Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines
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:Women Against State Pension Inequality
| Is the inclusion of a standalone “Criticism” section in this article consistent with WP:UNDUE?
The article concerns a pressure group. A separate “Criticism” section has been added, sourced to several newspaper articles critical of the group. There are currently no positive or neutral sources presented, and the section summarises criticism without clear evidence that such criticism constitutes a major or defining aspect of the group’s overall coverage. Velvetfreak (talk) 16:58, 2 February 2026 (UTC) |
| Should we include cities where Waymo has announced future expansion, but hasn't actually started service yet?
Arguments in favor of inclusion:
Argument against inclusion: (@Graywalls: feel free to add more here) Numberguy6 (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2026 (UTC) |
Talk:Proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery
| I am initiating this Request for Comment (RfC) to seek input from experienced editors and administrators regarding persistent policy compliance issues in this article, which covers a high-profile proposed acquisition involving Warner Bros. Discovery.
Despite repeated editing and cleanup efforts, the article continues to exhibit systemic problems that significantly undermine its encyclopedic quality and neutrality. Key Issues Requiring Community Review
Prior Cleanup Efforts I have personally conducted substantial editing, including:
However, these efforts have not resolved the underlying issues, suggesting that individual edits alone are insufficient and that broader consensus and oversight are required. Questions for Comment I respectfully request community input on the following:
Closing Given the prominence of this topic and the likelihood of continued drive-by or promotional editing, this article requires careful scrutiny by experienced contributors. The goal of this RfC is to establish clear consensus on how the article should be structured, weighted, and maintained in line with Wikipedia’s core content policies. Administrator and senior editor input is especially welcomed.
|
| I am requesting wider community input regarding multiple sourcing and accuracy issues in this article.
A detailed breakdown of the problems has been provided above on this talk page, but in summary the concerns include:
Several of these issues originate from a series of edits by one contributor, and despite partial later corrections, many problematic statements and citations remain in the article. I would appreciate independent evaluation of whether the current content meets Wikipedia’s standards for verifiability, accurate use of sources, and reliable sourcing, and guidance on how these sections should be corrected. Thank you for your time and input. Аксамит (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2026 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
| Should WP:Closing discussions be made a guideline? Aaron Liu (talk) 17:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:General disclaimer
| WP:DISCLAIMER now redirects to Category:Wikipedia disclaimers. There are currently six disclaimer pages ("Before"). Should they be replaced with one page, as proposed in the "After" section, and any redirects to the category or these pages go to the "After" version?
Before:
After: I asked editors at the idea lab to comment about the change, and posted an additional invitation to the talk page of the General disclaimer, but I didn't get much feedback. Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs) 16:46, 24 January 2026 (UTC) |
Template talk:Infobox Australian place
Should Template:Infobox Australian place be updated to support the aliases |first_nations_name= and |indigenous_name= for the existing |native_name= parameter? Poketama (talk) 22:32, 22 January 2026 (UTC)
|
| This Request for Comment seeks community input on whether the current article framing accurately reflects what reliable sources explicitly establish.
Specifically: – Do the cited sources explicitly and consistently support presenting the events as “genocide”, including casualty figures and inferred intent, as settled facts without attribution? – Or should these elements be more carefully attributed or contextualized in line with WP:V, WP:SYNTH, WP:UNDUE, and WP:LABEL? |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Airport destination lists - sourcing requirements
| What sourcing standards should be applied to airport destination lists? 10:59, 19 January 2026 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/RfC LLMCOMM guideline
| Should the proposed guideline at User:Athanelar/Don't use LLMs to talk for you be accepted?
Please see the collapsed sections above for the pre-RfC workshopping and discussion of the topic. Please indicate whether you Support or Oppose the proposed guideline and why. Athanelar (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2026 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)
Should the provision at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)#Upcoming films regarding considering recent pageviews to retain redirects with titles ending with the disambiguator "(upcoming film)" be adjusted, removed, not changed, or something else? Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
|
| :The information in this section is not based on verifiable fact and related to a living person. The investigation conducted by Canada Soccer can be found here. The investigation does not conclude what is being alleged in this article. See: https://news.canadasoccer.com/canada-soccer-releases-findings-of-independent-investigation-organizational-change-continues Anonymous sources and accusations re not sufficient for a living person biography. This section does not meet Wikipedia standards. AnnWinterburne (talk) 03:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Image use policy
| One of the valid uses of AI-generated imagery in articlespace is to illustrate AI-related topics and notable AI-generated images. For these cases, should we modify the policy to indicate a preference for images used by reliable sources (assuming there are no licensing concerns)? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:06, 9 January 2026 (UTC) |
Should the following be adopted as a guideline for using LLM-assisted machine translation tools?
Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:39, 6 January 2026 (UTC) |
Talk:Ukraine and weapons of mass destruction
| May an attributed, reliably sourced paragraph documenting a state leader’s stated perception or justification be included in an article without requiring mandatory inline “debunking” or editorial judgments about the leader’s sincerity or intent? User-FR-123 (talk) 21:22, 5 January 2026 (UTC) |