Contents 1 Biographies 2 Economy, trade, and companies 3 History and geography 4 Language and linguistics 5 Maths, science, and technology 6 Art, architecture, literature, and media 7 Politics, government, and law 8 Religion and philosophy 9 Society, sports, and culture 10 Wikipedia style and naming 11 Wikipedia policies and guidelines 12 WikiProjects and collaborations 13 Wikipedia technical issues and templates 14 Wikipedia proposals 15 Unsorted 16 User names 16.1 Reports Biographies[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies Talk:Greek royal family The title of the article does not seem to conform to the rule about articles' names. To remind ourselves of the pertinent passage in the rule, here it is: "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the [naming] criteria. ... Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." The name most commonly used by the overwhelming majority of reliable sources is "the former royal family of Greece" (or equivalent expressions, such as "former royal household"). Typical such citations can be found in the BBC (e.g. here); Washington Post (here); the National Herald (here); CBC News (here); the Daily Telegraph, UK (here); the Daily Telegraph, Australia (here); The Guardian (here); all the English-language online editions of newspapers, magazines, and other media in Greece (e.g. here, here, or here). Plus, all English Wikipedia articles concerning members of the family (e.g. about Constantine II of Greece or Tatoi Palace) use the term "former". The historical, official appellation is used mostly by fringe royalist organizations, media, and political parties (e.g. The Greek Royal Family; Royal Forums; Royal Correspondent; etc) or gossip magazines, such as Hello (see here) or Life & Style (e.g. here). It is suggested that the title of this article changes accordingly. Change it to Former Greek Royal Family? or Keep it unchanged? Your views are invited. -The Gnome (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Shin Dong-hyuk In 2015, Shin Dong-hyuk, a North Korean defector, admitted to fabricating parts of his story as told in the biography Escape from Camp 14 and reflected in this article. The biographer, Blaine Harden, hasn't explained precisely what Shin has retracted, nor has he published a revised account. The article therefore has a long "Biography" section that Shin has admitted is partly untrue. However, we don't know which parts. How should we handle this?--Jack Upland (talk) 09:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Noah Oppenheim Should the following be added to the article in place of the current statement on the topic: Oppenheim was one of the NBC executives involved in the decision to fire Matt Lauer after sexual harassment claims were made against the Today Show host. [1] References ^ Koblin, John (1 December 2017). "After Firing Matt Lauer, NBC Executives Move to Control the Damage". The New York Times.  See discussion so far at: Talk:Noah_Oppenheim#Lauer_content I will not vote as I am a paid consultant to NBC News. But essentially, I think the fuller discussion of this should take place on the NBC News page - discussion ongoing at Talk:NBC_News#Expanded_info_on_Matt_Lauer. Plus, of course, it's also on Matt Lauer. In order to explore this topic fairly, you need a bunch of context. You also have both critical and supportive statements about NBC News's response. But if you go down this route of explaining the situation fairly, it becomes very COATRACK for a blp. BC1278 (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Margot Robbie Does reporting on Robbie's endorsements and work in advertising violate the Terms of Use or WP:NOTADVERTISING? And is it, therefore, prohibited from being mentioned? This is the material in question. 16:04, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Joseph Stalin Option A and Option B Main question: For the lede image, used in the infobox, should this article use Option A or Option B? A previous Talk Page discussion reached no consensus, so hopefully a wider RfC will. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:List of oldest living people See above regarding Maria Emilia Quesada. This person has been removed on the basis that 1 or more editors don't believe the claim is genuine. Whether or not it is genuine is not up to editors to decide. The criteria for inclusion in this article is that the person is a) old enough to make the list b) has been reported alive within the last year yb a reliable source and c) is not older than the oldest living person as announced by Guinness. The reasons for these criteria are given here. Editors opinions that anyone should be excluded while meeting this criteria is pure WP:POV and needs to be actively discouraged. Seeking input from impartial and experienced editors as to whether WP:IDONTLIKEIT is sufficient to over-ride or change consensus. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Bahar Mustafa race row Ladies and gentlemen I come to you with questions three: Should the article include details on the police investigation against Bahar Mustafa? Should the article include details on the allegations of bullying against Bahar Mustafa and her subsequent resignation? Should the article include details of the email received by Pamella Gellar? See the above talk page sections for further context. Relisted by Cunard (talk) at 01:47, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Coco Austin Should the "Personal life" specify that the parents announced the birth "without specifying the exact date" or omit the claim? - 22:15, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca Can the article include the name and birth date of the subject's child, which the subject has made public? --17:14, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Dorothy Tarrant Should the subject be described as a "professor emerita"? Andrew D. (talk) 00:01, 3 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:2018 Should Naomi Parker Fraley be removed from 2018's list of deaths? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Princess Eugenie of York There has been some sort of edit war going on this page (1, 2, 3) over the inclusion or exclusion of a claim by Martin Farr, a senior history lecturer at Newcastle University, who had said that Princess Eugenie was initially rejected, and that the only reason she got approved was due to her royal status. To User:Richard naar it sounds like a rumor, but rumors and conspiracies may become notable if they make their way to the national newspapers. We even have articles about different sorts of conspiracies here on Wikipedia. I ask the users and readers to take a look at this article by The Daily Telegraph and decide whether we should include these information in the article or not. Keivan.fTalk 16:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Noah Oppenheim Should the following be added to this article? See discussion above if you like. Oppenheim worked with Ronan Farrow on the conception of the story about the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse allegations and the network supported his investigation for several months, but in the summer of 2017 the network withdrew support as the end of Farrow's contract approached, and Farrow took the story to the The New Yorker which published it in October after the New York Times broke the story. NBC News's failure to publish the story it had developed became a point of criticism and subject of reporting in itself, and Oppenheim defended the news division in response.[1][2][3][4][5][6] References ^ Koblin, John (11 October 2017). "How Did NBC Miss Out on a Harvey Weinstein Exposé?". The New York Times.  ^ Guthrie, Marisa (October 11, 2017). "Why Ronan Farrow's Harvey Weinstein Bombshell Did Not Run on NBC". The Hollywood Reporter.  ^ Guthrie, Marisa (10 January 2018). "Ronan Farrow, the Hollywood Prince Who Torched the Castle". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 11 January 2018.  ^ Folkenflik, David; Martin, Rachel (October 12, 2017). "Decision Not To Publish Weinstein Story Roils NBC". NPR Morning Edition.  ^ Stelter, Brian (October 11, 2017). "How NBC gave up Ronan Farrow's explosive Harvey Weinstein scoop". CNN.  ^ Warren, James (October 13, 2017). "How Badly Did NBC Blow the Weinstein Story?". Vanity Fair. To exhibit a firm grasp of the obvious: One of the finest publications on the planet took a look at whatever Oppenheim took a pass on and felt it was worth the effort. New Yorker chief David Remnick, a polymath with formidable news instincts and an even superior track record, decided there was an irresistible tale to be told. No doubt, there was the not inconsiderable challenge of turning a television piece into a print piece for a magazine whose strength is exactly the nuance and depth that can be incompatible with the structures of TV. But the magazine pulled it off.  -- Jytdog (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Per previous discussions over at Wikipedia talk:Days of the year, it seems that there is some level of support for some kind of inclusion criteria for what articles to include on the Births and Deaths sections. There are some concerns that these sections are too-Western centric (i.e. people from North America or Europe are over-represented). The question now is: should we have some kind of guideline for inclusion in Births and Dates articles? Or is the status-quo fine? In my case, my pet proposal is that a proposed inclusion criteria would be similar to what's currently done at WP:DYK, where no more than half of each set can be about US-related topics. Though of course, other editors are free to propose other proposals here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Seth MacFarlane As I stated before, it is inaccurate to just list him as an actor and singer since this is clearly false. These sources ([1][2][3][4][5]) list him as an actor, animator, writer, producer, director, and singer. The current format is just wrong and I feel that when a reader comes to the article they’re getting false information. The reader should be fully aware of what the subject of the article is known for, and when multiple sources list him as those occupations yet here in Wikipedia doesn’t, just doesn’t sit right with me. This isn’t fake news, we should be putting stuff into articles that are 100% true and give what’s right to the reader. 2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9D (talk) 07:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Economy, trade, and companies[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Economy, trade, and companies Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster Should statements, press releases, tweets, self-published video, etc, from SpaceX and Musk be given prominent placement in the article lead, and in the first article section (Objectives), excluding any non-SpaceX responses from that section, and keeping all commentary in the Reactions or Media section at the bottom of the article? These layout approaches are usually referred to as reception section vs integrated. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Lord & Taylor Trying to reach consensus on my last edit which was labeled as "white washing" and "promotion;" I condensed several parts of the article that were outdated and broken up. For example, you would read about current news then it would jump back to the 70's. The only other additional edits I made was the removal of two photos which if you read the article take up space and don't account for nearly as much. The store moved four times, the first photo is from a short lived store that was mentioned in one line and existed briefly over 170 years ago. The other is an outdated photo of the 5th avenue store and claims to represent the building before the renovations they're starting in 2019. The second photo in my opinion can be relevant but should be a better photo if used for this purpose. Any thoughts? Flossypossie98 (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 Article Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 is over 100 kB and should be split to a new page entitled Objections to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Presently, MOS:NUMS includes: Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may necessitate the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the South Asian numbering system is conventionally used in South Asian English. In those situations, link the first spelled-out instance of each quantity (e.g. crore, which yields: crore). This is followed by three more bullet points of WP:CREEP about crore. The lead sentence of this is just patently false; nothing necessitates the use of alternative numbering systems. Proof that Indian English doesn't do so abounds (including with regard to Indian currency) [1], [2], [3], [4] etc., etc. I propose that this be deleted and replaced with a) short advice against use of crore in Wikipedia articles, unless conversion is provided to Western numbers, and b) retaining the advice against using "1,00,00,000" for "10,000,000". Rationale: I do not believe the present wording has actual consensus, and crore are rarely used in our articles even on Indian subjects. Some small number of Indian editors have somehow gotten MoS to be permissive about crore, despite it being non-English and meaning nothing to most anyone outside that part of the world, and despite English-speakers of India having no problem with "ten million" (or "10,000,000", "10mil", "10M", etc.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Bitcoin Cash Should the article mention the "split" notion? Ladislav Mecir (talk) 08:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC) History and geography[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography Talk:Banderites I (Yulia Romero) and Poeticbent are currently embroiled in a dispute about this Wikipedia article. Per Wikipedia:CFORK I believe that it should not contain any biographical information about Stepan Bandera. Poeticbent (it seems to me) believes that this article should contain any biographical information Bandera because "none of this information - strictly about Banderites history - is in the Bandera article". I think that Poeticbent should insert this information in the article about Mr. Bandera or discuss this on the talkpage there. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 18:24, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Greek royal family The title of the article does not seem to conform to the rule about articles' names. To remind ourselves of the pertinent passage in the rule, here it is: "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the [naming] criteria. ... Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." The name most commonly used by the overwhelming majority of reliable sources is "the former royal family of Greece" (or equivalent expressions, such as "former royal household"). Typical such citations can be found in the BBC (e.g. here); Washington Post (here); the National Herald (here); CBC News (here); the Daily Telegraph, UK (here); the Daily Telegraph, Australia (here); The Guardian (here); all the English-language online editions of newspapers, magazines, and other media in Greece (e.g. here, here, or here). Plus, all English Wikipedia articles concerning members of the family (e.g. about Constantine II of Greece or Tatoi Palace) use the term "former". The historical, official appellation is used mostly by fringe royalist organizations, media, and political parties (e.g. The Greek Royal Family; Royal Forums; Royal Correspondent; etc) or gossip magazines, such as Hello (see here) or Life & Style (e.g. here). It is suggested that the title of this article changes accordingly. Change it to Former Greek Royal Family? or Keep it unchanged? Your views are invited. -The Gnome (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Giovanni Gentile Should WorldNetDaily be considered a credible source for calling Gentile a socialist in the lead? Gentile's alleged socialist ties are not discussed at any other point in the WP article. Etzedek24 (Would it kill ya to leave an edit summary?) 00:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Morlachs Please see section above, #Croatian census and recent revert war. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Appeasement Should there be an "Economic appeasement" section with the following statements? GPRamirez5 (talk) 05:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Paektu Mountain *Question: What should be the title on topic? example: Sea of Japan: The Sea of Japan (see below for other names) ... Senkaku Islands: The Senkaku Islands are a group of uninhabited islands ... They are also known as the Diaoyu Islands in Mainland China, ... Liancourt Rocks: The Liancourt Rocks, also known as Dokdo or Tokto in Korea, and Takeshima in Japanese, ... etc Thanks. --Garam (talk) 17:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Type 4 Chi-To I noticed that in the Category:World War II tanks by country there's a great differentiation in how the individual articles are named. According to WP:NAMINGCRITERIA: "a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English." Respectively, in the Category:World War II tanks of the United States (which is perhaps the most representative to English language articles on the subject), most articles have the word "tank" included in their titles: T14 Heavy Tank, T20 Medium Tank, T28 Super Heavy Tank, T29 Heavy Tank, T30 Heavy Tank, and so on. By contrast, in the Category:World War II tanks of Japan the word "tank" is never (!) used in the title of their models, i.e.: Type 1 Chi-He, Type 1 Ho-Ni I, Type 2 Ho-I, Type 2 Ka-Mi, Type 2 Ke-To, Type 3 Chi-Nu, and so on. I would suggest that some kind of linguistic uniformity here be followed throughout, for the benefit of our readership. Wouldn't you agree? — Poeticbent talk 18:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Simon's Sircus User:Pyrope wants to have the article start with Simon’s Sircus [sic] and do the same sort of thing in De Havilland Sea Vixen#Operational history [ "Simon's Sircus" (sic) ]. I maintain this is a misuse of sic. These are neither quotes, nor are they a cause of confusion, especially when you consider that Simon's Sircus is linked in the latter case. This is no different than what is done with Krispy Kreme and every other attention-seeking offbeat spelling (nothing), though Pyrope insists otherwise. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Joseph Stalin Option A and Option B Main question: For the lede image, used in the infobox, should this article use Option A or Option B? A previous Talk Page discussion reached no consensus, so hopefully a wider RfC will. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Template talk:Iranian Majlis Should the Iranian Parliaments before and after 1979 be considered separate institutions? Should the numbering of Iranian parliamentary terms reset in 1979? –Pahlevun (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) As some of my previous suggestions were disagreed upon, I think it will be best to take suggestions one subject at a time. To shorten the article I suggest separating notable offensives that were not directly aimed at the city but were a part of it. For example the Western Nineveh offensive (2017) has its own article. Instead, I suggest only the major details of the offensive let be remain here in this main article of the battle. And the other details like this many areas were captured in that particular offensive be shifted to that article until they are notable or widely covered in the media. This way the content will remain preserved on Wikipedia but the Mosul battle article will still be shortened somewhat. It will also help people to discover this content easily which they might not have earlier due to the huge contet in this article. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 00:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Continuation War Should the infobox's "result" parameter include subsidiary bullet points as "Finland retains independence" and "(more...)", or not? RedUser (talk) 09:41, 2 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh May the works of the authors specialized in the fields of international law or international security be used as a reference for the history related matters in this article? May the work of the pro (anti) Armenian or Azerbaijani authors be used as a reference in this article or not? Human7777 (talk) 13:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 Article Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 is over 100 kB and should be split to a new page entitled Objections to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Belarus Transliterated and Russian names were removed from the lede. The user who removed them is not willing to discuss the matter as can be seen in the section above. The page about the Romanization of Belarusian clearly shows that Belarus' name in Latin alphabet is Biełaruś. As for the Russian name, the country's official website clearly uses Беларусь as the correct Russian name. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Oakland Coliseum station Should the "Bus service" section have a table that is somewhat similar to the one seen in good articles Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue and Flushing–Main Street? AC Transit views the station as one of its major transit centers, serving 12 routes (most of which are feeder routes terminating at the station) that carry over 2 million passengers a year combined (Source 1 for that statement, starts at Page A-1) (Source 2 for that statement, Page 20). My recent attempt at clarifying this issue using the dispute resolution process failed due to a lack of participation, so hopefully this process can finally bring me some clarification for the future. TITANOSAURUS 01:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Battle of France I have extended full protection for one more week while the RFC plays out. Please note, I don't have an opinion here, the question is presented simply to answer the issue at hand. I will not vote but I will take action if any editor makes personal attacks or is grossly uncivil. Proposal The issue is to include or exclude the word "decisive" in the infobox as a descriptor of the victory. The current template strongly discourages the use of a qualifier, but under WP:IAR, it does not prohibit it, thus it is a matter of local consensus. The template is a stable one so we can assume it has consensus as a general guideline. The sole question is whether or not this particular article should be an exception to standard practice, for whatever reason. At an appropriate time (a week or longer), this will be closed and will provide a clear consensus as to the state of the article, and will serve as demonstration of that consensus until a new RFC demonstrates otherwise. At that time, anyone edit warring against the consensus will be blocked. Please use short, policy based reasons in the polling area and not just a vote. Please keep threaded comments in the "Discussion" area. You are encouraged to advertise this RFC on appropriate projects so long as it is a neutral notification and not an endorsement of any side of the issue. Notifying editors individually will probably be seen as canvassing, so I don't suggest it. Again, keep it civil, on topic and professional, please. Until this RFC closes, do not modify the current infobox entry, even if protection expires. This will be seen as edit warring and will result in a block without warning. This isn't an endorsement of the current version, it is a preventative measure to stop warring until a consensus is reached. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:March 14, 1891, lynchings Look up lynching in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. See previous section. We're on the verge of an edit war, and I'm starting to get pretty exasperated. People seem to be offended by Gambino's claim that this was the largest lynching in American history, but he based that claim on the definition of lynching in the Encyclopedia Brittanica and the NAACP's records on lynching. I also cited a page on the Library of Congress website that says the same thing. If he's wrong, so be it, but you have to do the work and show your sources. Don't just try to browbeat me into submission. --MopTop (talk) 17:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Language and linguistics[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Language and linguistics Talk:Simon's Sircus User:Pyrope wants to have the article start with Simon’s Sircus [sic] and do the same sort of thing in De Havilland Sea Vixen#Operational history [ "Simon's Sircus" (sic) ]. I maintain this is a misuse of sic. These are neither quotes, nor are they a cause of confusion, especially when you consider that Simon's Sircus is linked in the latter case. This is no different than what is done with Krispy Kreme and every other attention-seeking offbeat spelling (nothing), though Pyrope insists otherwise. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:"Polish death camp" controversy Should the phrase "Polish death camp" be described as a "misnomer" in the lede? See #Not a misnomer for the earlier discussion. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Issue statement: We have arrived at a bewildering profusion of ENGVAR-related templates, the only purpose of which seems to be advancing nationalistic viewpoints. For those not reading the discussion above this one, the short version is that in an encyclopedic, formal register, there is no meaningful difference between English, Scottish, Irish, Australian, New Zealand, African, Hong Kong, etc., varieties of English, only between Commonwealth English as a dialect continuum and the North American varieties (American English, and Canadian English which is a hybrid of American and British/Commonwealth). Commonwealth English is based on UK-published style guides; there are virtually no reliably published style manuals for Commonwealth dialects that are not produced in England in particular (by contrast, US and Canadian English are the subject of multiple mainstream style guides published in those countries). Concrete proposal: For WP purposes, we would just a {{Use Commonwealth English}} template with a {{Use European English}} redirect to it (since Ireland is not part of the Commonwealth at present). That will cover the full gamut of non-North American dialects of English following the style most often called "British". We would retain {{Use American English}} and {{Use Canadian English}} to cover the North American written dialects. Canadian is essentially a hybrid of US and British, and there are multiple, reputably published style guides for both US and Canadian writing. This would take care of the quiet, categorizing templates in Category:Use English templates; the big talk-page and editnotice banner equivalents (e.g. {{American English}}, etc.) in Category:Varieties of English templates would also be merged into a corresponding set of templates. Categories used would also, naturally, be merged as needed. MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES would be clarified and shortened, no longer suggesting that things be written in Pakistani English, etc., which is essentially meaningless with regard to encyclopedic prose.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Maths, science, and technology[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, science, and technology Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster Should statements, press releases, tweets, self-published video, etc, from SpaceX and Musk be given prominent placement in the article lead, and in the first article section (Objectives), excluding any non-SpaceX responses from that section, and keeping all commentary in the Reactions or Media section at the bottom of the article? These layout approaches are usually referred to as reception section vs integrated. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Enpass Enpass is completely free on Windows PC and in Android and IOS, it costs about 10 US. DOLLARS for more than 20 entries/passwords. So in mobile platforms, it is not completely free. Should we write both license because mobile app is not completely free?Zafar24Talk 19:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Should the "default" <math> be changed to inline in the future?--Debenben (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:PAX Labs I am reopening the merge discussion because JUUL was spun out of Pax Labs in 2017. Should Juul be unmerged or should it remain in the Pax Labs article? QuackGuru (talk) 01:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:ReleaseTheMemo 1. Should the article describe the media campaign as supported by Russian Bots? 2. If yes to number 1, should the Russian bot support for the campaign be in the first defining sentence of the article? Casprings (talk) 03:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Heat-not-burn tobacco product Maybe it would be best to roll back to this version before all the suspicious accounts started editing the article and fully protect the article for 6 months or longer. QuackGuru (talk) 17:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Presently, MOS:NUMS includes: Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may necessitate the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the South Asian numbering system is conventionally used in South Asian English. In those situations, link the first spelled-out instance of each quantity (e.g. crore, which yields: crore). This is followed by three more bullet points of WP:CREEP about crore. The lead sentence of this is just patently false; nothing necessitates the use of alternative numbering systems. Proof that Indian English doesn't do so abounds (including with regard to Indian currency) [5], [6], [7], [8] etc., etc. I propose that this be deleted and replaced with a) short advice against use of crore in Wikipedia articles, unless conversion is provided to Western numbers, and b) retaining the advice against using "1,00,00,000" for "10,000,000". Rationale: I do not believe the present wording has actual consensus, and crore are rarely used in our articles even on Indian subjects. Some small number of Indian editors have somehow gotten MoS to be permissive about crore, despite it being non-English and meaning nothing to most anyone outside that part of the world, and despite English-speakers of India having no problem with "ten million" (or "10,000,000", "10mil", "10M", etc.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Military Sealift Command In 2015 the CNO and SecNav renamed multiple classes, including changing designations for JHSV's to Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF), Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) to Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD), and the Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) variant of the MLP to Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB). Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) is the correct designation for ESB-class vessels and there is no need to edit it to previous or outdated names. Coffee Atoms (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:2018 in science Is a press release (or article heavily based on a press release) sufficient to list a new entry at this article? –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Art, architecture, literature, and media[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Art, architecture, literature, and media Talk:Miley Cyrus & Her Dead Petz I had a sourced genre edit in adding "psychedelic pop", but it was reverted, because certain people were not happy with it. The issue, from what I gather, is that "psychedelic" covers "psychedelic pop" as a genre. On another note, I also argued that "psychedelic rock" and "psychedelic pop" should be added to genre, as there are sources that I listed on the talk page that explicitly call the album these genres. Should "psychedelic rock" and "psychedelic pop" be added to the genre in the infobox and composition section (with sources)? Aleccat 16:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Noah Oppenheim Should the following be added to the article in place of the current statement on the topic: Oppenheim was one of the NBC executives involved in the decision to fire Matt Lauer after sexual harassment claims were made against the Today Show host. [6] References ^ https://deadline.com/2012/10/exclusive-seth-macfarlane-oscar-host-345899/ ^ https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/authors/125027/seth-macfarlane ^ https://www.ora.tv/larrykingnow/guests/seth-macfarlane ^ http://variety.com/exec/seth-macfarlane/ ^ https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/3119987.Seth_MacFarlane ^ Koblin, John (1 December 2017). "After Firing Matt Lauer, NBC Executives Move to Control the Damage". The New York Times.  See discussion so far at: Talk:Noah_Oppenheim#Lauer_content I will not vote as I am a paid consultant to NBC News. But essentially, I think the fuller discussion of this should take place on the NBC News page - discussion ongoing at Talk:NBC_News#Expanded_info_on_Matt_Lauer. Plus, of course, it's also on Matt Lauer. In order to explore this topic fairly, you need a bunch of context. You also have both critical and supportive statements about NBC News's response. But if you go down this route of explaining the situation fairly, it becomes very COATRACK for a blp. BC1278 (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Beirut (film) Which version is fairer, TimesUpBeirut's [9] or mine [10] ZinedineZidane98 (talk) 09:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:The National Memo Following the advice from Robert McClenon I'm making this request for comment concerning the proposed edits above. Before making this request I've discussed these changes at the article's Talk page, created the discussion at Project Journalism and filed dispute resolution request. I would like third-party view on including proposed edits to the article as we are unable to reach the consensus here, at the Talk page. Summary of the discussion After substantial edits from Justlettersandnumbers an important information describing the media's political stance was removed from the article. The editor first removed the phrase predominantly from a liberal perspective and changed it to predominantly from a left-wing point of view. When asked to provide solid references, supporting this point of view, he agreed to drop his initial left-wing claim. As a result of edits from Spintendo the article now doesn't have any information describing the political/editorial stance of The National Memo as a media. It is important to mention that before I made any edits to the article it has the following consensus edits result: it features daily breaking news and commentary as well as analysis from America's top progressive thinkers from a liberal / progressive perspective. I would like to re-instate the truth as both liberal and progressive statements are well-supported by references to high-quality third-party sources (unlike other claims such as left-wing). I also think that this information is important to Wikipedia users/readers because after the extensive edits (or rather deletions) from Justlettersandnumbers it is hard to understand what The National Memo is about. There are several editors (notably Justlettersandnumbers and Spintendo who think that this information should me omitted from the article. - 10:53, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Bahar Mustafa race row Ladies and gentlemen I come to you with questions three: Should the article include details on the police investigation against Bahar Mustafa? Should the article include details on the allegations of bullying against Bahar Mustafa and her subsequent resignation? Should the article include details of the email received by Pamella Gellar? See the above talk page sections for further context. Relisted by Cunard (talk) at 01:47, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster Should statements, press releases, tweets, self-published video, etc, from SpaceX and Musk be given prominent placement in the article lead, and in the first article section (Objectives), excluding any non-SpaceX responses from that section, and keeping all commentary in the Reactions or Media section at the bottom of the article? These layout approaches are usually referred to as reception section vs integrated. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Lyndsy Fonseca Can the article include the name and birth date of the subject's child, which the subject has made public? --17:14, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games When is it suitable to use the worldwide (WW) label from {{vgrelease}}? -- Wrath X (talk) 09:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians I brought up in a previous discussion that I would probably do this down the track – and pretty much made most of my argument there – so I figured there's no better time than the present. I've seen bands that have had large numbers of line-up changes (e.g. Anthrax, Black Sabbath, Megadeth) and have their own members subpages – this is where I believe it is most appropriate to have them. Others have only had minimal changes or disruptions to their respective line-ups (e.g. Foo Fighters, Linkin Park, Pearl Jam), yet still have these subpages where they, in my opinion, aren't necessary. I will restate my opinion (from the above discussion) that members subpages should only exist if there have been a large number of line-up changes and/or complex circumstances – does anyone agree with this statement? Please answer "Yes" or "No" in the survey below and, if agreed upon, use the discussion to discuss what number of line-up changes should constitute a members subpage – otherwise, feel free to state your opinion in either section. I would define "large number of line-up changes and/or complex circumstances" as about ten or more former members and/or line-up changes (criteria met by the first three bands that I mentioned, and not by the second three). 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 04:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film Should the narrator section in the infobox for films be reserved solely for documentaries or should it also be used for films like A Christmas Story in which an actor who doesn't physically appear in the film narrates sections of the film? The MOS currently does not address this issue, so whatever the consensus is here, MOS should be changed to reflect that. JDDJS (talk) 22:19, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) In general, should articles about anime media use the disambiguator (anime), rather than more general ones like ([animated] TV series) or (film) or, more broadly, (franchise)? There is some disagreement over whether an earlier discussion, WP:VPP#RfC: Is "telenovela" a suitable disambiguator? (permalink), is applicable. Sub-question: Should Wikipedia:Naming conventions (anime) be created? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Culture of the United Kingdom Two lists of examples starting at "Other contemporary British film directors include..." and "Well-known currently active performers include..." have grown to considerable length (105 examples total). Should the lists be shortened or left at that length? 22:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Noah Oppenheim Should the following be added to this article? See discussion above if you like. Oppenheim worked with Ronan Farrow on the conception of the story about the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse allegations and the network supported his investigation for several months, but in the summer of 2017 the network withdrew support as the end of Farrow's contract approached, and Farrow took the story to the The New Yorker which published it in October after the New York Times broke the story. NBC News's failure to publish the story it had developed became a point of criticism and subject of reporting in itself, and Oppenheim defended the news division in response.[1][2][3][4][5][6] References ^ Koblin, John (11 October 2017). "How Did NBC Miss Out on a Harvey Weinstein Exposé?". The New York Times.  ^ Guthrie, Marisa (October 11, 2017). "Why Ronan Farrow's Harvey Weinstein Bombshell Did Not Run on NBC". The Hollywood Reporter.  ^ Guthrie, Marisa (10 January 2018). "Ronan Farrow, the Hollywood Prince Who Torched the Castle". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 11 January 2018.  ^ Folkenflik, David; Martin, Rachel (October 12, 2017). "Decision Not To Publish Weinstein Story Roils NBC". NPR Morning Edition.  ^ Stelter, Brian (October 11, 2017). "How NBC gave up Ronan Farrow's explosive Harvey Weinstein scoop". CNN.  ^ Warren, James (October 13, 2017). "How Badly Did NBC Blow the Weinstein Story?". Vanity Fair. To exhibit a firm grasp of the obvious: One of the finest publications on the planet took a look at whatever Oppenheim took a pass on and felt it was worth the effort. New Yorker chief David Remnick, a polymath with formidable news instincts and an even superior track record, decided there was an irresistible tale to be told. No doubt, there was the not inconsiderable challenge of turning a television piece into a print piece for a magazine whose strength is exactly the nuance and depth that can be incompatible with the structures of TV. But the magazine pulled it off.  -- Jytdog (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Oakland Coliseum station Should the "Bus service" section have a table that is somewhat similar to the one seen in good articles Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue and Flushing–Main Street? AC Transit views the station as one of its major transit centers, serving 12 routes (most of which are feeder routes terminating at the station) that carry over 2 million passengers a year combined (Source 1 for that statement, starts at Page A-1) (Source 2 for that statement, Page 20). My recent attempt at clarifying this issue using the dispute resolution process failed due to a lack of participation, so hopefully this process can finally bring me some clarification for the future. TITANOSAURUS 01:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Seth MacFarlane As I stated before, it is inaccurate to just list him as an actor and singer since this is clearly false. These sources ([1][2][3][4][5]) list him as an actor, animator, writer, producer, director, and singer. The current format is just wrong and I feel that when a reader comes to the article they’re getting false information. The reader should be fully aware of what the subject of the article is known for, and when multiple sources list him as those occupations yet here in Wikipedia doesn’t, just doesn’t sit right with me. This isn’t fake news, we should be putting stuff into articles that are 100% true and give what’s right to the reader. 2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9D (talk) 07:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music I have been given numerous amounts of feedback regarding the placement of ranking charts within music albums. I have stated that per WP:IDEALSTUB, that sufficient context shall be given in placing ranking charts within an article, even if the chart is almost identical to a chart table that exists in an artist, ensemble, or discography page, and might not be formatted in an ideal manner. Some of these music ranking charts are difficult to manipulate, therefore, leeway should be permitted to persons who wish to copy and paste the information from one article to another, so long as they update the references to an appropriate access date. If the chart is identical, the information is still there, even if the table contains empty columns. Additionally, I have been scolded about putting music ranking charts for singles in an album article, if the artist/ensemble/discography page already has these rankings. I think that users should be permitted to add these to album articles. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Star Wars: The Last Jedi Hi, all. Per an RfC, editors (myself included) have worked on a draft at Draft:Star Wars Last Jedi audience response and its talk page. We are just about done, but there are remaining disagreements and we need comments from other editors to finally get this material into the article. The main disagreements are the following: There is debate on whether or not to present the "divisive" aspect first and whether or not it is WP:Due or WP:Undue. With regard to the parentage aspect, there is debate on whether or not, in order to give give an example instead of being vague, we should mention that many fans were expecting Rey to be Luke's daughter. Or whether we should mention a few examples. And there is debate on whether or not to plainly state that many fans felt that Luke's actions in The Last Jedi contrasted his previous heroic portrayal or to instead state that many fans felt that he should have been portrayed more heroically; how to word this can be worked out later. There was also alt-right debates, but we have kept that material out of the draft. I present three versions below. Obviously, none of these versions mean that the section cannot be edited further afterward. Coming to a consensus on one of the versions simply means that we can finally move forward. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Back to the Future Should the plot summary edit [17 January 2018‎] be reverted to the new version? Cpaaoi (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Politics, government, and law[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law Talk:Greek royal family The title of the article does not seem to conform to the rule about articles' names. To remind ourselves of the pertinent passage in the rule, here it is: "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the [naming] criteria. ... Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." The name most commonly used by the overwhelming majority of reliable sources is "the former royal family of Greece" (or equivalent expressions, such as "former royal household"). Typical such citations can be found in the BBC (e.g. here); Washington Post (here); the National Herald (here); CBC News (here); the Daily Telegraph, UK (here); the Daily Telegraph, Australia (here); The Guardian (here); all the English-language online editions of newspapers, magazines, and other media in Greece (e.g. here, here, or here). Plus, all English Wikipedia articles concerning members of the family (e.g. about Constantine II of Greece or Tatoi Palace) use the term "former". The historical, official appellation is used mostly by fringe royalist organizations, media, and political parties (e.g. The Greek Royal Family; Royal Forums; Royal Correspondent; etc) or gossip magazines, such as Hello (see here) or Life & Style (e.g. here). It is suggested that the title of this article changes accordingly. Change it to Former Greek Royal Family? or Keep it unchanged? Your views are invited. -The Gnome (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Morlachs Please see section above, #Croatian census and recent revert war. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Shin Dong-hyuk In 2015, Shin Dong-hyuk, a North Korean defector, admitted to fabricating parts of his story as told in the biography Escape from Camp 14 and reflected in this article. The biographer, Blaine Harden, hasn't explained precisely what Shin has retracted, nor has he published a revised account. The article therefore has a long "Biography" section that Shin has admitted is partly untrue. However, we don't know which parts. How should we handle this?--Jack Upland (talk) 09:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Holocaust denial User:Beyond My Ken removed the words "conspiracy theory" from the lede without explanation. It seems there were many specific sources added prior to support it. (Holocaust_denial#cite_note-conspiracy-9). I attempted to fix the issue and re-add the words but the edit was reverted. I propose keeping it as it was. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 06:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:"Polish death camp" controversy Should the phrase "Polish death camp" be described as a "misnomer" in the lede? See #Not a misnomer for the earlier discussion. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Joseph Stalin Option A and Option B Main question: For the lede image, used in the infobox, should this article use Option A or Option B? A previous Talk Page discussion reached no consensus, so hopefully a wider RfC will. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:The National Memo Following the advice from Robert McClenon I'm making this request for comment concerning the proposed edits above. Before making this request I've discussed these changes at the article's Talk page, created the discussion at Project Journalism and filed dispute resolution request. I would like third-party view on including proposed edits to the article as we are unable to reach the consensus here, at the Talk page. Summary of the discussion After substantial edits from Justlettersandnumbers an important information describing the media's political stance was removed from the article. The editor first removed the phrase predominantly from a liberal perspective and changed it to predominantly from a left-wing point of view. When asked to provide solid references, supporting this point of view, he agreed to drop his initial left-wing claim. As a result of edits from Spintendo the article now doesn't have any information describing the political/editorial stance of The National Memo as a media. It is important to mention that before I made any edits to the article it has the following consensus edits result: it features daily breaking news and commentary as well as analysis from America's top progressive thinkers from a liberal / progressive perspective. I would like to re-instate the truth as both liberal and progressive statements are well-supported by references to high-quality third-party sources (unlike other claims such as left-wing). I also think that this information is important to Wikipedia users/readers because after the extensive edits (or rather deletions) from Justlettersandnumbers it is hard to understand what The National Memo is about. There are several editors (notably Justlettersandnumbers and Spintendo who think that this information should me omitted from the article. - 10:53, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Bahar Mustafa race row Ladies and gentlemen I come to you with questions three: Should the article include details on the police investigation against Bahar Mustafa? Should the article include details on the allegations of bullying against Bahar Mustafa and her subsequent resignation? Should the article include details of the email received by Pamella Gellar? See the above talk page sections for further context. Relisted by Cunard (talk) at 01:47, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:List of Trump–Russia dossier allegations Merge This article → Trump–Russia dossier This article doesn't really have a good reason to stand alone other than length, and length is a problem that can be addressed with formatting and proper prose integration. If we merged this article into the main article, we could trim out all but the dry text outlining the allegation (a step that would, I believe, address many of the NPOV complaints made here), leaving the commentary to the main parts of the article. This could be formatted in a number of ways that would not make that article over-long. Indeed, much of the dry text describing the allegations could be trimmed significantly, as the details will have been given in the main body already. I mean, this article is about the contents of the dossier. I don't see any need to fork that off from the main article. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC) Template talk:Iranian Majlis Should the Iranian Parliaments before and after 1979 be considered separate institutions? Should the numbering of Iranian parliamentary terms reset in 1979? –Pahlevun (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:B'Tselem Should the following appear in the "Reception" section? In 2017 after Amira Hass in her Haaretz column posted a B'Tselem video and castigated the IDF officer who appeared in the video arresting a man who refused to comply with warnings to leave the area while filming the officer,[6] IDF Spokesperson Major General Moti Almoz said B'Tselem videos are "are out of line with reality" and that "there is a substantial difference between filming an incident as it is happening and the creating of an incident by arriving at a place with a camera".[7][6][8][9][10][11] References ^ https://deadline.com/2012/10/exclusive-seth-macfarlane-oscar-host-345899/ ^ https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/authors/125027/seth-macfarlane ^ https://www.ora.tv/larrykingnow/guests/seth-macfarlane ^ http://variety.com/exec/seth-macfarlane/ ^ https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/3119987.Seth_MacFarlane ^ a b Israeli Army Says B'Tselem Created Incident for Video Posted on Haaretz, Ha'aretz, Gili Coehn, 11 May 2017 ^ IDF defends soldier over B'Tselem video, YNET, 10 May 2017 ^ IDF Spokesman Posts Personal Resopose to B'Tselem Video, JPost, 10 May 2017 ^ IDF spokesman on B'Tselem video: "provocation disconnected from reality", Walla news, 10 May 2017 ^ IDF vs. B'Tselem: "Libel directed against IDF", 10 May 2017, Channel 2 News ^ IDF vs. B'Tselem: "Decided a Video is More Important than the Truth, CHannel 10 News, 10 May 2017 Should the follow appear under the "incidents" sub-section? In 2010 media outlets published that B'Tselem's information director, prior to her employment in B'Tselem, wrote on her personal blog various statements such as "The IDF Memorial Day is a pornographic circus", "Israel is committing Humanity's worst atrocities... Israel is proving devotion to Nazi values".[1][2][3] B'Tselem director Jessica Montell said that B'Tselem rejected these statement and that they do not represent B'Tselem,[3] and the information director resigned shortly thereafter from her position saying that she apologizes for making hurtful statements and that "veracity and professionalism are B'Tselem's main assets and are essential, I hope that now attention will return to what is truly important: struggling for human rights in the occupied territories".[4][5] In August 2014, journalist Tuvia Tenenbom taped Palestinians and Israeli activists presenting the conflict to foreigners. One of those taped was a B'Tselem field researcher who denied the Holocaust saying "It’s a lie — I don’t believe it".[6] B'Tselem said they rejected holocaust denial and that they would investigate the incident.[6] B'Tselem investigation concluded that the field researcher merely translated what an off camera individual had said and said that the field researcher "said unequivocally that the Holocaust is a terrible crime against the Jewish people". However, in October 2014 after a longer segment of the exchange with the field worker was aired,[7] B'Tselem said "we ask to amend our [original] response on this matter, which was given in good faith, and clarify that a B’Tselem worker did say those things, which we reject with contempt and disgust".[8][9] B'Tselem terminated the employment of the field researcher.[10] References ^ Reaping What You Sow: A Comparative Examination of Torture Reform in the United States, France, Argentina, and Israel, Henry F. Carey, 2012, page 110 ^ Making David into Goliath: How the World Turned Against Israel, Joshua Muravchik, 2015, page 149 ^ a b Lizi Sagie, senior B'Tselem officer: Israel adheres to Nazi values, and turns its casualties into celebrities, Globes, 18 April 2010 ^ Lizi Sagie, who called Memorial Day a "pornographic circus", resigns, Globes, 22 April 2010 ^ As a result of her statements: senior B'Tselem figure resigns, Channel 2 News, 22 April 2010 ^ a b The undercover journalist who revealed the hate to israel, Channel2 News, 29 August 2017 ^ B'Tselem admits: Field researcher denied Holocaust, Channel 2 News, 6 October 2014 ^ Israeli rights group admits employee denied Holocaust, Times of Israel, 7 October 2014 ^ The troubling "truth" of B'Tselem, Maariv, 7 October 2014 ^ Response to accusations regarding former B'Tselem's field Researcher 'Atef Abu a-Rub, B'Tselem, 7 October 2014 Previous discussion may be seen in the talk page under "Holocaust denial by employee", "IDF statements regarding B'Tselem", and "BLP violation ?!". Please indicate Yes for include, No for not including, and Partially or Modify (with an explanation of what to include and what to modify) - with an explanation of the !vote.Icewhiz (talk) 07:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Real News Update Should the following sentence be kept or removed? Some stories that Lara Trump claimed were ignored by the media, such as the plans of Foxconn to build a factory in Wisconsin and the donation of President's Trump's salary to the Department for Education, had in fact previously been reported by news outlets. The cited source is: Dylan Byers (August 2, 2017). "Trump launches 'real news' Facebook series to combat mainstream media". CNN. Retrieved August 2, 2017.  Please !vote with either Keep or Remove. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 Should the section titled "Cloud tables" be removed? Please !vote with either Keep or Remove. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 Article Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 is over 100 kB and should be split to a new page entitled Objections to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Justice Party (South Korea) Questions 1) Should social democracy be added as one of the party's ideologies in the infobox with sources as presented above (on the talk page)/in reverted edits and in a previous discussion on Garam's talk page? 2)Should the democratic socialist "opinion group" within the party be considered a faction and have it's ideology described as such in the infobox as well? HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 19:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:ReleaseTheMemo 1. Should the article describe the media campaign as supported by Russian Bots? 2. If yes to number 1, should the Russian bot support for the campaign be in the first defining sentence of the article? Casprings (talk) 03:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Issue statement: We have arrived at a bewildering profusion of ENGVAR-related templates, the only purpose of which seems to be advancing nationalistic viewpoints. For those not reading the discussion above this one, the short version is that in an encyclopedic, formal register, there is no meaningful difference between English, Scottish, Irish, Australian, New Zealand, African, Hong Kong, etc., varieties of English, only between Commonwealth English as a dialect continuum and the North American varieties (American English, and Canadian English which is a hybrid of American and British/Commonwealth). Commonwealth English is based on UK-published style guides; there are virtually no reliably published style manuals for Commonwealth dialects that are not produced in England in particular (by contrast, US and Canadian English are the subject of multiple mainstream style guides published in those countries). Concrete proposal: For WP purposes, we would just a {{Use Commonwealth English}} template with a {{Use European English}} redirect to it (since Ireland is not part of the Commonwealth at present). That will cover the full gamut of non-North American dialects of English following the style most often called "British". We would retain {{Use American English}} and {{Use Canadian English}} to cover the North American written dialects. Canadian is essentially a hybrid of US and British, and there are multiple, reputably published style guides for both US and Canadian writing. This would take care of the quiet, categorizing templates in Category:Use English templates; the big talk-page and editnotice banner equivalents (e.g. {{American English}}, etc.) in Category:Varieties of English templates would also be merged into a corresponding set of templates. Categories used would also, naturally, be merged as needed. MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES would be clarified and shortened, no longer suggesting that things be written in Pakistani English, etc., which is essentially meaningless with regard to encyclopedic prose.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Coachella Valley Church Various names are editing this article to lead with details about its operation as a Church. However, the news sources themselves question whether or not it is actually a marijuana dispensary operating as a Church and the City is trying to shut down their operations. The notability of this article is due based on this dispute between the City which calls it a marijuana dispensary and the 'Church'. I edited it to be more even handed and include details of the dispute in the lead but keep getting reverted by various names (who may or may not be the same person or group trying to push their side of this dispute). Its current form is biased and misleading trying to bury the claims that this newly formed 'Church' is actually a marijuana dispensary. NaturaNaturans (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Alternative for Germany How should the AfD be described within the infobox? A: right-wing to far-right B: far-right C: another option (describe below) Mélencron (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Military Sealift Command In 2015 the CNO and SecNav renamed multiple classes, including changing designations for JHSV's to Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF), Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) to Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD), and the Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) variant of the MLP to Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB). Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) is the correct designation for ESB-class vessels and there is no need to edit it to previous or outdated names. Coffee Atoms (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Knights of Columbus * Q: Should the article mention Proposition 8 specifically in the lead? Note: Originally summoned bot. I'm boldly cutting short the previous RfC and opening one that is specific enough to reach an actionable consensus. Per this comment, this one issue seems to be a a particular enough sticking point where consensus can fall clearly one way or the other, and one side or the other is going to need to accept it and move on. GMGtalk 14:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC) Religion and philosophy[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: WikiProject Philosophy article · category · portal  · Join the project  · Main Φ discussion w  · Categories  · Style guide  · Article alerts  · New articles  · Articles for deletion  · Open tasks  · RFC  · Requested articles  · Reference desk  · Featured content  · Star of Sophia  · Reference Resources  · BLPs Task forces Philosophers log join Literature log join Aesthetics log join Epistemology log join Ethics log join Logic log join Metaphysics log join Social and political log join Language log join Mind log join Religion log join Science log join Analytic log join Continental log join Eastern log join Anarchism log join Ancient log join Medieval log join Modern log join Contemporary log join Assessment  · Project banner  · Statistics  · Articles needing attention  · Peer review Articles by quality  · FA 44  · FL 6  · GA 144  · B 691  · C 1651  · Start 6755  · Stub 6460  · Unassessed 379 Articles by importance  · Top 81  · High 959  · Mid 2801  · Low 8544  · Unknown 3872 Article lists  · Philosophers  · Philosophical literature  · Aesthetics  · Ethics  · Epistemology  · Logic  · Metaphysics  · Soc+Pol  · Philosophy of language  · Philosophy of mind  · Philosophy of religion  · Philosophy of science  · Analytic philosophy  · Continental philosophy  · Eastern philosophy  · Anarchism  · Ancient philosophy  · Medieval philosophy  · Modern philosophy  · Contemporary philosophy Logs  · Philosophers  · Literature  · Aesthetics  · Epistemology  · Ethics  · Logic  · Metaphysics  · S+P philosophy  · Philosophy of language  · Philosophy of mind  · Philosophy of religion  · Philosophy of science  · Analytic  · Continental  · Eastern  · Anarchism  · Ancient  · Medieval  · Modern  · Contemporary Popular pages Philosophers Literature Aesthetics Epistemology Ethics Logic Metaphysics Social and political Language Mind Religion Science Analytic Continental Eastern Anarchism Ancient Medieval Modern Contemporary Indices  · Philosophers  · Literature  · Aesthetics  · Epistemology  · Ethics  · Logic  · Metaphysics  · Social and political  · Language  · Mind  · Religion  · Science  · Analytic  · Continental  · Eastern  · Anarchism  · Ancient  · Medieval  · Modern  · Contemporary Portals Philosophy talk Aesthetics talk Ethics talk Epistemology talk Logic talk Metaphysics talk Philosophy of science talk Mind and Brain talk Thinking talk Anarchism talk Existentialism talk Social and political talk Templates General  · {{WikiProject Philosophy}}  · {{Philosophy topics}}  · {{Infobox philosopher}}  · {{PhilCOTW}}  · {{PhilosophyTasks}}  · {{PhilosophyTasksBox}}  · {{PhilInvit}} Navigation  · {{Aesthetics}}  · {{Epistemology}}  · {{Ethics}}  · {{Logic}}  · {{Metaphysics}}  · {{Social and political philosophy}}  · {{Philosophy of language}}  · {{Philosophy of mind}}  · {{Philosophy of religion}}  · {{Philosophy of science}}  · {{Analytic philosophy}}  · {{Continental philosophy}} Stubs  · {{Philo-stub}}  · {{Philosopher-stub}}  · {{Philo-book-stub}}  · {{Hindu-philo-stub}}  · {{Philos-novel-stub}}  · {{ethics-stub}}  · {{logic-stub}} Userboxen  · {{User WP Philosophy}}  · {{User WP Philosophers}}  · {{User WP Philosophical lit}}  · {{User WP Aesthetics}}  · {{User WP Epistemology}}  · {{User WP Ethics}}  · {{User WP Logic}}  · {{User WP Metaphysics}}  · {{User WP Soc+Pol Phil}}  · {{User WP Continental Philosophy}}  · {{User WP Anarchism}}  · {{User WP Analytic Philosophy}}  · {{User WP Eastern Phil}}  · {{User WP Ancient Phil}}  · {{User WP Medieval Phil}}  · {{User WP Modern Phil}}  · {{User WP Contemporary Phil}}  · {{User WP Phil of religion}}  · {{User WP Phil of mind}}  · {{User WP Phil of science}}  · {{User WP Phil of language}} Related WikiProjects  · Alternative views talk  · Arts talk  · Atheism talk  · Biblical criticism talk  · Biography (academians) talk  · Hindu Philosophy talk  · History of Science talk  · History talk  · Islamic philosophy talk  · Linguistics talk  · Literature talk  · Mathematics talk  · Middle ages talk  · Mythology talk  · Physics talk  · Skepticism talk  · Religion talk  · Science talk  · Spirituality talk  · Christian theology workgroup talk Reference resources  · PhilPapers  · Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  · Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy  · Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project  · Perseus Digital Library Tools Grep CatScan 2.0 WikiYanker Intersection search WikiChecker WikiWatcher Edit war Article Blamer Red link recovery Traffic statistics Project summary tables Article lists CatGraph v t e Talk:Christianity in Iran I invite comments from other editors on recent changes to the article pertaining to the state of Christian converts in Iran. My position and a proposed edit are in the section immediately below. I regret this is a "Bad Question", as described at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, but to be more specific would be to (non-neutrally) restate my own position. Pinkbeast (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:The Satanic Temple Until recently this article has been about an organization called The Satanic Temple whose members were Satanists, recently it was been decided through editor consensus that The Satanic Temple is not only an organization but also it's own religion, whose members are also called Satanists. As this is a new stand alone religion this Satanism is different from the pre-existing religion of Satanism. As it so happens there is an existing disambiguation page Satanism_(disambiguation) to clarify uses of the term Satanism & Satanist. On the top of Satanism is a WP:hatnote that says "For other uses, see Satanism (disambiguation)." the question is if a similar link should now be included at the top of this article. Seanbonner (talk) 01:02, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Coachella Valley Church Various names are editing this article to lead with details about its operation as a Church. However, the news sources themselves question whether or not it is actually a marijuana dispensary operating as a Church and the City is trying to shut down their operations. The notability of this article is due based on this dispute between the City which calls it a marijuana dispensary and the 'Church'. I edited it to be more even handed and include details of the dispute in the lead but keep getting reverted by various names (who may or may not be the same person or group trying to push their side of this dispute). Its current form is biased and misleading trying to bury the claims that this newly formed 'Church' is actually a marijuana dispensary. NaturaNaturans (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Knights of Columbus * Q: Should the article mention Proposition 8 specifically in the lead? Note: Originally summoned bot. I'm boldly cutting short the previous RfC and opening one that is specific enough to reach an actionable consensus. Per this comment, this one issue seems to be a a particular enough sticking point where consensus can fall clearly one way or the other, and one side or the other is going to need to accept it and move on. GMGtalk 14:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC) Society, sports, and culture[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture Talk:Chloe Kim *Question: Is the template {{Korean name}} not appropriate for article Chloe Kim? In other words, can we add the template {{Korean name}} in articles for Korean diaspora? See also: Template talk:Korean name#New format for multi-cultural persons??? Thanks. --Garam (talk) 13:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Greek royal family The title of the article does not seem to conform to the rule about articles' names. To remind ourselves of the pertinent passage in the rule, here it is: "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the [naming] criteria. ... Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources." The name most commonly used by the overwhelming majority of reliable sources is "the former royal family of Greece" (or equivalent expressions, such as "former royal household"). Typical such citations can be found in the BBC (e.g. here); Washington Post (here); the National Herald (here); CBC News (here); the Daily Telegraph, UK (here); the Daily Telegraph, Australia (here); The Guardian (here); all the English-language online editions of newspapers, magazines, and other media in Greece (e.g. here, here, or here). Plus, all English Wikipedia articles concerning members of the family (e.g. about Constantine II of Greece or Tatoi Palace) use the term "former". The historical, official appellation is used mostly by fringe royalist organizations, media, and political parties (e.g. The Greek Royal Family; Royal Forums; Royal Correspondent; etc) or gossip magazines, such as Hello (see here) or Life & Style (e.g. here). It is suggested that the title of this article changes accordingly. Change it to Former Greek Royal Family? or Keep it unchanged? Your views are invited. -The Gnome (talk) 10:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Morlachs Please see section above, #Croatian census and recent revert war. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Appeasement Should there be an "Economic appeasement" section with the following statements? GPRamirez5 (talk) 05:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Korean fried chicken *Question: The "Tongdak" (not "Tongdak-gui") is not one of the name Korean-style fried chicken, known as "KTC"? See also: Talk:Korean fried chicken#Korean roasted chicken and User talk:Munui#Korean Romanization Thanks. --Garam (talk) 16:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Holocaust denial User:Beyond My Ken removed the words "conspiracy theory" from the lede without explanation. It seems there were many specific sources added prior to support it. (Holocaust_denial#cite_note-conspiracy-9). I attempted to fix the issue and re-add the words but the edit was reverted. I propose keeping it as it was. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 06:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Canada The current sound file of the national anthem in the article's infobox is File:Fr-Ô Canada.ogg, a recording that is over a century old. It has a bitrate of 100 kilobits, which, combined with its vocals, makes the melody rather difficult to hear. The entire thing is very out of place, given that a) the vocals are also from the French version of the song rather than the English version, which would be easier to understand for most visitors to the English Wikipedia, and b) on the infoboxes on articles for other countries, instrumental versions of their anthems seem to be far more common. There are some alternatives available, but usually whenever someone adds them, they get reverted on the basis that consensus has already been established. Going back through the archives of this talk page, there have indeed been discussions on the issue going back to at least 2012, but it seems to be a very weak consensus. One of the main contenders for the replacement is the higher quality File:United States Navy Band - O Canada.ogg, but this has proven somewhat controversial: see exhibits A, B, C D, among others I'm likely missing. The other alternative is File:O Canada.ogg, a simplistic but recognizable piano version, which existed on the article for some time before it was removed a few months ago without any explanation, but no longer seems to be the de facto replacement for the US Navy version. This seems to be a persistent issue that seems to challenge the consensus that has apparently been established so I've decided to open this up to RFC. Cryptic Canadian 03:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Prostitution in Oceania Should living on the earnings of prostitutes or Procuring (prostitution) be considered pimping, or does it need to be as per the stereotype of an American pimps? John B123 (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Rasta Rasivhenge There are two proposals. Should this article should be included in the category Category:Australian rugby union referees? Do we need a more general discussion over how referee articles are categorised? -- Shuddetalk 19:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:High Point High School Should this article include a map of the school's attendance boundary (meaning the area which the school draws its students)? This RFC is applicable to most US and Canadian public schools, which draw students from particular catchment areas. @John from Idegon:@Mellis: WhisperToMe (talk) 04:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Culture of the United Kingdom Two lists of examples starting at "Other contemporary British film directors include..." and "Well-known currently active performers include..." have grown to considerable length (105 examples total). Should the lists be shortened or left at that length? 22:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:ReleaseTheMemo 1. Should the article describe the media campaign as supported by Russian Bots? 2. If yes to number 1, should the Russian bot support for the campaign be in the first defining sentence of the article? Casprings (talk) 03:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Christianity in Iran I invite comments from other editors on recent changes to the article pertaining to the state of Christian converts in Iran. My position and a proposed edit are in the section immediately below. I regret this is a "Bad Question", as described at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, but to be more specific would be to (non-neutrally) restate my own position. Pinkbeast (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Presently, MOS:NUMS includes: Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may necessitate the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the South Asian numbering system is conventionally used in South Asian English. In those situations, link the first spelled-out instance of each quantity (e.g. crore, which yields: crore). This is followed by three more bullet points of WP:CREEP about crore. The lead sentence of this is just patently false; nothing necessitates the use of alternative numbering systems. Proof that Indian English doesn't do so abounds (including with regard to Indian currency) [11], [12], [13], [14] etc., etc. I propose that this be deleted and replaced with a) short advice against use of crore in Wikipedia articles, unless conversion is provided to Western numbers, and b) retaining the advice against using "1,00,00,000" for "10,000,000". Rationale: I do not believe the present wording has actual consensus, and crore are rarely used in our articles even on Indian subjects. Some small number of Indian editors have somehow gotten MoS to be permissive about crore, despite it being non-English and meaning nothing to most anyone outside that part of the world, and despite English-speakers of India having no problem with "ten million" (or "10,000,000", "10mil", "10M", etc.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Alternative for Germany How should the AfD be described within the infobox? A: right-wing to far-right B: far-right C: another option (describe below) Mélencron (talk) 02:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Star Wars: The Last Jedi Hi, all. Per an RfC, editors (myself included) have worked on a draft at Draft:Star Wars Last Jedi audience response and its talk page. We are just about done, but there are remaining disagreements and we need comments from other editors to finally get this material into the article. The main disagreements are the following: There is debate on whether or not to present the "divisive" aspect first and whether or not it is WP:Due or WP:Undue. With regard to the parentage aspect, there is debate on whether or not, in order to give give an example instead of being vague, we should mention that many fans were expecting Rey to be Luke's daughter. Or whether we should mention a few examples. And there is debate on whether or not to plainly state that many fans felt that Luke's actions in The Last Jedi contrasted his previous heroic portrayal or to instead state that many fans felt that he should have been portrayed more heroically; how to word this can be worked out later. There was also alt-right debates, but we have kept that material out of the draft. I present three versions below. Obviously, none of these versions mean that the section cannot be edited further afterward. Coming to a consensus on one of the versions simply means that we can finally move forward. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia style and naming[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia style and naming Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) In general, should articles about anime media use the disambiguator (anime), rather than more general ones like ([animated] TV series) or (film) or, more broadly, (franchise)? There is some disagreement over whether an earlier discussion, WP:VPP#RfC: Is "telenovela" a suitable disambiguator? (permalink), is applicable. Sub-question: Should Wikipedia:Naming conventions (anime) be created? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:A Wizard of Earthsea User:Vanamonde93 and I have a disagreement about what is acceptable in synopses (see "Disputed changes" section above), specifically: Here Ged realizes that the shadow has always been a part of his own spirit. Naming it with his own name, he merges with the shadow creature, understanding and accepting it as part of himself, and thus healing himself.[1][2] References ^ Cadden 2005, p. 80. ^ Bernardo & Murphy 2006, pp. 98–99. I believe that this violates MOS:PLOT: "the plot summary must not present interpretations of the creators' intent. [...] Interpretation of the plot taken from reliable sources can be included elsewhere in the article to provide additional information." The fact that it requires two sources to back it up demonstrates, in my opinion, that this is the case here. Author Ursula K. Le Guin never reveals the exact nature of the shadow creature, leaving that to the reader's imagination. She also, as far as I can recall, doesn't refer to any "spirit" whatsoever. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Issue statement: We have arrived at a bewildering profusion of ENGVAR-related templates, the only purpose of which seems to be advancing nationalistic viewpoints. For those not reading the discussion above this one, the short version is that in an encyclopedic, formal register, there is no meaningful difference between English, Scottish, Irish, Australian, New Zealand, African, Hong Kong, etc., varieties of English, only between Commonwealth English as a dialect continuum and the North American varieties (American English, and Canadian English which is a hybrid of American and British/Commonwealth). Commonwealth English is based on UK-published style guides; there are virtually no reliably published style manuals for Commonwealth dialects that are not produced in England in particular (by contrast, US and Canadian English are the subject of multiple mainstream style guides published in those countries). Concrete proposal: For WP purposes, we would just a {{Use Commonwealth English}} template with a {{Use European English}} redirect to it (since Ireland is not part of the Commonwealth at present). That will cover the full gamut of non-North American dialects of English following the style most often called "British". We would retain {{Use American English}} and {{Use Canadian English}} to cover the North American written dialects. Canadian is essentially a hybrid of US and British, and there are multiple, reputably published style guides for both US and Canadian writing. This would take care of the quiet, categorizing templates in Category:Use English templates; the big talk-page and editnotice banner equivalents (e.g. {{American English}}, etc.) in Category:Varieties of English templates would also be merged into a corresponding set of templates. Categories used would also, naturally, be merged as needed. MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:TIES would be clarified and shortened, no longer suggesting that things be written in Pakistani English, etc., which is essentially meaningless with regard to encyclopedic prose.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Presently, MOS:NUMS includes: Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may necessitate the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the South Asian numbering system is conventionally used in South Asian English. In those situations, link the first spelled-out instance of each quantity (e.g. crore, which yields: crore). This is followed by three more bullet points of WP:CREEP about crore. The lead sentence of this is just patently false; nothing necessitates the use of alternative numbering systems. Proof that Indian English doesn't do so abounds (including with regard to Indian currency) [15], [16], [17], [18] etc., etc. I propose that this be deleted and replaced with a) short advice against use of crore in Wikipedia articles, unless conversion is provided to Western numbers, and b) retaining the advice against using "1,00,00,000" for "10,000,000". Rationale: I do not believe the present wording has actual consensus, and crore are rarely used in our articles even on Indian subjects. Some small number of Indian editors have somehow gotten MoS to be permissive about crore, despite it being non-English and meaning nothing to most anyone outside that part of the world, and despite English-speakers of India having no problem with "ten million" (or "10,000,000", "10mil", "10M", etc.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Talk:Military Sealift Command In 2015 the CNO and SecNav renamed multiple classes, including changing designations for JHSV's to Expeditionary Fast Transport (EPF), Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) to Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD), and the Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB) variant of the MLP to Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB). Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) is the correct designation for ESB-class vessels and there is no need to edit it to previous or outdated names. Coffee Atoms (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC) Template talk:Infobox country I haven't found any guidelines on this, so I apologize if this topic's been discussed and closed before. Per MOS:CURRENCY: In country-specific articles, such as Economy of Australia, use the currency of the subject country. [...] In general, the first mention of a particular currency should use its full, unambiguous signifier (e.g. A$52), with subsequent references using just the appropriate symbol (e.g. $88), unless this would be unclear. A quick browse of infoboxes for some existing countries shows no signifier for the type of dollar used to denote their GDP. However, the IMF seems to be universally cited for the numbers, which notes the amount is in US Dollars. That information is only viewable if the reader opens the reference link. This can be confusing for readers outside the US as the dollar sign is a currency symbol for multiple countries, including Mexico's peso, and en.Wikipedia is the most read of WMF's projects around the world. I propose adding language to the infobox parameters that ambiguous currency symbols (e.g. $, ¥, ₩ etc.) should be prepended with the appropriate ISO code as prescribed by MOS:CURRENCY. The Examples and TemplateData section on this infobox's page should show currency code examples like US$10.5 billion or HK$10.5 billion, dependent of course on what currency the reference uses. Unambiguous symbols, like the Indian rupee (₹) should just be wikilinked without the ISO code. - GS ⋙ ☎ 07:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia policies and guidelines[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines Wikipedia talk:Banning policy I'd like to see a change to WP:CBAN from "Sanction discussions are normally kept open for at least 24 hours to allow time for comments from a broad selection of community members." to "Sanction discussions must be kept open for at least 24 hours to allow time for comments from a broad selection of community members." Summarizing from here: Can someone please explain why there's a rush to close banning discussions? If the editor is currently being disruptive that can be solved with a block. Otherwise it saves a lot of time and discussion when the editor or someone else complains that not all interested community members had a chance to comment. The shorter the discussion stays open, the better for opponents of the editor to steamroll through a sanction. All sides - opponents, supporters, uninvolved (who usually take longer to comment) - should get at least the chance to be heard. --NeilN talk to me 02:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Did you know The role of admins in the DYK process as defined in the instructions, and the role as practiced, differ widely. Moreover, different admins treat their role differently, and based on past discussions, have widely divergent views on what the role should be. For folks unfamiliar with the process, admins are required to move approved DYK hooks from Prep areas to Queues. The question here is what, if any, further checks admins are required to perform during this process. Since there are many possible combinations here, I have structured this to permit maximum flexibility in the outcome. Therefore, please feel free to add additional checks that you think admins are required to do, that I may have left out. Vanamonde (talk) 17:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Should we update WP:NOTDIR to explicitly state that lists of transportation service destinations are outside the scope of Wikipedia? What is the relationship between WP:NOTDIR and WP:GNG for transportation related lists? BillHPike (talk, contribs) 23:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Administrators In the case of admins who have not actively used their tools for a prolonged period, should they still be granted two years to simply ask for them back if they are removed for inactivity? Beeblebrox (talk) 22:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Per previous discussions over at Wikipedia talk:Days of the year, it seems that there is some level of support for some kind of inclusion criteria for what articles to include on the Births and Deaths sections. There are some concerns that these sections are too-Western centric (i.e. people from North America or Europe are over-represented). The question now is: should we have some kind of guideline for inclusion in Births and Dates articles? Or is the status-quo fine? In my case, my pet proposal is that a proposed inclusion criteria would be similar to what's currently done at WP:DYK, where no more than half of each set can be about US-related topics. Though of course, other editors are free to propose other proposals here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) This RfC is to solicit feedback on the proposed re-write (above) of the notability guideline for corporations, organizations, products, etc. This is not a !voting for support/oppose. We are not there yet. Instead, want to hear thoughts on things to add, delete, modify, etc. before it goes to the !voting stage. Renata (talk) 02:07, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Template talk:COI Should the instructions for Template:COI include the following underlined language? Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start this discussion, then any editor without a conflict of interest is justified in removing the tag without warning. Be careful not to violate the policy against WP:OUTING users who have not publicly self-disclosed their identities on the English Wikipedia. -- Jytdog (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Notability (events) Should this edit be reinstated? jps (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2018 (UTC) WikiProjects and collaborations[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiProjects and collaborations Wikipedia technical issues and templates[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia technical issues and templates Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Should the "default" <math> be changed to inline in the future?--Debenben (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Talk:Battle of France I have extended full protection for one more week while the RFC plays out. Please note, I don't have an opinion here, the question is presented simply to answer the issue at hand. I will not vote but I will take action if any editor makes personal attacks or is grossly uncivil. Proposal The issue is to include or exclude the word "decisive" in the infobox as a descriptor of the victory. The current template strongly discourages the use of a qualifier, but under WP:IAR, it does not prohibit it, thus it is a matter of local consensus. The template is a stable one so we can assume it has consensus as a general guideline. The sole question is whether or not this particular article should be an exception to standard practice, for whatever reason. At an appropriate time (a week or longer), this will be closed and will provide a clear consensus as to the state of the article, and will serve as demonstration of that consensus until a new RFC demonstrates otherwise. At that time, anyone edit warring against the consensus will be blocked. Please use short, policy based reasons in the polling area and not just a vote. Please keep threaded comments in the "Discussion" area. You are encouraged to advertise this RFC on appropriate projects so long as it is a neutral notification and not an endorsement of any side of the issue. Notifying editors individually will probably be seen as canvassing, so I don't suggest it. Again, keep it civil, on topic and professional, please. Until this RFC closes, do not modify the current infobox entry, even if protection expires. This will be seen as edit warring and will result in a block without warning. This isn't an endorsement of the current version, it is a preventative measure to stop warring until a consensus is reached. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia proposals[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) This topic has seen a lot of debate, but I think we might want to consider turning off the function that leaves messages on talk pages. See user:InternetArchiveBot for context. This talk page shows a typical instance of the bot's messaging process, which it does after redirecting a dead link to an archived copy of a dead web page hosted at the Internet Archive. The bot has posted hundreds of thousands of these messages on various Wikipedia article talk pages since 2016. Why? IABot's error rate has dropped to near negligible numbers. Users really interested in checking the edit, will do so without being asked to. If the bot did make an error, with IABot's newest upgrade in v1.6, simply reverting the bot is enough to report a bad edit as a false positive. Question for you guys, should I turn off the bot's messaging feature? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberpower678 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Per previous discussions over at Wikipedia talk:Days of the year, it seems that there is some level of support for some kind of inclusion criteria for what articles to include on the Births and Deaths sections. There are some concerns that these sections are too-Western centric (i.e. people from North America or Europe are over-represented). The question now is: should we have some kind of guideline for inclusion in Births and Dates articles? Or is the status-quo fine? In my case, my pet proposal is that a proposed inclusion criteria would be similar to what's currently done at WP:DYK, where no more than half of each set can be about US-related topics. Though of course, other editors are free to propose other proposals here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC) Unsorted[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Unsorted User names[edit] Transcluded from Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names Shortcuts WP:RFC/NAME WP:RFCN Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache 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. 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. v t e Requests for comment (All) Articles Biographies (bio) Economy, trade, and companies (econ) History and geography (hist) Language and linguistics (lang) Maths, science, and technology (sci) Media, the arts, and architecture (media) Politics, government, and law (pol) Religion and philosophy (reli) Society, sports, and culture (soc) Non-articles Wikipedia style and naming (style) Wikipedia policies and guidelines (policy) WikiProjects and collaborations (proj) Wikipedia technical issues and templates (tech) Wikipedia proposals (prop) Unsorted Instructions To add a discussion to this list: Add the tag {{rfc|xxx}} at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, {{rfc|xxx|yyy}}, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category. For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot. v t e Noticeboards Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. General Administrators main incidents Bots Bureaucrats Closure Education Main Page errors Open proxies OTRS 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 Reliable sources Resource requests Spam blacklist whitelist Scalable vector graphics Titleblacklist Translation Page handling History merges Mergers Moves Protection Importing pages XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion User conduct Long-term abuse Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal sanctions General sanctions Paid editing Sockpuppets Usernames Vandalism Other Arbitration Committee noticeboard requests enforcement Edit filters requested Mediation Questions Editor assistance Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump ideas policy proposals technical miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Category:Wikipedia noticeboards Skip to TOC Skip to bottom Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All&oldid=795631515" Categories: Wikipedia requests for commentWikipedia dispute resolutionHidden categories: Non-talk pages that are automatically signed


Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged inTalkContributionsCreate accountLog in Namespaces Project pageTalk Variants Views ReadEditView history More Search Navigation Main pageContentsFeatured contentCurrent eventsRandom articleDonate to WikipediaWikipedia store Interaction HelpAbout WikipediaCommunity portalRecent changesContact page Tools What links hereRelated changesUpload fileSpecial pagesPermanent linkPage information Print/export Create a bookDownload as PDFPrintable version Languages Add links This page was last edited on 15 August 2017, at 13:43. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Developers Cookie statement Mobile view (window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgPageParseReport":{"limitreport":{"cputime":"0.684","walltime":"0.935","ppvisitednodes":{"value":4456,"limit":1000000},"ppgeneratednodes":{"value":0,"limit":1500000},"postexpandincludesize":{"value":490214,"limit":2097152},"templateargumentsize":{"value":122227,"limit":2097152},"expansiondepth":{"value":11,"limit":40},"expensivefunctioncount":{"value":17,"limit":500},"entityaccesscount":{"value":0,"limit":400},"timingprofile":["100.00% 418.621 1 -total"," 52.91% 221.485 127 Template:Rfcquote"," 29.77% 124.603 7 Template:Reflist"," 27.12% 113.527 5 Template:Reflist-talk"," 22.87% 95.759 1 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies"," 19.92% 83.380 15 Template:Cite_news"," 13.10% 54.839 1 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Art,_architecture,_literature,_and_media"," 11.40% 47.732 1 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Religion_and_philosophy"," 10.53% 44.092 1 Template:Philosophy/Nav"," 9.49% 39.725 1 Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Politics,_government,_and_law"]},"scribunto":{"limitreport-timeusage":{"value":"0.120","limit":"10.000"},"limitreport-memusage":{"value":4671941,"limit":52428800}},"cachereport":{"origin":"mw1261","timestamp":"20180217190652","ttl":1900800,"transientcontent":false}}});});(window.RLQ=window.RLQ||[]).push(function(){mw.config.set({"wgBackendResponseTime":74,"wgHostname":"mw1327"});});


Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All - Photos and All Basic Informations

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All More Links

Wikipedia:Requests For CommentWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Requests For Comment/BiographiesTalk:Greek Royal FamilyWikipedia:COMMMONNAMEWikipedia:NAMINGCRITERIAWikipedia:RSBBCWashington PostNational HeraldCanadian Broadcasting CorporationDaily TelegraphThe Daily Telegraph (Sydney)The GuardianConstantine II Of GreeceTatoi PalaceRoyalistGossip MagazineHello (magazine)User:The GnomeUser Talk:The GnomeTalk:Shin Dong-hyukUser:Jack UplandUser Talk:Jack UplandTalk:Noah OppenheimMatt LauerTalk:Noah OppenheimNBC NewsTalk:NBC NewsMatt LauerUser:BC1278User Talk:BC1278Talk:Margot RobbieWikipedia:NOTADVERTISINGTalk:Joseph StalinUser:MidnightblueowlUser Talk:MidnightblueowlTalk:List Of Oldest Living PeopleWikipedia:RSTalk:List Of Oldest Living People/Archive 16Wikipedia:POVWikipedia:IDONTLIKEITUser:DerbyCountyinNZUser Talk:DerbyCountyinNZSpecial:Contributions/DerbyCountyinNZTalk:Bahar Mustafa Race RowUser Talk:CunardTalk:Coco AustinTalk:Lyndsy FonsecaTalk:Dorothy TarrantEmeritusUser:Andrew DavidsonUser Talk:Andrew DavidsonTalk:2018Naomi Parker FraleyUser:The Rambling ManUser Talk:The Rambling ManTalk:Princess Eugenie Of YorkUser:Keivan.fUser Talk:Keivan.fTalk:Noah OppenheimTalk:Noah OppenheimRonan FarrowHarvey Weinstein Sexual Abuse AllegationsJames Warren (journalist)User:JytdogUser Talk:JytdogWikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia Talk:Days Of The YearWikipedia:DYKUser:Narutolovehinata5User Talk:Narutolovehinata5Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5Wikipedia:CSDSpecial:NewPagesTalk:Seth MacFarlaneSpecial:Contributions/2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9DUser Talk:2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9DWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Economy, Trade, And CompaniesTalk:Elon Musk's Tesla RoadsterUser:Dennis BratlandUser Talk:Dennis BratlandTalk:Lord & TaylorUser:Flossypossie98User Talk:Flossypossie98Talk:Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Objections To The Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017User:Jax 0677User Talk:Jax 0677Wikipedia Talk:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersMOS:NUMSCroreWikipedia:CREEPCroreUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishTalk:Bitcoin CashUser:Ladislav MecirUser Talk:Ladislav MecirWikipedia:Requests For Comment/History And GeographyTalk:BanderitesUser:Yulia RomeroUser:PoeticbentWikipedia:CFORKStepan BanderaUser:Yulia RomeroUser Talk:Yulia RomeroTalk:Greek Royal FamilyWikipedia:COMMMONNAMEWikipedia:NAMINGCRITERIAWikipedia:RSBBCWashington PostNational HeraldCanadian Broadcasting CorporationDaily TelegraphThe Daily Telegraph (Sydney)The GuardianConstantine II Of GreeceTatoi PalaceRoyalistGossip MagazineHello (magazine)User:The GnomeUser Talk:The GnomeTalk:Giovanni GentileUser:Etzedek24Talk:MorlachsUser:Staszek LemUser Talk:Staszek LemTalk:AppeasementUser:GPRamirez5User Talk:GPRamirez5Talk:Paektu MountainSea Of JapanSea Of JapanSenkaku IslandsLiancourt RocksUser:GaramUser Talk:GaramTalk:Type 4 Chi-ToCategory:World War II Tanks By CountryWikipedia:NAMINGCRITERIACategory:World War II Tanks Of The United StatesT14 Heavy TankT20 Medium TankT28 Super Heavy TankT29 Heavy TankT30 Heavy TankCategory:World War II Tanks Of JapanType 1 Chi-HeType 1 Ho-Ni IType 2 Ho-IType 2 Ka-MiType 2 Ke-ToType 3 Chi-NuUser:PoeticbentUser Talk:PoeticbentTalk:Simon's SircusUser:PyropeSicDe Havilland Sea VixenSimon's SircusKrispy KremeUser:ClarityfiendUser Talk:ClarityfiendTalk:Joseph StalinUser:MidnightblueowlUser Talk:MidnightblueowlTemplate Talk:Iranian MajlisUser Talk:PahlevunTalk:Battle Of Mosul (2016–2017)Western Nineveh Offensive (2017)User:MonsterHunter32User Talk:MonsterHunter32Talk:Continuation WarUser Talk:RedUserTalk:Nagorno-KarabakhUser:Human7777User Talk:Human7777Talk:Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Objections To The Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017User:Jax 0677User Talk:Jax 0677Talk:BelarusRomanization Of BelarusianUser:SabbatinoUser Talk:SabbatinoTalk:Oakland Coliseum StationUser:Titanosaurus/sandboxConey Island–Stillwell Avenue (New York City Subway)Flushing–Main Street (IRT Flushing Line)AC TransitWikipedia:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard/Archive 160User:TitanosaurusUser Talk:TitanosaurusTalk:Battle Of FranceWikipedia:IARUser:Dennis BrownUser Talk:Dennis BrownTalk:March 14, 1891, LynchingsUser:MopTopUser Talk:MopTopWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Language And LinguisticsTalk:Simon's SircusUser:PyropeSicDe Havilland Sea VixenSimon's SircusKrispy KremeUser:ClarityfiendUser Talk:ClarityfiendTalk:"Polish Death Camp" ControversyMisnomerUser:Staszek LemUser Talk:Staszek LemWikipedia Talk:Manual Of StyleRegister (socio-linguistics)Commonwealth EnglishAmerican EnglishCanadian EnglishTemplate:Use European EnglishTemplate:Use American EnglishTemplate:Use Canadian EnglishCategory:Use English TemplatesTemplate:American EnglishCategory:Varieties Of English TemplatesMOS:ENGVARMOS:TIESUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Maths, Science, And TechnologyTalk:Elon Musk's Tesla RoadsterUser:Dennis BratlandUser Talk:Dennis BratlandTalk:EnpassUser:Zafar24User Talk:Zafar24Wikipedia:Village Pump (policy)User:DebenbenUser Talk:DebenbenTalk:PAX LabsUser Talk:QuackGuruTalk:ReleaseTheMemoUser:CaspringsUser Talk:CaspringsTalk:Heat-not-burn Tobacco ProductUser Talk:QuackGuruWikipedia Talk:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersMOS:NUMSCroreWikipedia:CREEPCroreUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishTalk:Military Sealift CommandUser:Coffee AtomsUser Talk:Coffee AtomsTalk:2018 In ScienceUser:Deacon VorbisUser Talk:Deacon VorbisSpecial:Contributions/Deacon VorbisWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Art, Architecture, Literature, And MediaTalk:Miley Cyrus & Her Dead PetzUser Talk:AleccatTalk:Noah OppenheimMatt LauerTalk:Noah OppenheimNBC NewsTalk:NBC NewsMatt LauerUser:BC1278User Talk:BC1278Talk:Beirut (film)User:ZinedineZidane98User Talk:ZinedineZidane98Talk:The National MemoUser:Robert McClenonUser:JustlettersandnumbersUser:SpintendoThe National MemoUser:JustlettersandnumbersThe National MemoUser:JustlettersandnumbersUser:SpintendoTalk:Bahar Mustafa Race RowUser Talk:CunardTalk:Elon Musk's Tesla RoadsterUser:Dennis BratlandUser Talk:Dennis BratlandTalk:Lyndsy FonsecaWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Video GamesTemplate:VgreleaseUser:Wrath XUser Talk:Wrath XWikipedia Talk:WikiProject MusiciansWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Musicians/Archive 10Anthrax (American Band)Black SabbathMegadethFoo FightersLinkin ParkPearl JamUser:4TheWynneUser Talk:4TheWynneSpecial:Contributions/4TheWynneWikipedia Talk:WikiProject FilmA Christmas StoryUser:JDDJSUser Talk:JDDJSWikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia:VPPSpecial:Contributions/67.14.236.50User Talk:67.14.236.50Talk:Culture Of The United KingdomTalk:Noah OppenheimTalk:Noah OppenheimRonan FarrowHarvey Weinstein Sexual Abuse AllegationsJames Warren (journalist)User:JytdogUser Talk:JytdogTalk:Oakland Coliseum StationUser:Titanosaurus/sandboxConey Island–Stillwell Avenue (New York City Subway)Flushing–Main Street (IRT Flushing Line)AC TransitWikipedia:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard/Archive 160User:TitanosaurusUser Talk:TitanosaurusTalk:Seth MacFarlaneSpecial:Contributions/2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9DUser Talk:2600:387:8:7:0:0:0:9DWikipedia Talk:WikiProject MusicWikipedia:IDEALSTUBUser:Jax 0677User Talk:Jax 0677Talk:Star Wars: The Last JediTalk:Star Wars: The Last JediDraft:Star Wars Last Jedi Audience ResponseWikipedia:DueRey (Star Wars)Luke SkywalkerAlt-rightUser:Flyer22 RebornUser Talk:Flyer22 RebornTalk:Back To The FutureUser:CpaaoiUser Talk:CpaaoiWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Politics, Government, And LawTalk:Greek Royal FamilyWikipedia:COMMMONNAMEWikipedia:NAMINGCRITERIAWikipedia:RSBBCWashington PostNational HeraldCanadian Broadcasting CorporationDaily TelegraphThe Daily Telegraph (Sydney)The GuardianConstantine II Of GreeceTatoi PalaceRoyalistGossip MagazineHello (magazine)User:The GnomeUser Talk:The GnomeTalk:MorlachsUser:Staszek LemUser Talk:Staszek LemTalk:Shin Dong-hyukUser:Jack UplandUser Talk:Jack UplandTalk:Holocaust DenialHolocaust DenialUser:R9tgokunksUser Talk:R9tgokunksTalk:"Polish Death Camp" ControversyMisnomerUser:Staszek LemUser Talk:Staszek LemTalk:Joseph StalinUser:MidnightblueowlUser Talk:MidnightblueowlTalk:The National MemoUser:Robert McClenonUser:JustlettersandnumbersUser:SpintendoThe National MemoUser:JustlettersandnumbersThe National MemoUser:JustlettersandnumbersUser:SpintendoTalk:Bahar Mustafa Race RowUser Talk:CunardTalk:List Of Trump–Russia Dossier AllegationsTrump–Russia DossierTrump–Russia DossierUser:MjolnirPantsUser Talk:MjolnirPantsTemplate Talk:Iranian MajlisUser Talk:PahlevunTalk:B'TselemAmira HassHaaretzIDF SpokespersonMoti AlmozTuvia TenenbomHolocaust DenialUser:IcewhizUser Talk:IcewhizTalk:Real News UpdateFoxconnUnited States Department Of EducationUser:DrFleischmanUser Talk:DrFleischmanTalk:Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017User:DrFleischmanUser Talk:DrFleischmanTalk:Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017Objections To The Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Of 2017User:Jax 0677User Talk:Jax 0677Talk:Justice Party (South Korea)Social DemocracyUser:GaramDemocratic SocialistUser:HapHaxionUser Talk:HapHaxionSpecial:Contributions/HapHaxionTalk:ReleaseTheMemoUser:CaspringsUser Talk:CaspringsWikipedia Talk:Manual Of StyleRegister (socio-linguistics)Commonwealth EnglishAmerican EnglishCanadian EnglishTemplate:Use European EnglishTemplate:Use American EnglishTemplate:Use Canadian EnglishCategory:Use English TemplatesTemplate:American EnglishCategory:Varieties Of English TemplatesMOS:ENGVARMOS:TIESUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishTalk:Coachella Valley ChurchUser Talk:NaturaNaturansTalk:Alternative For GermanyUser:MélencronUser Talk:MélencronTalk:Military Sealift CommandUser:Coffee AtomsUser Talk:Coffee AtomsTalk:Knights Of ColumbusProposition 8User:GreenMeansGoUser Talk:GreenMeansGoWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Religion And PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophyCategory:PhilosophyPortal:PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/participantsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Working CategoriesWikipedia:Manual Of Style/PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Article AlertsWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/New ArticlesWikipedia:WikiProject Deletion Sorting/PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/To DoWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/RFCWikipedia:Requested Articles/PhilosophyWikipedia:Reference Desk/HumanitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ShowcaseWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Star Of SophiaWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Reference ResourcesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Unreferenced BLPsWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/StructureWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/PhilosophersWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosopher Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/LiteratureWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophical Literature Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/AestheticsWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Aesthetics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/EpistemologyWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Epistemology Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/EthicsWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject LogicWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Logic Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/MetaphysicsWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Metaphysics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Social And PoliticalWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Social And Political Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/LanguageWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Language Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/MindWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Mind Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ReligionWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Religion Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ScienceWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Science Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/AnalyticWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Analytic Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ContinentalWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Continental Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/EasternWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Eastern Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/AnarchismWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Anarchism Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/AncientWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ancient Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/MedievalWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Medieval Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ModernWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Modern Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/ContemporaryWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Contemporary Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/AssessmentTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Tables Of StatisticsWikipedia:Pages Needing Attention/PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Peer ReviewCategory:Philosophy Articles By QualityCategory:FA-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:FL-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:GA-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:B-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:C-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Start-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Stub-Class Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Unassessed Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Philosophy Articles By ImportanceCategory:Top-importance Philosophy ArticlesCategory:High-importance Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Mid-importance Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Low-importance Philosophy ArticlesCategory:Unknown-importance Philosophy ArticlesWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosopher Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophical Literature Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Aesthetics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Epistemology Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Logic Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Metaphysics Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Social And Political Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Language Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Mind Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Religion Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Philosophy Of Science Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Analytic Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Continental Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Eastern Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Anarchism Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ancient Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Medieval Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Modern Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Contemporary Philosophy Articles By Quality LogWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Philosophers/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Philosophical Literature/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Aesthetics/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Epistemology/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Ethics/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Logic/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Metaphysics/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Social And Political/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Language/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Mind/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Religion/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Science/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Analytic/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Continental/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Eastern/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Anarchism/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Ancient/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Medieval/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Modern/Popular PagesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Contemporary/Popular PagesIndex Of PhilosophyList Of PhilosophersIndex Of Philosophical LiteratureIndex Of Aesthetics ArticlesIndex Of Epistemology ArticlesIndex Of Ethics ArticlesIndex Of Logic ArticlesIndex Of Metaphysics ArticlesIndex Of Social And Political Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Philosophy Of Language ArticlesIndex Of Philosophy Of Mind ArticlesIndex Of Philosophy Of Religion ArticlesIndex Of Philosophy Of Science ArticlesIndex Of Analytic Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Continental Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Eastern Philosophy ArticlesLists Of Anarchism TopicsIndex Of Ancient Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Medieval Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Modern Philosophy ArticlesIndex Of Contemporary Philosophy ArticlesPortal:Philosophy/PortalsPortal:PhilosophyPortal Talk:PhilosophyPortal:AestheticsPortal Talk:AestheticsPortal:EthicsPortal Talk:EthicsPortal:EpistemologyPortal Talk:EpistemologyPortal:LogicPortal Talk:LogicPortal:MetaphysicsPortal Talk:MetaphysicsPortal:Philosophy Of SciencePortal Talk:Philosophy Of SciencePortal:Mind And BrainPortal Talk:Mind And BrainPortal:ThinkingPortal Talk:ThinkingPortal:AnarchismPortal Talk:AnarchismPortal:ExistentialismPortal Talk:ExistentialismPortal:Social And Political PhilosophyPortal Talk:Social And Political PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/TemplatesTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:Philosophy TopicsTemplate:Infobox PhilosopherTemplate:PhilCOTWTemplate:PhilosophyTasksTemplate:PhilosophyTasksBoxTemplate:PhilInvitTemplate:AestheticsTemplate:EpistemologyTemplate:EthicsTemplate:LogicTemplate:MetaphysicsTemplate:Social And Political PhilosophyTemplate:Philosophy Of LanguageTemplate:Philosophy Of MindTemplate:Philosophy Of ReligionTemplate:Philosophy Of ScienceTemplate:Analytic PhilosophyTemplate:Continental PhilosophyTemplate:Philo-stubTemplate:Philosopher-stubTemplate:Philo-book-stubTemplate:Hindu-philo-stubTemplate:Philos-novel-stubTemplate:Ethics-stubTemplate:Logic-stubTemplate:User WP PhilosophyTemplate:User WP PhilosophersTemplate:User WP Philosophical LitTemplate:User WP AestheticsTemplate:User WP EpistemologyTemplate:User WP EthicsTemplate:User WP LogicTemplate:User WP MetaphysicsTemplate:User WP Soc+Pol PhilTemplate:User WP Continental PhilosophyTemplate:User WP AnarchismTemplate:User WP Analytic PhilosophyTemplate:User WP Eastern PhilTemplate:User WP Ancient PhilTemplate:User WP Medieval PhilTemplate:User WP Modern PhilTemplate:User WP Contemporary PhilTemplate:User WP Phil Of ReligionTemplate:User WP Phil Of MindTemplate:User WP Phil Of ScienceTemplate:User WP Phil Of LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Philosophy And ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismWikipedia Talk:WikiProject AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject Bible/Biblical Criticism Work GroupWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Bible/Biblical Criticism Work GroupWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Science And AcademiaWikipedia Talk:WikiProject BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/PhilosophyWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Hinduism/PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject History Of ScienceWikipedia Talk:WikiProject History Of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryWikipedia Talk:WikiProject HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject IslamWikipedia Talk:WikiProject IslamWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureWikipedia Talk:WikiProject LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyWikipedia Talk:WikiProject MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsWikipedia Talk:WikiProject PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismWikipedia Talk:WikiProject SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionWikipedia Talk:WikiProject ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceWikipedia Talk:WikiProject ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityWikipedia Talk:WikiProject SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Theology Work GroupWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Christianity/Theology Work GroupWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Reference ResourcesWikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/NavWikipedia Talk:WikiProject Philosophy/NavTalk:Christianity In IranWikipedia:Requests For CommentUser:PinkbeastUser Talk:PinkbeastTalk:The Satanic TempleSatanistsSatanism (disambiguation)SatanismWikipedia:HatnoteSatanism (disambiguation)User:SeanbonnerUser Talk:SeanbonnerTalk:Coachella Valley ChurchUser Talk:NaturaNaturansTalk:Knights Of ColumbusProposition 8User:GreenMeansGoUser Talk:GreenMeansGoWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Society, Sports, And CultureTalk:Chloe KimTemplate:Korean NameChloe KimTemplate:Korean NameTemplate Talk:Korean NameUser:GaramUser Talk:GaramTalk:Greek Royal FamilyWikipedia:COMMMONNAMEWikipedia:NAMINGCRITERIAWikipedia:RSBBCWashington PostNational HeraldCanadian Broadcasting CorporationDaily TelegraphThe Daily Telegraph (Sydney)The GuardianConstantine II Of GreeceTatoi PalaceRoyalistGossip MagazineHello (magazine)User:The GnomeUser Talk:The GnomeTalk:MorlachsUser:Staszek LemUser Talk:Staszek LemTalk:AppeasementUser:GPRamirez5User Talk:GPRamirez5Talk:Korean Fried ChickenTalk:Korean Fried ChickenUser Talk:MunuiUser:GaramUser Talk:GaramTalk:Holocaust DenialHolocaust DenialUser:R9tgokunksUser Talk:R9tgokunksTalk:CanadaTalk:Canada/Archive 22Talk:Canada/Archive 23Talk:Canada/Archive 23Talk:Canada/Archive 26User:Cryptic CanadianUser Talk:Cryptic CanadianTalk:Prostitution In OceaniaProcuring (prostitution)User:John B123User Talk:John B123Talk:Rasta RasivhengeCategory:Australian Rugby Union RefereesUser:ShuddeUser Talk:ShuddeTalk:High Point High SchoolUser:John From IdegonUser:MellisUser:WhisperToMeUser Talk:WhisperToMeTalk:Culture Of The United KingdomTalk:ReleaseTheMemoUser:CaspringsUser Talk:CaspringsTalk:Christianity In IranWikipedia:Requests For CommentUser:PinkbeastUser Talk:PinkbeastWikipedia Talk:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersMOS:NUMSCroreWikipedia:CREEPCroreUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishTalk:Alternative For GermanyUser:MélencronUser Talk:MélencronTalk:Star Wars: The Last JediTalk:Star Wars: The Last JediDraft:Star Wars Last Jedi Audience ResponseWikipedia:DueRey (Star Wars)Luke SkywalkerAlt-rightUser:Flyer22 RebornUser Talk:Flyer22 RebornWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Style And NamingWikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia:VPPSpecial:Contributions/67.14.236.50User Talk:67.14.236.50Talk:A Wizard Of EarthseaUser:Vanamonde93MOS:PLOTUrsula K. Le GuinUser:ClarityfiendUser Talk:ClarityfiendWikipedia Talk:Manual Of StyleRegister (socio-linguistics)Commonwealth EnglishAmerican EnglishCanadian EnglishTemplate:Use European EnglishTemplate:Use American EnglishTemplate:Use Canadian EnglishCategory:Use English TemplatesTemplate:American EnglishCategory:Varieties Of English TemplatesMOS:ENGVARMOS:TIESUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishWikipedia Talk:Manual Of Style/Dates And NumbersMOS:NUMSCroreWikipedia:CREEPCroreUser:SMcCandlishUser Talk:SMcCandlishSpecial:Contributions/SMcCandlishTalk:Military Sealift CommandUser:Coffee AtomsUser Talk:Coffee AtomsTemplate Talk:Infobox CountryMOS:CURRENCYOECDIMFDollarMexican Peso$¥ISO 3166-1 Alpha-2MOS:CURRENCYTemplate:Infobox CountryTemplate:Infobox CountryUS$HK$User:GrapefruitSculpinUser Talk:GrapefruitSculpinWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia Talk:Banning PolicyWikipedia:CBANWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsUser:NeilNUser Talk:NeilNWikipedia Talk:Did You KnowUser:Vanamonde93User Talk:Vanamonde93Wikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia:NOTDIRWikipedia:GNGUser:BillhpikeUser Talk:BillhpikeSpecial:Contributions/BillhpikeWikipedia Talk:AdministratorsUser:BeeblebroxUser Talk:BeeblebroxWikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia Talk:Days Of The YearWikipedia:DYKUser:Narutolovehinata5User Talk:Narutolovehinata5Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5Wikipedia:CSDSpecial:NewPagesWikipedia Talk:Notability (organizations And Companies)User:Renata3User Talk:Renata3Template Talk:COITemplate:COIWikipedia:COIWikipedia:OUTINGUser:JytdogUser Talk:JytdogWikipedia Talk:Notability (events)User:ජපසUser Talk:ජපසWikipedia:Requests For Comment/WikiProjects And CollaborationsWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Technical Issues And TemplatesWikipedia:Village Pump (policy)User:DebenbenUser Talk:DebenbenTalk:Battle Of FranceWikipedia:IARUser:Dennis BrownUser Talk:Dennis BrownWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia ProposalsWikipedia:Village Pump (proposals)User:InternetArchiveBotInternet ArchiveWikipedia:SignaturesUser:Cyberpower678User Talk:Cyberpower678Special:Contributions/Cyberpower678Wikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia Talk:Days Of The YearWikipedia:DYKUser:Narutolovehinata5User Talk:Narutolovehinata5Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5Wikipedia:CSDSpecial:NewPagesWikipedia:Requests For Comment/UnsortedWikipedia:Requests For Comment/User NamesWikipedia:ShortcutWikipedia:Requests For Comment/User Names/IndexWikipedia:Requests For Comment/User Names/AdministratorsWikipedia:Username PolicyWikipedia:Usernames For Administrator AttentionWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsWikipedia:Blocking PolicyTemplate:Uw-usernameTemplate:UsernameDiscussionTemplate:UsernameNoticeTemplate:Rfcn1Special:ListUsersSpecial:BlockListTemplate:RFC List FooterTemplate Talk:RFC List FooterWikipedia:Requests For CommentWikipedia:Requests For Comment/BiographiesWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Economy, Trade, And CompaniesWikipedia:Requests For Comment/History And GeographyWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Language And LinguisticsWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Maths, Science, And TechnologyWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Media, The Arts, And ArchitectureWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Politics, Government, And LawWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Religion And PhilosophyWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Society, Sports, And CultureWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Style And NamingWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Policies And GuidelinesWikipedia:Requests For Comment/WikiProjects And CollaborationsWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia Technical Issues And TemplatesWikipedia:Requests For Comment/Wikipedia ProposalsWikipedia:Requests For Comment/UnsortedWikipedia:Talk PageTemplate:RfcWikipedia:Requests For CommentWikipedia Talk:Requests For CommentUser:LegobotTemplate:Noticeboard LinksTemplate Talk:Noticeboard LinksWikipedia:NoticeboardsWikipedia:Request DirectoryWikipedia:DashboardWikipedia:Administrators' NoticeboardWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/IncidentsWikipedia:Bots/NoticeboardWikipedia:Bureaucrats' NoticeboardWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Requests For ClosureWikipedia:Education NoticeboardWikipedia:Main Page/ErrorsWikipedia:WikiProject On Open ProxiesWikipedia:OTRS NoticeboardWikipedia:Requests For OversightWikipedia:Requests For PermissionsWikipedia:Biographies Of Living Persons/NoticeboardWikipedia:Media Copyright QuestionsWikipedia:Copyright ProblemsWikipedia:Dispute Resolution NoticeboardWikipedia:External Links/NoticeboardWikipedia:Fringe Theories/NoticeboardWikipedia:Neutral Point Of View/NoticeboardWikipedia:No Original Research/NoticeboardWikipedia:Reliable Sources/NoticeboardWikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource RequestWikipedia Talk:WikiProject SpamMediaWiki Talk:Spam-blacklistMediaWiki Talk:Spam-whitelistWikipedia:SVG HelpMediaWiki Talk:TitleblacklistWikipedia:Pages Needing Translation Into EnglishWikipedia:Requests For History MergeWikipedia:Proposed MergersWikipedia:Requested MovesWikipedia:Requests For Page ProtectionWikipedia:Requests For Page ImportationWikipedia:Deletion ProcessWikipedia:Articles For DeletionWikipedia:Redirects For DiscussionWikipedia:Categories For DiscussionWikipedia:Templates For DiscussionWikipedia:Files For DiscussionWikipedia:Miscellany For DeletionWikipedia:Requests For UndeletionWikipedia:Long-term AbuseWikipedia:Conflict Of Interest/NoticeboardWikipedia:Contributor Copyright InvestigationsWikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard/Edit WarringWikipedia:SanctionsWikipedia:Editing RestrictionsWikipedia:General SanctionsWikipedia:WikiProject Cooperation/Paid Editor HelpWikipedia:Sockpuppet InvestigationsWikipedia:Usernames For Administrator AttentionWikipedia:Administrator Intervention Against VandalismWikipedia:Arbitration Committee/NoticeboardWikipedia:Arbitration/RequestsWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/EnforcementWikipedia:Edit Filter NoticeboardWikipedia:Edit Filter/RequestedWikipedia:Requests For MediationWikipedia:Editor Assistance/RequestsWikipedia:Help DeskWikipedia:TeahouseWikipedia:Reference DeskWikipedia:WikiProject Articles For Creation/Help DeskWikipedia:Village Pump (idea Lab)Wikipedia:Village Pump (policy)Wikipedia:Village Pump (proposals)Wikipedia:Village Pump (technical)Wikipedia:Village Pump (miscellaneous)Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/ProposalsCategory:Wikipedia NoticeboardsHelp:CategoryCategory:Wikipedia Requests For CommentCategory:Wikipedia Dispute ResolutionCategory:Non-talk Pages That Are Automatically SignedDiscussion About Edits From This IP Address [n]A List Of Edits Made From This IP Address [y]View The Project Page [c]Discussion About The Content Page [t]Edit This Page [e]Visit The Main Page [z]Guides To Browsing WikipediaFeatured Content – The Best Of WikipediaFind Background Information On Current EventsLoad A Random Article [x]Guidance On How To Use And Edit WikipediaFind Out About WikipediaAbout The Project, What You Can Do, Where To Find ThingsA List Of Recent Changes In The Wiki [r]List Of All English Wikipedia Pages Containing Links To This Page [j]Recent Changes In Pages Linked From This Page [k]Upload Files [u]A List Of All Special Pages [q]Wikipedia:AboutWikipedia:General Disclaimer



view link view link view link view link view link