Wikipedia:Requests for comment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcut:
Wikipedia:RFC
For Request for checkuser, see Wikipedia:SPI.
For Redirects for creation, see Wikipedia:AFC/R.
For automatic linking of RFC expressions, see Wikipedia:RFCAUTO.

Dispute resolution ()
Honest conduct
Gaming the system
Tendentiousness
Calming problems
Wikiquette
Assuming good faith
No angry mastodons
Civility
Negotiation
Article talk pages
Discussion
Compromise
Editor assistance ()
Third opinion ()
Request comments ()
Wikiquette alerts ()
Mediation
Mediation Cabal
Mediation Committee ()
Arbitration
Arbitration Committee
Request arbitration
Remedies
Administrator assistance
Arbitration enforcement
Editing restrictions
General sanctions
Requests for comment (RfC) is an informal, lightweight process for requesting outside input, and dispute resolution, with respect to article content, user conduct, and Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Please note that there are other dispute resolution alternatives, notably the third opinion for disputes involving two editors as well as the reliable sources noticeboard and the neutral point of view noticeboard.

A list of all current RFCs can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All (Wikipedia:RFC/A).

Contents

Before requesting comment

Suggestions for responding

All editors (including anonymous or IP users) are welcome to provide comment or opinion, and to assist in reaching agreements, by responding to requests for comment.

Request comment through talk pages

Issues by topic area
Articles (main namespace)
Biographies(watch){{rfctag|bio}}
Economy, trade, and companies(watch){{rfctag|econ}}
History and geography(watch){{rfctag|hist}}
Language and linguistics(watch){{rfctag|lang}}
Maths, science, and technology(watch){{rfctag|sci}}
Art, architecture, literature, and media(watch){{rfctag|media}}
Politics, government, and law(watch){{rfctag|pol}}
Religion and philosophy(watch){{rfctag|reli}}
Society, sports, and culture(watch){{rfctag|soc}}
Non-article pages
Wikipedia style and naming(watch){{rfctag|style}}
Wikipedia policies and guidelines(watch){{rfctag|policy}}
WikiProjects and collaborations(watch){{rfctag|proj}}
Unsorted
Unsorted RFCs(watch)

You could use the RfC posting tool, or:

  1. Create a section for the RfC on the bottom of the disputed article's talk page; the section title should be neutral.
  2. Place one of the templates shown in the table on the right at the top of the new section. Fill out the template as follows: {{rfctag|category}} where "category" is the category abbreviation listed on the right. If you spell this category abbreviation incorrectly, use one that doesn't exist, or you leave it blank, then it will be added to the "Unsorted" list. Requests for comments in articles should be tagged for their main subject area(s), e.g., an RfC at the biography article for an artist should be tagged "bio" and "media". The "policy" category is for discussing changes to the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines themselves, not for discussing how to apply the existing policies and guidelines to a specific article. Do not use subst:
    Requests for comment can be in multiple categories through the addition of parameters; e.g. {{rfctag|xxx|yyy}}, {{rfctag|xxx|yyy|zzz}}, etc.
  3. Include a brief, neutral statement of the issue below the template. Be sure to sign the statement with ~~~~
  4. Now you're done. A bot will take care of the rest, so be patient.
Or you can add it manually; see below.

Example use of Rfctag

Below is an example of how a completed RFC template in the "hist" category and associated section heading might appear in a discussion page edit box before saving.

==RfC: Is Photo in History section relevant==

{{rfctag|hist}}

Is the photograph in the "History" section relevant to the article? ~~~~

The bot will place all of the text before the signature line (which can be ~~~~ (sign with your name) or ~~~~~ (only the date)) onto the RfC page. If the description is more than a couple of sentences long, you might choose to provide a very brief summary, sign it (so the bot will list only that summary), and then continue with longer comments afterwards (which you should also sign with your name, although they will not be placed on the centralized RfC pages).

If you feel as though you cannot describe the dispute neutrally, ask someone else to write a summary for you.

If you are not certain in which area an issue belongs, pick the one that's closest, or inquire on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment.

Adding an article RfC manually

As an alternative to request comment through talk pages, you may do so through Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Request board. Follow the directions on that page, and your request will be transferred to an appropriate location.

Request comment on users

To report an offensive or confusing user name in violation of Wikipedia username policy, see subpage User names.'

To report spam, page blanking, and other blatant vandalism, see Wikipedia:Vandalism.'

A user-conduct RfC is for discussing specific users who have violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Carefully read the following before filing an RfC.

  • Disputes over article content, including disputes over how best to follow the neutral point of view policy, follow a different process.
  • For a mild-to-moderate conflict, you might try Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, a quick, simple way to get an outside view.
  • Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on the user's talk page, or the talk page(s) involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours. The evidence, preferably in the form of diffs, should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it.
  • RfCs brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary are not permitted. Repetitive, burdensome, or unwarranted filing of meritless RfCs is an abuse of the dispute resolution process. RfC is not a venue for personal attack.
  • An RfC may bring close scrutiny on all involved editors. In most cases, editors named in an RfC are expected to respond to it. The Arbitration Committee closely considers evidence and comments in RfC if the editors involved in the RfC are later named in a request for arbitration.
  • While an RfC doesn't create sanctions, it may provide justification for them by collecting information, assessing consensus, and providing feedback to the subject. Sanctions may then be created separately through the administrative, community sanction, or arbitration processes.
The list of user conduct RfCs (along with a brief statement of the behaviors in dispute) are transcluded at the top of the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard to encourage wide participation. Separate postings at the noticeboard that announce user conduct RfCs should generally be avoided.

Ending RfCs

RfCs that are listed by the RfC bot are also automatically ended by the RfC bot after thirty days. If consensus has been reached before then, the RfC nominator(s) can remove the RfC tag, and the bot will remove the discussion from the list on its next run.

Manually added RfCs must be manually closed. This is accomplished by deleting the text that you added from the RfC page.

A request for comment on a user, however, needs to be closed manually. This should be done by an uninvolved editor.

See also

Personal tools