Wikipedia:Closure requests

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.

Archives

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

This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by .

Shortcuts

Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to assess, summarize, and formally close a Wikipedia discussion. Do so when consensus appears unclear, it is a contentious issue, or where there are wiki-wide implications (e.g. any change to our policies or guidelines).

Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.

Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases, it is appropriate to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.

Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.

On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.

There is no fixed length for a formal request for comment (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.

When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.

Be sure to include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing discussions easier.

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

Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if the area is contentious. You should be familiar with all policies and guidelines that could apply to the given discussion (consult your draft closure at the discussions for discussion page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.

Non-admins can close most discussions. Admins may not overturn your non-admin closures just because you are not an admin, and this should not normally be in itself a problem at closure reviews. Still, there are caveats. You may not close discussions as an unregistered user, or where implementing the closure would call to use tools or edit permissions you do not have access to. Articles for deletion and move discussion processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.

Technical instructions for closers

Please append {{Doing}} to the discussion's entry you are closing so that no one duplicates your effort. When finished, replace it with {{Close}} or {{Done}} and an optional note, and consider sending a {{Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. Where a formal closure is not needed, reply 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}}.

If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.

Other areas tracking old discussions[edit]

Administrative discussions[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Thomas_B_forum-shopping,_circumventing_page_ban,_refusing_to_drop_the_stick[edit]

(Initiated 19 days ago on 27 March 2024) – The discussion converged to a consensus. The reported user requested a closure on my talk page. NicolausPrime (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion appears to have concluded; there are no replies in the past six days, and there appears to be a consensus. I second the request for closure. EducatedRedneck (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thirding the request for closure. As someone who has been reported at various conduct noticeboards, a report hanging around for 20 days is nightmarish. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading[edit]

Requests for comment[edit]

Talk:Battle_of_Kosovo#RfC Should Muzaka and Jonima be included in the infobox?[edit]

(Initiated 160 days ago on 7 November 2023) I mistakenly assumed an admin would automatically closure the RfC, so that's why the discussion has turned old. However, it stills needs a final result. Latest comment: 87 days ago and 16 editors involved in the discussion. --Azor (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Awdal#RFC - Habr Awal/Isaaq clan[edit]

(Initiated 113 days ago on 24 December 2023) ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean)#RFC[edit]

(Initiated 61 days ago on 14 February 2024) First time I've ever requested a close, please lmk if done wrong. Think conversation has slowed and it's been a while since it started. toobigtokale (talk) 02:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I closes[edit]

(Initiated 61 days ago on 15 February 2024) As the first round of Phase I reaches 30 days in action, I'll be listing discussions here as they reach time. Once the final discussion has been closed, this heading can be archived. Proposals ripe for closing:

Proposal 2: Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA, initiated at 02:19 (UTC) on 15 February 2024
Proposal 3b: Make the first two days discussion-only (trial), initiated at 03:00 (UTC) on 20 February 2024
Proposal 4: Prohibit threaded discussion (trial), initiated at 11:33 (UTC) on 18 February 2024
Proposal 12c: Lower the high end of the bureaucrats' discretionary zone from 75% to 70%, initiated on 1 March 2024
Proposal 13: Admin elections, initiated at 05:53 (UTC) on 23 February 2024
Proposal 14: Suffrage requirements, initiated on 23 February 2024
Proposal 17: Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions, initiated on 17:56 (UTC) on 27 February 2024
Proposal 24: Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process, initiated on 1 March 2024

Thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've closed 3b and 7. I believe 13 and 14 are also overdue now too. – Joe (talk) 13:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated, thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly every proposal can now be closed. Soni (talk) 22:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and I think now any and all can be closed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4 was closed User:Wehwalt. Nagol0929 (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: Interstate 90#RFC: Infobox junctions[edit]

(Initiated 46 days ago on 29 February 2024) Discussion is about to expire and will need closure. RoadFan294857 (talk) 15:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: enacting X3[edit]

(Initiated 40 days ago on 7 March 2024) SilverLocust 💬 22:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Paul_Atreides#RfC_on_the_infobox_image[edit]

(Initiated 37 days ago on 9 March 2024) Trying this one again. Latest comment: 3 days ago, 98 comments, 21 people in discussion. Admins are involved, vigorous WP:NFCC discussion. Closure would be good. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting this; I was about to do so myself. The consensus seems pretty clear, but given this is a copyright issue I think a formal close is beneficial. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:SpaceX Starship#RfC on IFT-3[edit]

(Initiated 26 days ago on 21 March 2024) This is a contentious issue with accusations of tendentious editing, so the RfC would benefit from a formal closure. Redraiderengineer (talk) 14:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:StoneToss#RfC:_Exclusion_of_StoneToss's_website_from_the_article[edit]

(Initiated 22 days ago on 25 March 2024) Has been running for 10 days but discussion has slowed down considerably recently. Contentious topic, so requesting formal closure here. — Czello ^(music) 12:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Is the OCB RS?[edit]

(Initiated 21 days ago on 26 March 2024) This WP:RSN RfC was initiated on March 26, with the last !vote occurring on March 28. Ten editors participated in the discussion and, without prejudicing the close one way or the other, I believe a closer may discover a clear consensus emerged. It was bot-archived without closure on April 4 due to lack of recent activity. Chetsford (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:StoneToss#RfC: Should the revelation of StoneToss's identity be referred to as doxxing?[edit]

(Initiated 20 days ago on 27 March 2024) Discussion has slowed. 6 days since last vote. TarnishedPath^talk 05:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading[edit]

Deletion discussions[edit]

XFD backlog
V	Feb	Mar	Apr	Total
CfD	0	5	4	9
TfD	0	8	3	11
MfD	1	0	2	3
FfD	0	0	1	1
RfD	0	0	13	13
AfD	0	0	0	0

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Brion Vibber Interviews[edit]

(Initiated 53 days ago on 22 February 2024) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 March 17#Template:Officially used writing systems in India[edit]

(Initiated 30 days ago on 17 March 2024) Frietjes (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth (21st nomination)[edit]

(Initiated 15 days ago on 1 April 2024) Would also appreciate the closing admin determining whether there is a consensus to title blacklist, in addition to whether there is a consensus to delete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and i'll leave it to you to implement the title blacklist, Pppery :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading[edit]

Other types of closing requests[edit]

Talk:Eat_Bulaga!#Merger_of_Eat_Bulaga!_and_E.A.T.[edit]

(Initiated 101 days ago on 6 January 2024) The discussion wasn't inactive for 7 days. It seems there's no clear consensus on merging those two articles into one. 107.185.128.255 (talk) 18:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over a month. So, it could be a good time to close that discussion. 107.185.128.255 (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Charles_XI_of_Sweden#Requested_move_13_January_2024[edit]

(Initiated 94 days ago on 13 January 2024) – Requested move open for 2 months, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Has now been open for three months. 2601:249:9301:D570:9012:4870:54CD:5F95 (talk) 04:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Frederik_IX_of_Denmark#Requested_move_15_January_2024[edit]

(Initiated 92 days ago on 15 January 2024) – Requested move open for 2 months, needs closure.98.228.137.44 (talk) 18:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now has been open for three months. 170.76.231.175 (talk) 15:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Maersk Hangzhou#Second merge proposal[edit]

(Initiated 83 days ago on 24 January 2024) Merge discussion involving CTOPS that has been open for 2 weeks now. Needs closure. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WeatherWriter: I would give it a few days as the discussion is now active with new comments. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As nominator, I support a non consensus closure of this discussion so we can create an RFC to discuss how WP:ONEEVENT applies in this situation. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading[edit]

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia'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 and 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:Wikipedia noticeboards