections?

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Template talk:Star Wars#RfC: Should the template be divided into canon/non-canon sections? (initiated 1 September 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

As can be seen in the discussions on Template talk:Star Wars, there is a dispute as to whether Template:Star Wars should only be divided by media type, or whether it should be further divided into canon/non-canon sections.

If there is no consensus, please consider advising the participants how to better publicize the discussion to encourage participation by more uninvolved editors. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Ed Miliband#Judaism RFC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ed Miliband#Judaism RFC (initiated 30 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

The lead describes Edward Miliband as the first 'Jewish leader' of the Labour party. Miliband is ethnically Jewish, but not Jewish in the religious sense of the word; the infobox describes him as an atheist. Should this section of the lead be clarified to say Miliband is an ethnic Jew, rather than a religious Jew, so as not to suggest incorrectly that Miliband follows Judaism?
Option 1: Keep as it is. Option 2: Specify that Miliband is ethnically Jewish, not religiously Jewish.
Option 3: Remove from the lead altogether.

Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:European Conservatives and Reformists#Request for Comments

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:European Conservatives and Reformists#Request for Comments (initiated 4 September 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "There is currently disagreement about how the lead and infobox should described the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR)." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Miroslav Klose#RfC on faith

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Miroslav Klose#RfC on faith (initiated 28 August 2014)? The discussion concerns this edit to the article. The content removed in that edit is currently in the article. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#Proposal: Restrict use of "WMF" prefix or suffix in usernames to WMF staff (initiated 26 August 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Notability#Renaming Notability

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages talk:Notability#Renaming Notability (initiated 30 August 2014)? The discussion is listed at Template:Centralized discussion. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Volunteer Response Team/Userright RfC

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Volunteer Response Team/Userright RfC (initiated 30 August 2014)? The discussion was listed at and archived from Template:Centralized discussion. An editor wrote:

And another reminder about the RFC for a global group to supersede this one (see m:Requests for comment/Creation of a global OTRS-permissions user group for that. Also, regarding the above - the edit filter was already set up but needs to be modified to meet en.wiki (it was simply copied from Commons).

Please mention that m:Requests for comment/Creation of a global OTRS-permissions user group may supersede the userright set up in this RfC. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Distinguishing between New Pages Patrol reviews and AfC reviews

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#Distinguishing between New Pages Patrol reviews and AfC reviews (initiated 2 September 2014)? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario#Splitting of this category

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario#Splitting of this category (initiated 21 August 2014)? See Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario#RFC: A wider handling of the situation (initiated 29 August 2014)? The opening poster wrote: "Proposal: We agree on a minimum size: any category by city and sport where we have that many entries, we allow the creation of the category. I think 100 sounds good." Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 115#Colourisation of images

Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 115#Colourisation of images (initiated 15 September 2014)? The opening poster wrote:

There is a developing trend for colleagues to colourise b&w images and use the new version in articles. This is often done via Misplaced Pages:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop.
There are two types of case where this happens:

Re-adding colour to a b&w reproduction of a colour original; e.g. File:Sabinin. St George the Hagiorite colourised.jpg

Adding colour to a b&w original e.g. File:Ilia Chavchavadze by Alexander Roinashvili (digitally colorized).png
I think we should develop a clear and agreed policy on when such images may or may not be used, and how and when the fact that a colourised image is shown must be declared.

The discussion was listed at and archived from Template:Centralized discussion. Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 July 27#Category:Software modeling tools? Please see here for advice from an experienced CfD closer about how to implement CfD closes. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 9#Category:Writers by ethnic or national descent? Please see here for advice from an experienced CfD closer about how to implement CfD closes. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal attacks (and probable trolling) on Talk:Historicity of Jesus

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal attacks (and probable trolling) on Talk:Historicity of Jesus (initiated 27 September 2014)? Please see the subsection Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic-Ban of User:Fearofreprisal (initiated 3 October 2014). If there is consensus for a topic ban, please add the topic ban to Misplaced Pages:Editing restrictions. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Battleground mentality and disruptive editing by Coat of Many Colours

Would an admin assess the consensus at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Battleground mentality and disruptive editing by Coat of Many Colours (initiated 2 October 2014)? There is a clear consensus for "endorse block". Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Category:

Administrative backlog