Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia style and naming

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:List of pro-Russian political parties

What links do you think will be more appropriate in terms of suitability and neutrality to include in "See also" section of this article? Choose at least 3.

1. Eurasianism
2. Front organization
3. List of Eurosceptic political parties
4. List of political parties in Russia
5. List of pro-European political parties
6. List of right-wing political parties
7. Putinism
8. Russian hybrid warfare
9. Russophilia
10. Russosphere
11. List of left-wing political parties

Gigman (talk) 09:42, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim

How should we format his place of birth in the infobox?

• A - Louhisaari Manor, Askainen, Finland, Russian Empire
• B - Louhisaari Manor, Askainen, Grand Duchy of Finland, Russian Empire (status quo)
• C - Louhisaari Manor, Askainen, Grand Duchy of Finland
• D - Louhisaari Manor, Askainen, Finland
• E - Askainen, Finland, Russian Empire
• F - Askainen, Grand Duchy of Finland, Russian Empire
• G - Askainen, Grand Duchy of Finland
• H - Askainen, Finland

Thedarkknightli (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

I floated this at Village pump (proposals) here awhile back, and there was wide support for doing this (some editors said they felt it unofficially already was a guideline). But, it was noted that the essay, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice, needed some clean up and to be fleshed out in places. After multiple discussions, including some disputes and RfCs, I think the essay is finally in a place where there is an updated consensus and enough detail that it can be an official MOS style guideline. This is a formal presentation of the updated and discussed essay to see if there is support for making it formally part of Wikipedia's Manual of Style.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 12:35, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales

I'd like to raise a quick style point for consensus: should this article include a comma after fronted year phrases such as "In 2011, ..."?

Another editor has noted that comma placement isn't regulated by ENGVAR, so it's up to local consensus whether to include or omit the comma. With that in mind, I wanted to ask what the preferred approach should be here. Several royal Featured Articles — including Queen Victoria, George VI, and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother — consistently include the comma after "In [year]," and it seems to improve readability by preventing the opening of the sentence from running together. By contrast, the articles on Catherine, William, and their children tend to omit the comma, which makes them outliers compared with most other royal biographies. For the sake of consistency across these closely related pages, it would be helpful to decide whether these articles should follow the broader FA precedent. For my part, I support including the comma after "In [year],". It keeps this article consistent with the wider set of royal biographies, most of which already use that style, and it does improve readability. I'm not sure why the Catherine, William, and Wales children's pages use a different approach when the majority of comparable royal articles include the comma, so aligning the style here seems the clearer and more consistent option. I'm happy to follow whatever consensus forms — I just wanted to raise the point so we can settle on one consistent approach. ItsShandog (talk) 14:46, 25 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)

Talk:Greenland crisis

Which of the following varieties of English should this article have? Doug Weller talk 15:02, 19 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)

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)