Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: ()
Biographies[edit]
| Should this article refer to the number of Johnson's children as "seven children", or as "seven acknowledged children"? Cortador (talk) 08:34, 13 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
| Should the following text be added to MOS:GENDERID, inserted before the fourth paragraph? Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
| This article about two Victorian crossdressers currently ends with a limerick in which an animal being sodomized asks the perpetrator if he had mistaken the animal for the two article subjects. There are two questions for consideration: (1) Should this limerick end the article, as it currently does? and (2) Should the text of the limerick be included?--Jerome Frank Disciple 14:02, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
| There's disagreement between User:PamD and myself regarding the spelling of the subject's last name. There seem to be plenty of WP:RS for either version, including a PNAS biography that spells his name both ways. Suggestions or additional comments are welcome! -- bender235 (talk) 19:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the following subsection about Assange publishing a report into the 2006 Ivory Coast toxic waste dump be included in the article, beneath "early publications" in the section "WikiLeaks"? Cambial — foliar❧ 14:13, 7 June 2023 (UTC) |
In reference to the January 6 United States Capitol attack, the Donald Trump article currently says, According to the Department of Justice, more than 140 police officers were injured, and five people, including a Capitol Police officer, died.
|
| How narrowly to read 'city' of birth/death?The infoboxes of Pearl Mackie, Peter Hawkins, Danny Kirwan, and Tony Sewell, Baron Sewell of Sanderstead read "Born... Brixton, London, England". For a short while, so did the infobox for David Bowie; then "Brixton" was removed from that last infobox, on the grounds that only a "city" should be named, and Brixton is not a city (though it has a larger population than 17 of the USA's state capitals, and in-real-life form fields marked "city" are routinely filled in with names of other place-types – town, village, etc. – where appropriate). How narrowly should that word "city" be read? This has been discussed by @Bretonbanquet and Nikkimaria: and me, at User talk:Nikkimaria#David Bowie. Should template documentation be changed? Or some other clarification be sought? How say you all? – .Raven .talk 01:23, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Regarding the issue surrounding the reports, which previously did not achieve a consensus, three options are proposed:
Thank you, Simón, el Silbón (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject YouTube
| In 2023, is Deji Olatunji notable enough to be removed from WP:DEEPER and have a Wikipedia biography? Is Deji notable enough for an article in 2023? DrewieStewie (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Now that this person's recent death is confirmed, shall Maharis's 1970s arrest be reinserted? George Ho (talk) 00:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the first sentence of the article say that Assange is a "prisoner fighting extradition to the US" or something like this? Jack Upland (talk) 05:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC) |
Economy, trade, and companies[edit]
Talk:Fifth Industrial Revolution
| How is the Fourth Industrial Revolution failing? Please keep in mind that, on Wikipedia, claims like the one about the Fourth Industrial Revolution failing should be supported by reputable sources. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
History and geography[edit]
| On the beginning of June 8th, 2023, the state of the Northeastern university article corresponded with the following version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeastern_University&oldid=1158298335 That day, user GuardianH made a series of thirteen edits, significantly refactoring the article with extensive removals and new tags indicating the presence of academic boosterism and bias. Afterwards, the state of the article corresponded with the following version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeastern_University&oldid=1159227225
1) Whether these proposed edits should be applied to the article. 2) Whether the tags (which are currently active) are necessary. I have discussed them at length with the proposer on the article talk page: Talk:Northeastern University#Major edits proposed by GuardianH and have opened a DNR on the subject here: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Northeastern University Thank you, Relativebalance. 04:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:2022 Peruvian self-coup attempt
How should the introduction of the article be presented?
|
Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics
| What should be the introductory sentence of the capital cities of Kashmir region related first-level administrative subdivisions? UnpetitproleX (talk) 10:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
In reference to the January 6 United States Capitol attack, the Donald Trump article currently says, According to the Department of Justice, more than 140 police officers were injured, and five people, including a Capitol Police officer, died.
|
| Should the lede state the Sultanate is A. Harla B. Harari C. Somali D. Afar or E. none of the above? Magherbin (talk) 11:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Should we say the battle is over, and that Russia has won? Slatersteven (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:Durham special counsel investigation
Should the current lead sentence...
be amended to include this bold content...
This question is rooted in what Charlie Savage exclusively reported in The New York Times:
This matter has been previously discussed in this Talk thread. soibangla (talk) 15:47, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Regarding the issue surrounding the reports, which previously did not achieve a consensus, three options are proposed:
Thank you, Simón, el Silbón (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the maps of Suriname include the disputed areas?--Jerome Frank Disciple 12:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should we add an infobox after this discussion above, and per previous edit. 112.204.206.165 (talk) 05:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should this article include text about the "heckling of President Obama"[2] Andre🚐 15:56, 18 May 2023 (UTC) |
Should the following paragraph be included in the article?
Wes sideman(talk) 13:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:2001 insurgency in Macedonia
| Should we say in wikivoice that about 150 mujahideen participated in the conflict on the side of NLA or use the wording "There have been claims that..."? Alaexis¿question? 18:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC) |
Language and linguistics[edit]
There's a longstanding dispute between me and User:Nihil novi at Talk:Poetry#"Poetry" lead illustration on whether to include picture in the lead, which hasn't been resolved in 7 months. So, I will let the community decide:
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
Maths, science, and technology[edit]
| On the beginning of June 8th, 2023, the state of the Northeastern university article corresponded with the following version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeastern_University&oldid=1158298335 That day, user GuardianH made a series of thirteen edits, significantly refactoring the article with extensive removals and new tags indicating the presence of academic boosterism and bias. Afterwards, the state of the article corresponded with the following version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northeastern_University&oldid=1159227225
1) Whether these proposed edits should be applied to the article. 2) Whether the tags (which are currently active) are necessary. I have discussed them at length with the proposer on the article talk page: Talk:Northeastern University#Major edits proposed by GuardianH and have opened a DNR on the subject here: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Northeastern University Thank you, Relativebalance. 04:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Is FossForce.com a reliable source for Free and open-source software (FOSS) articles?
With these edits at Libreboot, PhotographyEdits removed cited info, claiming FossForce.com (and others) is not a WP:RS: one, two, and 2021 article purge and proposal to merge Prevous RSN discussions: None found. Talk discussions : one found in 2019; thin consensus, including me, was not reliable. Newslinger called it a "group blogs with no reputations". An author "Christine Hall" is cited on a few editor talk pages, but I don't think it is the same Christine Hall. About a dozen articles cite FossForce.com. Three cites that have been removed from Libreboot over time include:
|
Talk:Fifth Industrial Revolution
| How is the Fourth Industrial Revolution failing? Please keep in mind that, on Wikipedia, claims like the one about the Fourth Industrial Revolution failing should be supported by reputable sources. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 10:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
Art, architecture, literature, and media[edit]
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/India-related articles
| Should we add the following exception to MOS:INDICSCRIPT (changes highlighted in bold)?
Note that the status quo text already provides for exceptions for |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject YouTube
| In 2023, is Deji Olatunji notable enough to be removed from WP:DEEPER and have a Wikipedia biography? Is Deji notable enough for an article in 2023? DrewieStewie (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC) |
There's a longstanding dispute between me and User:Nihil novi at Talk:Poetry#"Poetry" lead illustration on whether to include picture in the lead, which hasn't been resolved in 7 months. So, I will let the community decide:
|
| At the time of this RfC, the article includes a sentence covering how PragerU profited off a video of theirs that contained anti-LGBT content.
There exists three sources for this content that have been discussed thus far, Media Matters, Washington Blade, Columbia Journalism Review. After intense debate above, it was work-shopped into three proposals: Option A:Option B:
Option C: Leave it out entirely. 17:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should Wanda Maximoff be referred to as Wanda or Mazimoff? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 14:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Is the content below suitable for being the lead of the Wikipedia article?
Wikipedia[note 1] is a multilingual crowdsourced online encyclopedia. The content on Wikipedia is available without charge and is distributed under free content licenses (CC BY 3.0 and GDFL for texts), allowing for widespread use and furthering its goal of democratizing knowledge. At its core, Wikipedia aims to cover any topic that is above a notability threshold, based on external reliable sources, and its content must not contain original research by its editors. Wikipedia is available in 333 languages and features a total of 61 million articles across all languages. Among them, the most popular language edition is the English Wikipedia with 6,669,589 articles. Wikipedia as a whole is the most widely read reference work in history.[3][4] Almost all articles on Wikipedia are available for editing by registered editors and visitors. These articles are collectively written via a wiki system; as such articles on Wikipedia generally provide more up-to-date information and have a wider range in reliability than paper encyclopedias. Though the Wikipedia community is popularly known by its anarchical structure, the community has adopted elements of democratic and bureaucratic systems, as demonstrated by the establishment of user rights, policies, guidelines, and the final avenue of dispute resolution – the Arbitration Committee. Wikipedia was launched by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger on January 15, 2001, as a publicly editable encyclopedia initially associated with Nupedia. Both of these projects were owned by the Bomis company. As Wikipedia became increasingly more popular than Nupedia, its website experienced a rapid growth in content, editors, and language availability. In 2003, Wikipedia was transitioned from a commercial to a non-profit encyclopedia and is now hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, based in the United States. Around late 2000s, as Wikipedia became one of the most visited websites in the world, the number of active editors reached its peak and has since remained stable.[5] Throughout its existence, Wikipedia consistently faced concerns about its reliability, systemic bias and its editor base, though over time the website began to be viewed more positively, largely due to the overall improvement in the quality of its articles. – CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2023 (UTC) |
Politics, government, and law[edit]
Talk:2022 Peruvian self-coup attempt
How should the introduction of the article be presented?
|
Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics
| What should be the introductory sentence of the capital cities of Kashmir region related first-level administrative subdivisions? UnpetitproleX (talk) 10:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject International relations
| Should we remove or keep country comparison charts/tables on bilateral relations articles?
An example being Russia–United States relations, which is the first section of the article after the lead. I am rather neutral on this issue, but I can see arguments for keeping and removing. While there is information that compares and contrasts information between both nations, it seems like it belongs more in like a world fact book and much of the information on there doesn't really seem to fit the overall topic of bilateral relations. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Which ideologies should be included in the infobox of the League (and in what order)?
Right-wing populism, Populism, Federalism, Regionalism, Conservatism, Nationalism, Sovereigntism, Euroscepticism, Autonomism. Please do not respond to other editors in the Survey. You may respond to other editors in the Discussion section. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 09:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the three past elections contested by this current U.S. presidential candidate be presented in the form of Election Results tables using Template:Election box (e.g. [3]), or, should they be removed and replaced with this sentence: "Castro contested several elections, but didn't succeed." Chetsford (talk) 14:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Does the reference in the infobox for social liberalism comply with Wikipedia guidelines and specifically WP:SYNTH? Helper201 (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC) |
What is the reliability of La Patilla?
|
In reference to the January 6 United States Capitol attack, the Donald Trump article currently says, According to the Department of Justice, more than 140 police officers were injured, and five people, including a Capitol Police officer, died.
|
| Should we say the battle is over, and that Russia has won? Slatersteven (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:Durham special counsel investigation
Should the current lead sentence...
be amended to include this bold content...
This question is rooted in what Charlie Savage exclusively reported in The New York Times:
This matter has been previously discussed in this Talk thread. soibangla (talk) 15:47, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Regarding the issue surrounding the reports, which previously did not achieve a consensus, three options are proposed:
Thank you, Simón, el Silbón (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC) |
| At the time of this RfC, the article includes a sentence covering how PragerU profited off a video of theirs that contained anti-LGBT content.
There exists three sources for this content that have been discussed thus far, Media Matters, Washington Blade, Columbia Journalism Review. After intense debate above, it was work-shopped into three proposals: Option A:Option B:
Option C: Leave it out entirely. 17:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums
| How should party colours (as stored in (e.g.) Module:Political party/A and used in infoboxes, results tables etc) be determined? By the dominant colour of the logo or via colours used for the party in the media. Number 57 10:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the maps of Suriname include the disputed areas?--Jerome Frank Disciple 12:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should the first sentence of the article say that Assange is a "prisoner fighting extradition to the US" or something like this? Jack Upland (talk) 05:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Which of the two article versions do you conider more NPOV from a global (non-US-centric) perspective? Special:Diff/1155967719 or Special:Diff/1132451253?
[Edit: these are additional questions not compulsory to the RFC] Could the two be combined into something that is more NPOV than either? Where do you see the NPOV issues in the two versions? ShabbyHoose (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Should this article include text about the "heckling of President Obama"[5] Andre🚐 15:56, 18 May 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:List of guests at the coronation of Charles III and Camilla
| How should MOS:JOBTITLE be applied to this page? Should peers be listed under their name and title or title alone? A.D.Hope (talk) 13:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC) |
Religion and philosophy[edit]
Society, sports, and culture[edit]
| Which ideologies should be included in the infobox of the League (and in what order)?
Right-wing populism, Populism, Federalism, Regionalism, Conservatism, Nationalism, Sovereigntism, Euroscepticism, Autonomism. Please do not respond to other editors in the Survey. You may respond to other editors in the Discussion section. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 09:12, 11 June 2023 (UTC) |
What is the reliability of La Patilla?
|
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports/Handling sports transactions
| Frequently, contracts between sports teams and players/coaches are leaked to media outlets before they are officially announced.
This essay is often invoked to keep any mention of these reported details out of articles until the signing is officially announced [6], and articles are protected to prevent new editors from adding the information. For examples: [7] [8] This RfC is to determine if the following line should be altered:
I would propose revising it to read like this:
This change would codify and encourage Wikipedians old and new to cover what reliable sources will often widely report, but in a non-crystally way that communicates the uncertainty. An example of how that could look is in Monty Williams' article. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject YouTube
| In 2023, is Deji Olatunji notable enough to be removed from WP:DEEPER and have a Wikipedia biography? Is Deji notable enough for an article in 2023? DrewieStewie (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC) |
| At the time of this RfC, the article includes a sentence covering how PragerU profited off a video of theirs that contained anti-LGBT content.
There exists three sources for this content that have been discussed thus far, Media Matters, Washington Blade, Columbia Journalism Review. After intense debate above, it was work-shopped into three proposals: Option A:Option B:
Option C: Leave it out entirely. 17:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
| This article from the Chicago Tribune describes and reviews an Opera performance titled "The Walkers" that was written about this organisation, a performance also discussed by its creator in this source from the Washington Post.
Should this Opera receive mention in this article about the organisation on which the Opera was based? 08:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
Talk:List of guests at the coronation of Charles III and Camilla
| How should MOS:JOBTITLE be applied to this page? Should peers be listed under their name and title or title alone? A.D.Hope (talk) 13:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia style and naming[edit]
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity
| So, on the page Neuro-sama I removed the gendered she/her pronouns and replaced them with it/its on the basis that Neuro-sama is an AI, and thus an inanimate object. User:Meteoric91 added the pronouns back because, quote, "Neuro-sama was specifically designed to have gender-identifying properties, as stated by the creator Vedal himself and evidenced by Neuro-sama's art style, voice, and live mannerisms." I wanted to bring this to this page so that we could perhaps come to a decision as a community how it should be handled, and also perhaps update the MoS page itself to reflect whatever we decide. While this discussion is primarily related to the page Neuro-sama, it would also effect other AIs with "gender-identifying properties" such as Tay (chatbot) and Zo (bot), and possibly more that I am unaware of. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
| Should MOS:SECTIONCAPS recommend that, in a heading, the first letter after a colon is capitalized?
That is, should this example be reversed?
Similar past discussions: May 2023, October 2022, March 2022. Wracking talk! 05:43, 9 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Regarding the display of the {{circa}} template (designed to express an approximate date as in "c. 1325"): should the current default "abbreviation tooltip" style ("c.") be replaced by the currently optional Wiktionary link instead ("c.") as the new default, so that a date would rather display as "c. 1325" by default? पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 06:00, 4 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Romanization of Ukrainian
| I propose designating Wikipedia:Romanization of Ukrainian as a WP:guideline and supplement to the WP:Manual of Style, with the shortcut link MOS:UKR. —Michael Z. 03:05, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography
| Should the "Positions, offices, and occupational titles" section be changed to reflect actual practice, namely capitalising titles adjacent to names? ~~~~ A.D.Hope (talk) 19:14, 22 May 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia policies and guidelines[edit]
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
| Should the following text be added to MOS:GENDERID, inserted before the fourth paragraph? Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:01, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Gender identity
| So, on the page Neuro-sama I removed the gendered she/her pronouns and replaced them with it/its on the basis that Neuro-sama is an AI, and thus an inanimate object. User:Meteoric91 added the pronouns back because, quote, "Neuro-sama was specifically designed to have gender-identifying properties, as stated by the creator Vedal himself and evidenced by Neuro-sama's art style, voice, and live mannerisms." I wanted to bring this to this page so that we could perhaps come to a decision as a community how it should be handled, and also perhaps update the MoS page itself to reflect whatever we decide. While this discussion is primarily related to the page Neuro-sama, it would also effect other AIs with "gender-identifying properties" such as Tay (chatbot) and Zo (bot), and possibly more that I am unaware of. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
| Should MOS:SECTIONCAPS recommend that, in a heading, the first letter after a colon is capitalized?
That is, should this example be reversed?
Similar past discussions: May 2023, October 2022, March 2022. Wracking talk! 05:43, 9 June 2023 (UTC) |
| Does the reference in the infobox for social liberalism comply with Wikipedia guidelines and specifically WP:SYNTH? Helper201 (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Romanization of Ukrainian
| I propose designating Wikipedia:Romanization of Ukrainian as a WP:guideline and supplement to the WP:Manual of Style, with the shortcut link MOS:UKR. —Michael Z. 03:05, 2 June 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not
Should WP:NOTDIRECTORY be changed to the following?:
Changes highlighted in bold and italica. 03:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Which of the two article versions do you conider more NPOV from a global (non-US-centric) perspective? Special:Diff/1155967719 or Special:Diff/1132451253?
[Edit: these are additional questions not compulsory to the RFC] Could the two be combined into something that is more NPOV than either? Where do you see the NPOV issues in the two versions? ShabbyHoose (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
WikiProjects and collaborations[edit]
Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations
I propose that criterion 2(b) of the good article criteria should be changed from
to
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia technical issues and templates[edit]
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
| This is a continuation of the previous RfC three years ago that passed to deprecate WebCite. The proposal today is to delete all remaining WebCite links. -- GreenC 17:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC) |
Wikipedia proposals[edit]
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
| A May 2023 RSN discussion about Healthline raises the question about whether Healthline should be deprecated as generally unreliable or blacklisted as fabrication and spam on many of its health-related article pages.
Healthline is frequently used by novice editors to source medical, nutrition, and lifestyle content. Its name implies health expertise, and its author(s) or editors are identified as having "medically reviewed" articles, despite most having no medical expertise (BS or MS degrees in non-medical fields). Healthline commonly cites individual primary studies to extrapolate to an anti-disease effect or "health benefit", a term used in many of its articles on foods, phytochemicals, and supplements. Previous RSN discussion: Feb 2022 goji berries Examples of spam health misinformation are Healthline articles on coffee antioxidants ("Many of coffee’s positive health effects may be due to its impressive content of powerful antioxidants"), anti-disease effects of black tea, "proven health benefits" of ashwagandha, and "proven health benefits" of blueberries, among dozens of others. Search "antioxidant" on Healthline and browse any retrieved article for the extent of misinformation (where only vitamins A-C-E apply as antioxidants for the human diet). Diffs on goji - this talk discussion on goji nutrition and health benefits; continued further here. Numerous others under my history, here. It may be justified to blacklist Healthline as a perpetual source of fabrication and spam. Similar to reputations in scientific publishing generally, blatant misinformation destroys confidence permanently in the rest of the source. Seeing an edit containing a Healthline source is WP:REDFLAG for revising or reverting the edit. There are no circumstances where a Healthline source could not be MEDRS-sourced. Healthline should be blacklisted. Zefr (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC) |
| Is the content below suitable for being the lead of the Wikipedia article?
Wikipedia[note 2] is a multilingual crowdsourced online encyclopedia. The content on Wikipedia is available without charge and is distributed under free content licenses (CC BY 3.0 and GDFL for texts), allowing for widespread use and furthering its goal of democratizing knowledge. At its core, Wikipedia aims to cover any topic that is above a notability threshold, based on external reliable sources, and its content must not contain original research by its editors. Wikipedia is available in 333 languages and features a total of 61 million articles across all languages. Among them, the most popular language edition is the English Wikipedia with 6,669,589 articles. Wikipedia as a whole is the most widely read reference work in history.[3][4] Almost all articles on Wikipedia are available for editing by registered editors and visitors. These articles are collectively written via a wiki system; as such articles on Wikipedia generally provide more up-to-date information and have a wider range in reliability than paper encyclopedias. Though the Wikipedia community is popularly known by its anarchical structure, the community has adopted elements of democratic and bureaucratic systems, as demonstrated by the establishment of user rights, policies, guidelines, and the final avenue of dispute resolution – the Arbitration Committee. Wikipedia was launched by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger on January 15, 2001, as a publicly editable encyclopedia initially associated with Nupedia. Both of these projects were owned by the Bomis company. As Wikipedia became increasingly more popular than Nupedia, its website experienced a rapid growth in content, editors, and language availability. In 2003, Wikipedia was transitioned from a commercial to a non-profit encyclopedia and is now hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, based in the United States. Around late 2000s, as Wikipedia became one of the most visited websites in the world, the number of active editors reached its peak and has since remained stable.[6] Throughout its existence, Wikipedia consistently faced concerns about its reliability, systemic bias and its editor base, though over time the website began to be viewed more positively, largely due to the overall improvement in the quality of its articles. – CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2023 (UTC) |
Unsorted[edit]
User names[edit]
|
Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • |
This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of 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:
- Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
- For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.
Do NOT post here if:
- the user in question has made no recent edits.
- you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).
Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:
- has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
- has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
- is not already blocked.
If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates 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 (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.
Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.
Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList
Reports[edit]
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.
- ^ Pronounced /ˌwɪkɪˈpiːdiə/ (
listen) wik-ih-PEE-dee-ə or /ˌwɪki-/ (listen) wik-ee-
- ^ Pronounced /ˌwɪkɪˈpiːdiə/ (listen) wik-ih-PEE-dee-ə or /ˌwɪki-/ (listen) wik-ee-
- ^ Hague, Euan; Beirich, Heidi; Sebesta, Edward H. (15 September 2009). Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction. University of Texas Press. p. 29. ISBN 978-0-292-77921-1. Retrieved 4 May 2023.
- ^ Omi, Michael; Winant, Howard (20 June 2014). Racial Formation in the United States. Routledge. p. 260. ISBN 978-1-135-12751-0. Retrieved 4 May 2023.
- ^ a b Cohen, Noam (February 9, 2014). "Wikipedia vs. the Small Screen". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2022-11-09. Retrieved 2023-01-22.
- ^ a b "Wikistats – Statistics For Wikimedia Projects". Wikimedia Foundation. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
- ^ Mandiberg, Michael (February 23, 2020). "Mapping Wikipedia". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on November 15, 2021. Retrieved November 26, 2021.
- ^ Mandiberg, Michael (February 23, 2020). "Mapping Wikipedia". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on November 15, 2021. Retrieved November 26, 2021.