Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: You can sign up to receive a user talk page invitation to participate in discussions of interest to you, see Wikipedia:Feedback request service

Talk:Sanctioned Suicide

Should this article include an an external link to the website?

(Reactivated RfC for more comment on the sensitive topic, particularly in light of previous threads on talk page, see e.g. previous RfC, thread 1, thread 2) Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs) 01:20, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics

Starting an RfC on the placement of Template:2026 Winter Olympics and Template:2024 Summer Olympics (and all similar templates) across main Olympic Games articles such as 2026 Winter Olympics and 2024 Summer Olympics.

Until earlier this month, these templates have been located directly below the infobox, usually within the introduction. As their recent removal, appears to impact navigability to other related articles such as 2024 Summer Olympics Parade of Nations. Open to suggestions on if they should be re-added as before, relocated elsewhere within the main article, or completely removed. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League

Should NFL conference championship games be notable enough for their own articles? ~2026-37153-4 (talk) 22:10, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The following questions are regarding this footnote on J.K. Rowling regarding proposed gender self-recognition law reforms that Rowling opposes.

In this footnote, is Pedersen 2022 a sufficient source for the information it's citing?
In this footnote, is Suissa & Sullivan 2021 a sufficient source for the information it's citing?

Loki (talk) 17:39, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:Antioch International Movement of Churches

Should the Antioch International Movement of Churches article include the following precise, sourced wording for the 2025 River Church Banff incident, noting the senior leadership response and regulatory inquiry, reflecting precise conviction language, attribution, and proportional coverage?

Proposed wording: "In 2025, a youth leader at Antioch affiliate River Church Banff was convicted of "repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy" and placed on the sex offenders register. According to The Times, the conduct involved inappropriately stroking the boy beginning in 2022. The Press and Journal and The Times report that the church's senior leadership, lead pastor Rob McArthur and founding elder Joe Ewen, were aware of the behavior for several months before the family and police were notified. Parents of the victim spoke of how their son was "betrayed" by their church, saying the leadership repeatedly "downplayed" concerns about grooming and prioritized protecting the public image of the church. After the victim’s family approached Antioch Waco in 2023, McArthur and Ewen issued a joint apology. Media coverage also noted River Church Banff's formal link to Antioch Waco, including receipt of staff salaries and hosting missionaries from the United States. Following reporting, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator opened an inquiry into the church's trustees."

Arguments for inclusion:

The material is supported by multiple independent, reliable sources.
It summarizes a notable incident linked to Antioch’s affiliate structure and senior leadership.
It maintains proportionality and attribution without editorializing.
It gives context about the wider organization and regulatory outcomes without excessive narrative detail.

Arguments for removal or trimming:

The formal legal charge is “sexual activity with an older child” and any other phrasing (e.g., “repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy”) is “inaccurate” or paraphrasing, per WP:BLP.
Terms such as “grooming” are not directly in the sources’ voice and should not be used.
Media coverage did not “highlight” Antioch Waco’s involvement, so such phrasing is inappropriate.

Questions for comment: 1. Does this proposed wording accurately reflect the sources, remain neutral, and maintain due weight in the article? 2. Should the senior leadership names be included, considering sourcing, notability, and accountability under WP:BLP? 3. Does the proposed summary appropriately reflect the incident’s coverage and significance, while remaining proportional in length?

HonestHarbor (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

v t e Requests for comment (All)
Articles (All)	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 (All)	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.