Wikipedia:Closure requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Closure requests 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 appears 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.

1ball.svg

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 7 January 2023); if consensus becomes clear before that and discussion has slowed, then it may be closed earlier. 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 a discussion has ended to get a formal closure from an uninvolved editor. When the consensus is reasonably clear, participants may be best served by not requesting closure and then waiting weeks for a formal closure.

2ball.svg

If the consensus of a given discussion appears unclear, then you may post a brief and neutrally-worded request for closure here; be sure to include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. Do not use this board to continue the discussion in question. A helper script is available to make listing discussions easier.

If you disagree with a particular closure, please discuss matters on the closer's talk page, 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.

3 billiard ball.svg

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. Closers who want to discuss their evaluation of consensus while preparing for a close may use WP:Discussions for discussion.

A request for comment from February of 2013 discussed the process for appealing a closure and whether or not an administrator could summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus of that discussion 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#Non-admin closure for details.

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

Requests for closure[edit]

Administrative discussions[edit]

Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

Requests for comment[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#RfC about exceptions to WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE and commanders/leaders in Template:Infobox military conflict[edit]

(Initiated 62 days ago on 5 December 2022) Stale discussion, and overdue changes to an important article are being held up at Talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine#Commanders until this is resolved. —Michael Z. 15:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I started to close this as "no consensus", but it really comes down to each side doing another "let's try to interpret the infobox policy our way to support our position" type of discussion. And there are so few commenters, I don't think it even nears to being able to be called a "local consensus". So probably better to just let this one stay in the archives unclosed. - jc37 06:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk:Donald Trump#RfC on links in the lead[edit]

(Initiated 31 days ago on 6 January 2023) RfC tag has expired. Iamreallygoodatcheckers[email protected] 01:46, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Iamreallygoodatcheckers  Done. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk:2022#RFC on the inclusion of Barbara Walters in Deaths (Result:)[edit]

(Initiated 21 days ago on 15 January 2023) A consensus seems to have developed; most recent "votes" were cast on Feb. 3rd, and discussion seems to have died down. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 00:51, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

Deletion discussions[edit]

XFD backlog
V Nov Dec Jan Feb Total
CfD 0 1 11 0 12
TfD 0 0 3 0 3
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 0 3 0 3
RfD 0 0 44 0 44
AfD 0 0 21 0 21

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_27#Category:Wikipedians_who_served_prison_term[edit]

(Initiated 9 days ago on 27 January 2023) One of several old CfD's on this date that has reached consensus. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 04:13, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]

Other types of closing requests[edit]

Talk:History of Israel#Proposed split of modern history[edit]

(Initiated 135 days ago on 23 September 2022) - this discussion has been open for a while now, and there has not been any recent fresh input or discussion. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk:The Wire (India)/Archive 1#Merger proposal[edit]

(Initiated 98 days ago on 30 October 2022). New comments are not being added at a substantial rate. TryKid[dubiousdiscuss] 23:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk:Endemic COVID-19#Proposed merge[edit]

(Initiated 65 days ago on 2 December 2022) Last !vote was 27 days ago, and later discussion among involved editors indicates a lack of ability to develop consensus without formal closure from an uninvolved party. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard/Archive 102#Sexual violence in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine: section on Ukrainian forces[edit]

(Initiated 46 days ago on 21 December 2022) Please review this discussion. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 17:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 4 heading[edit]