Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for comment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gzornenplatz (talk | contribs) at 02:45, 19 August 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

Part of Wikipedia:Dispute resolution

Ultimately, the content of Wikipedia is determined by making progress toward a community consensus. However, the size of Wikipedia prevents community members from actively following every development. As a result, disputes sometimes arise that could be resolved with additional input from a larger segment of the community.

To request comment on a dispute, link to the page where the discussion should take place. Please add a brief, neutral statement of the issue involved. Don't list arguments for or against any position, or try to assign blame for the dispute. Don't sign entries, just link to the appropriate page.

Place the link in the appropriate section below. Disputes over article content should link to the talk page for the article in question. (If you simply want peer review of an article, then list it at Wikipedia:Peer review instead.) If the dispute involves allegations that a user has engaged in serious violations of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, create a subpage for the dispute. Use the subpage to elaborate on the allegations.

Whatever the nature of the dispute, the first resort should always be to discuss the problem with the other user. Try to resolve the dispute on your own first. For disputes over user conduct, before requesting community comment, please wait until at least two people have contacted the user on his or her talk page (or the talk pages involved in the dispute) and failed to resolve the problem. Don't forget to follow Wikiquette. Items listed on this page may be removed if you fail to try basic methods of dispute resolution.

Article content disputes

Please only list links to talk pages where two or more participants cannot reach consensus and are thus stalling progress on the article.

List newer entries on top - do not sign entries.
  • Talk:The Carpetbaggers Editor tagged early stub version with {{NPOV}} stating objection to sentence: The Carpetbaggers combined good writing, a strong story, and numerous more-or-less-gratuitous scenes of explicit sex." Writer of sentence removed it and greatly expanded the article. Editor objects to new article, stating "what I care about is you asserting your own opinion about the author's writing style." Not yet clear to others where current article makes such an assertion. How can this objection be met?
  • Talk:Nazism - should Nazism be described as a reactionary or revolutionary ideology?
  • Talk:Jew - POV and accuracy problems, dispute header being removed without any concensus in talk
  • United States Republican Party -- should an external link to "Republicans for Kerry," a special interest group of registered Republicans, be removed or stay?


Resolved. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 19:53, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Falcon I (and Falcon V+SpaceX) — Should articles be allowed to include pricing info and use language that at least one user considers advertising?
  • George W. Bush How should a section on the 2000 presidential election be worded?
  • Talk:Syphilis - Should a photograph of a syphilitic vagina appear on the page or be linked to with a warning?
  • Talk:Oradour-sur-Glane - should the article include mention of other massacres in order to show how this massacre was less important?
  • Talk:T. Cullen Davis (There is not yet a dispute; this is an effort to precipitate any dispute before taking action whose reversal would probably be impractical.) Should the existing articles on 3 of the victims be merged into the accused's article, and become redirects to it?
  • Talk:CHSH inequality This article is copied in other encylopaedias etc but is largely wrong. I have suggested a re-write. Should I go ahead?
  • Talk:John Kerry - Which version on Kerry's military service and anti-war activism is the most NPOV?
  • Talk:Hugh Hefner - should this article describe Hefner's various lovers as "mistresses" and the (hypothetical) children from the relationships as "illegitimate"?
  • Talk:Ladislaus - should Ladislaus or Vladislaus be used as primary spelling of the name for Polish kings?
  • Talk:Yeshu - Should the article state at the start that references to Yeshu in the Talmud are believed by most scholars to be references to Jesus, or should it first discuss Yeshu without mentioning Jesus and then discuss the identification with Jesus as a minority view?
  • Talk:Nazarene Judaism The Dispute is over whether to reveal the netzarim movement as a branch of mordern orthodox Judaism or to present it as a form of apostate Messianic Judaism.
  • Talk:Evolutionism just generally request any comments from people who are not as POV as us two.
  • Talk:Mesa, Arizona - Should articles include the Pima language or any other foreign name in the article headers?
    Example: Mesa (Pima Mohmli) is a city...
  • Talk:Childlover is an article about pedophiles. Conflicts are about whether it should argue that "non-violent" "consensual" sex with children is nothing bad, whether it should display a list of links to forums of such people, and whether it should have links to organizations that help both pedophiles searching for treatment and those who suffer from the described "love".
  • Talk:Anti-American_sentiment: Dispute over how to include alleged consequence of terrorism and view that fundamentalist islamic terrorism is not directed solely against the US, wording of introduction.

Article dispute archive

Comment about individual users

This section is for discussing specific users who have allegedly violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In order to request comment about a user, please follow the instructions to create a subpage in the appropriate section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in the Article content disputes section above.

General user conduct

Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using the following sample listing as a template (anything within {...} are notes):

  • /Example user - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts; do not sign entry.}

Before listing any user conduct dispute here, at least two people must try to resolve the same issue by talking with the person on his or her talk page or the talk pages involved in the dispute. The two users must document and certify their efforts when listing the dispute. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

  • Kenneth Alan pattern of questionable edits followed by ad hominem attacks on multiple pages
  • CVA Allegations: personal attacks, ignorance of the three revert rule, vandalism
  • Bobblewik Allegations: systematically destroying all references to "Great Britain"
  • TDC Allegations: personal attacks, ignorance of the three revert rule.
  • WHEELER2 Allegations: resisting consensus, personal attacks or negative personal comments about other users
  • /24.168.92.117 Allegations: continuous revert wars, insertion of self-promotion, removal of info on other artistic groups.
  • /VeryVerily - Allegations: ignores consensus, inserts POV, misrepresents edits in edit summaries, refuses to discuss issues.
  • /Bushit - Allegations: offensive username, vandalism of George W. Bush, adding commentary to Silvio Berlusconi.

Use of administrator privileges

This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Wikipedia:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

  • /Example admin - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts; do not sign entry.}

As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

  • /Guanaco - unprotecting without consenus

Choice of username

If you believe someone has chosen an inappropriate username under Wikipedia's username policy, you may create a subpage here to discuss whether the user should be forced to change usernames. However, before listing the user here, please first contact the user on his or her talk page and give them an opportunity to change usernames voluntarily.

User dispute archive

Convention disputes

List newer entries on top
I can't seem to find the page for this discussion; can someone help? [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 19:58, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)

Resolved convention disputes

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment&oldid=5297084"