Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure

The Requests for closure noticeboard is for posting requests to have an uninvolved editor assess, summarize, and formally close a discussion on Wikipedia. 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, such as when the discussion is about creating, abolishing or changing a policy or guideline.

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 comment is 30 days (opened on or before 17 February 2020); 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 a discussion opens, unless the outcome is very obvious, so that there is enough time for a full discussion.

On average, it takes two or three weeks after the discussion ended to get a formal closure from an uninvolved editor. When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.

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

Please ensure that your request for closure is brief and neutrally worded, and also ensure that a link to the discussion itself is included as well. Be prepared to wait for someone to act on your request and do not use this board to continue the discussion in question.

If you disagree with a particular closure, do not dispute it here. Please discuss matters on the closer's talk page instead, and, if necessary, request a closure review at the administrators' noticeboard. Include links to the closure being challenged and the discussion on the closer's talk page, and also include a policy-based rationale supporting your request for the closure to be overturned.

See Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions and Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for details.

To reduce editing conflicts and an undesirable duplication of effort when closing a discussion listed on this page, please append {{Closing}} or {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry here. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note. A request where a close is deemed unnecessary can be marked with {{Not done}}. After addressing a request, mark the {{Initiated}} template with |done=yes. ClueBot III will automatically archive requests marked with {{Close}}, {{Done}}, and {{Not done}}.

Requests for closure

See also: 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, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion § Old business

Administrative discussions

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to streamline the welcome template

(Initiated 36 days ago on 11 February 2020) I would appreciate if an experienced editor could please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to streamline the welcome template. Thanks, Sdkb (talk) 07:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

RfCs

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 165#New approaches to "Simple English Wikipedia"

(Initiated 83 days ago on 25 December 2019) Pretty old discussion and needs to be closed. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 10:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@Soumya-8974: That's not an RFC, and it would be almost impossible to determine "consensus" from a grab-bag of editors saying either "This seems like a good idea, but I don't know how to go about accomplishing/implementing it" or "This seems like a bad idea, and here's why", unless the consensus would simply be "No consensus Default to status quo." Moreover, closing threads after they've already been archived is rarely done. Unarchiving would be the way to go about it if it had been archived recently, but more than 30 newer threads have already been archived. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Use of Large Quotes in article space, and the Cquote template

(Initiated 80 days ago on 29 December 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Use of Large Quotes in article space, and the Cquote template? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

NB: the discussion has now been archived to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 219#RfC: Use of Large Quotes in article space, and the Cquote template Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I've unarchived the RfC. Cunard (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:WikiLeaks#RfC on OPCW documents related to Douma chemical attack

(Initiated 73 days ago on 5 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:WikiLeaks#RfC on OPCW documents related to Douma chemical attack? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Color Developing Agent 3 and Color Developing Agent 4

(Initiated 68 days ago on 10 January 2020) I'm requesting that an experienced editor please advise on how to move forward with this merge proposal. Qono (talk) 17:21, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Next Italian general election#Parties in infobox, redux

(Initiated 66 days ago on 11 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Next Italian general election#Parties in infobox, redux? Please consider in your close Talk:Next Italian general election#Results of RfC, where there is disagreement about the consensus. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Archive 31#RfC: Should episode article titles default to the broadcaster's official title?

(Initiated 65 days ago on 13 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#RfC: Should episode article titles default to the broadcaster's official title?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome#RfC on inclusion of lead image

(Initiated 57 days ago on 21 January 2020) Could an uninvolved admin please assess consensus and close the RfC on this page? There hasn't been active discussion in some time, and it has run for a month. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:01, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Qasem Soleimani#RfC about inclusion of Iranian propaganda section

(Initiated 54 days ago on 23 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Qasem Soleimani#RfC about inclusion of Iranian propaganda section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Shuttle-Derived_Launch_Vehicle#RfC_on_24_January_2020

(Initiated 54 days ago on 24 January 2020) Any uninvolved editor can assess the consensus of this RfC. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 11:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion#What should be the venue for discussing Rcat templates?

(Initiated 53 days ago on 24 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at the RfC at Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion#What should be the venue for discussing Rcat templates?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (New Zealand)#RfC: Proposal to add macrons to New Zealand naming conventions

(Initiated 53 days ago on 24 January 2020) Would an uninvolved sysop (or otherwise experienced editor) please assess the consensus? We've had a good discussion, with many good suggestions having been worked into the proposed naming convention change. I think this is now stable; everybody who is interested in the topic appears to have had their say. As the topic has a huge history going back to 2007 and there's been a lot of controversy about it in the past, there's a bit of reading to do; it's not a short RfC. Note that the media has been watching this; three outlets have reported about the RfC (and the Wikipedia discussion on the topic has received media attention before). Thanks in advance. Schwede66 01:43, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Ross Finlayson (User:Rsfinlayson), a major contributor to related discussions such as at Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 25#Appeal to revert the revert that changed Paekākāriki back to Paekakariki, and/or to clarify rules around Māori place names, last edited Wikipedia a few days before the RfC started. Maybe he is on holiday or something. He may have opposed the RfC. His views can be seen in the discussion I have just linked. This may not make much difference to the support/oppose vote numbers, but I think worth mentioning. Nurg (talk) 11:23, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Bernie Sanders#RfC: "news coverage" section

(Initiated 50 days ago on 28 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Bernie Sanders#RfC: "news coverage" section? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal: New Village Pump Page

(Initiated 49 days ago on 29 January 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal: New Village Pump Page? Assuming a positive result, you can just ping me in the closure or in the edit summary and I can implement the result. Thanks, Alsee (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

•  Note: archived without consensus at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_166#Proposal:_New_Village_Pump_Page. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 04:30, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

   Note: I brought it back out of the archive. Alsee (talk) 10:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

  Robot is a robot. It will archive the discussion again. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 12:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Republican Party (United States)#RfC: Racial and geographical realignment after the Civil Rights Act

(Initiated 45 days ago on 1 February 2020) Could an experienced editor please assess the consensus at Talk:Republican_Party_(United_States)#RfC: Racial and geographical realignment after the Civil Rights Act? Thanks, Sdkb (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:List of the oldest living people#RfC: List world's oldest 50 people or 100?

(Initiated 44 days ago on 3 February 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:List of the oldest living people#RfC: List world's oldest 50 people or 100?? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Ian Smith#RfC: Regarding the introduction

(Initiated 44 days ago on 3 February 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Ian Smith#RfC: Regarding the introduction? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak#Inclusion criteria RFC

(Initiated 43 days ago on 3 February 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Hospitalized cases in the vaping lung illness outbreak#Inclusion criteria RFC? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

This discussion has been been resolved in practice, but a formal and exceptionally clear closing statement would still be helpful. Otherwise, when one of the editors gets unblocked, we may be back here again. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:List of the verified oldest people#RfC on sourcing

(Initiated 37 days ago on 10 February 2020) Please assess consensus at Talk:List of the verified oldest people#RfC on sourcing. — JFG ^talk 10:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Rfc: Arab news is a reliable source?

(Initiated 34 days ago on 13 February 2020) Would an uninvolved experienced editor please assess the consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Rfc: Arab news is a reliable source?? Thank you. — Newslinger talk 03:26, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses#RfC about change proposal for infobox for caucus results

(Initiated 33 days ago on 13 February 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses#RfC about change proposal for infobox for caucus results? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Note to closer: There is also an RfC on the main page, which overlaps with this RfC.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 22:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Big_City_Greens#RFC_about_writers_in_the_infobox

(Initiated 24 days ago on 22 February 2020) Lots of tensions have run high in this discussion. The editors involved (myself inclueded) have seemed to say everything they have to say. Would love to just have a definitive conclusion to this debate already. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 04:22, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:North Macedonia#Listing "Macedonia" as a common form in English

(Initiated 24 days ago on 22 February 2020) The RfC was closed by one of the participants on March 13th. However, a new discussion (not an RfC) was opened below the RfC 3 days after the RfC was opened (Talk:North Macedonia#Options for including "Macedonia"). That discussion is still ongoing, but two editors that support one side are claiming consensus, when clearly it is not the case. Please advise. Khirurg (talk) 03:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries#Two part RfC about inclusion criteria for listing candidates in infoboxes AND Rfc regarding the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries infobox template

(Initiated 21 days ago on 26 February 2020) & (Initiated 13 days ago on 4 March 2020) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at these related RfCs here & here. This may be a difficult close, as the conversation has had a tenancy to spill over into other talk page sections and overlaps with other RfCs.  Thanks--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 22:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Note to closer: A participant discussion is taking place here with the hope of resolving or partly resolving the first of these RfCs without the need for a formal close. With any luck, that discussion may resolve or narrow the issues of the first RfC. I do not believe its creator, Davemoth, intended it to resolve the issues raised in the second RfC however.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 21:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Mottainai#RFC on Yuriko Sato citation

(Initiated 15 days ago on 3 March 2020) RFC has been open for 15 days, but has seen no new participation in 11 days. An administrative close will likely be needed, and sooner seems better than later. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussions

XFD backlog
	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar	TOTAL
CfD	0	30	113	62	205
TfD	0	0	0	10	10
MfD	0	0	0	4	4
FfD	0	0	10	15	25
AfD	0	0	0	31	31

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 8#Customs and Immigration

(Initiated 40 days ago on 7 February 2020) Somewhat complicated RfD involving multiple options. feminist (talk) 04:50, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ice Road Truckers episodes

(Initiated 19 days ago on 28 February 2020) Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ice Road Truckers episodes. --Jax 0677 (talk) 08:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Other types of closing requests

Current interpretations of WP:NCORP fail to adequately evaluate Art Galleries

(Initiated 335 days ago on 18 April 2019) Would an experienced admin please summarize and officially close this discussion on how notability for organizations and companies should be applied to art galleries? Thank you! Qono (talk) 16:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

• @Qono: the consensus in this discussion is obvious and official closure is unnecessary. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:48, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle: The consensus was not clear to me and I think that this long, varied discussion would benefit from a closing summary. Qono (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Qono, I would second Marcocapelle's opinion. While in a perfect world it would be nice to have a summary of all of the various arguments raised in the discussion, ultimately the concrete proposals were all resoundingly shot down, and I don't know that it's the best use of our limited volunteer resources to ask someone to summarize the discussion at this time. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:08, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the above, that an official closure of this rather convoluted discussion is unnecessary. BD2412 T 01:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle, Rosguill, and BD2412: Fair enough. For what it's worth, I asked for this close because this discussion came up during a recent AfD. I thought it would be useful to have an official summary to help guide future discussions about galleries with questionable notability, but I accept that I am outnumbered here. Qono (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Support Official Close - I support an official closure of this long discussion. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:The Boxmasters/GA2

(Initiated 153 days ago on 16 October 2019) GAR that was originally closed as "Delist" until I realized that the article had been compromised by COI accounts. Consensus is that the article is fine to keep as a GA for now. As this discussion was started all the way back in October I'd like it closed. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2020 Formula One World Championship#Map

(Initiated 122 days ago on 17 November 2019) Please determine the consensus (if any) at Talk:2020 Formula One World Championship#Map. Thank you,
SSSB (talk) 09:34, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

 Note: An RfC has just started to discuss whether there should be a map at all. Therefore this discussion may be void after the RfC closes.
SSSB (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

 Note: That RfC has finished and we still need this discussion to be closed. Thanks,
SSSB (talk) 13:39, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#White privilege

(Initiated 108 days ago on 30 November 2019) Please review, asses and close this discussion on the NPOV noticeboard Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#White privilege.Keith Johnston (talk) 12:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

 Note: Now archived at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 80#White_privilege. comrade waddie96 ★ (talk)  11:49, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Global warming#Second discussion on titles for potential move request

(Initiated 106 days ago on 2 December 2019) Would an experienced editor assess consensus at Talk:Global warming#Second discussion on titles for potential move request. Various topics may require assessment: A) is there consensus for/against a split/fork between 'Climate Change' and 'Global warming' B) Is there consensus to start a rename proposal for either of the two options on the table B) is there consensus to wait a period of time for more developments/research before making an official move. Femke Nijsse (talk) 10:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Dubai Marina#Proposed merge of Dubai Marina Mall into Dubai Marina

(Initiated 103 days ago on 6 December 2019) Could an uninvolved editor or administrator close this discussion? Lightburst (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Naval Air Station Pensacola shooting#Add names of victims who died

(Initiated 101 days ago on 8 December 2019) Would an experienced editor assess the consensus at Talk:Naval Air Station Pensacola shooting#Add names of victims who died? Thank you! ―Mandruss ☎ 05:40, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Mobile_launcher_platform#Merger_proposal_27_January_2020

(Initiated 51 days ago on 27 January 2020) Please close the discussion. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 07:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:The Lord of the Rings#Proposed merge of The Fellowship of the Ring etc into The Lord of the Rings

(Initiated 42 days ago on 4 February 2020) Need closure for this discussion. Lightburst (talk) 04:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2019–20 Hong Kong protests#NPOV issue: "Local residents"

(Initiated 39 days ago on 8 February 2020) Could an experienced uninvolved editor please review Talk:2019–20_Hong_Kong_protests#NPOV_issue:_"Local_residents"? --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Penis (disambiguation)#Merger proposal

(Initiated 35 days ago on 11 February 2020) Any time after this merger proposal has been outstanding, would a non-involved editor assess the consensus and close the merger discussion? If no opposition, close as no objection after a period of time. Thanks.
Note: you do not need to effect or carry out the merge as it has already been listed at the Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers holding cell as awaiting consensus. --Doug Mehus  T·C 00:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)