Wikipedia:Closure requests

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

    Use the closure requests noticeboard to ask an uninvolved editor to

    policies or guidelines

    Do not list discussions where consensus is clear. If you feel the need to close them, do it yourself.

    Move on – do not wait for someone to state the obvious. In some cases,

    it is appropriate
    to close a discussion with a clear outcome early to save our time.

    Do not post here to rush the closure. Also, only do so when the discussion has stabilised.

    On the other hand, if the discussion has much activity and the outcome isn't very obvious, you should let it play out by itself. We want issues to be discussed well. Do not continue the discussion here.

    There is no fixed length for a formal

    request for comment
    (RfC). Typically 7 days is a minimum, and after 30 days the discussion is ripe for closure. The best way to tell is when there is little or no activity in the discussion, or further activity is unlikely to change its result.

    When the discussion is ready to be closed and the outcome is not obvious, you can submit a brief and neutrally worded request for closure.

    Be sure to include a link to the discussion itself and the {{Initiated}} template at the beginning of the request. A helper script can make listing discussions easier.


    uninvolved editor
    may close most discussions, so long as they are prepared to discuss and justify their closing rationale.

    Closing discussions carries responsibility, doubly so if

    discussions for discussion
    page if unsure). Be prepared to fully answer questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that editors may have.

    Non-admins can close most discussions.

    move discussion
    processes have more rules for non-admins to follow.

    Technical instructions for closers

    Please append {{

    Ping}} to the editor who placed the request. Where a formal closure is not needed, reply with {{Not done}}. After addressing a request, please mark the {{Initiated}} template with |done=yes. ClueBot III will automatically archive requests marked with {{Already done}}, {{Close}}, {{Done}} {{Not done}}, and {{Resolved

    If you want to formally challenge and appeal the closure, do not start the discussion here. Instead follow advice at


    Other areas tracking old discussions

    Administrative discussions

    Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Thomas_B_forum-shopping,_circumventing_page_ban,_refusing_to_drop_the_stick

    (Initiated 20 days ago on 27 March 2024) – The discussion converged to a consensus. The reported user requested a closure on my talk page. NicolausPrime (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    The discussion appears to have concluded; there are no replies in the past six days, and there appears to be a consensus. I second the request for closure. EducatedRedneck (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thirding the request for closure. As someone who has been reported at various conduct noticeboards, a report hanging around for 20 days is nightmarish. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Place new administrative discussions above this line using a level 3 heading

    Requests for comment

    Talk:Battle_of_Kosovo#RfC Should Muzaka and Jonima be included in the infobox?

    (Initiated 161 days ago on 7 November 2023) I mistakenly assumed an admin would automatically closure the RfC, so that's why the discussion has turned old. However, it stills needs a final result. Latest comment: 87 days ago and 16 editors involved in the discussion. --Azor (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Awdal#RFC - Habr Awal/Isaaq clan

    (Initiated 113 days ago on 24 December 2023) ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean)#RFC

    (Initiated 62 days ago on 14 February 2024) First time I've ever requested a close, please lmk if done wrong. Think conversation has slowed and it's been a while since it started.

    talk) 02:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

    Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I closes

    (Initiated 61 days ago on 15 February 2024) As the first round of Phase I reaches 30 days in action, I'll be listing discussions here as they reach time. Once the final discussion has been closed, this heading can be archived. Proposals ripe for closing:

    Thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I've closed 3b and 7. I believe 13 and 14 are also overdue now too. – Joe (talk) 13:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Updated, thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nearly every proposal can now be closed. Soni (talk) 22:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    and I think now any and all can be closed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    4 was closed User:Wehwalt. Nagol0929 (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk: Interstate 90#RFC: Infobox junctions

    (Initiated 47 days ago on 29 February 2024) Discussion is about to expire and will need closure. RoadFan294857 (talk) 15:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RfC: enacting X3

    (Initiated 40 days ago on 7 March 2024) SilverLocust 💬 22:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 38 days ago on 9 March 2024) Trying this one again. Latest comment: 3 days ago, 98 comments, 21 people in discussion. Admins are involved, vigorous

    WP:NFCC discussion. Closure would be good. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

    Thanks for posting this; I was about to do so myself. The consensus seems pretty clear, but given this is a copyright issue I think a formal close is beneficial. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:SpaceX Starship#RfC on IFT-3

    (Initiated 26 days ago on 21 March 2024) This is a contentious issue with accusations of tendentious editing, so the RfC would benefit from a formal closure. Redraiderengineer (talk) 14:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 22 days ago on 25 March 2024) Has been running for 10 days but discussion has slowed down considerably recently. Contentious topic, so requesting formal closure here. — Czello (music) 12:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    RfC: Is the OCB RS?

    (Initiated 21 days ago on 26 March 2024) This

    WP:RSN RfC was initiated on March 26, with the last !vote occurring on March 28. Ten editors participated in the discussion and, without prejudicing the close one way or the other, I believe a closer may discover a clear consensus emerged. It was bot-archived without closure on April 4 due to lack of recent activity. Chetsford (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

    Talk:StoneToss#RfC: Should the revelation of StoneToss's identity be referred to as doxxing?

    (Initiated 20 days ago on 27 March 2024) Discussion has slowed. 6 days since last vote. TarnishedPathtalk 05:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Place new discussions concerning RfCs above this line using a level 3 heading

    Deletion discussions

    XFD backlog
    V Jan Feb Mar Apr Total
    CfD 0 0 5 4 9
    TfD 0 0 8 3 11
    MfD 0 1 0 2 3
    FfD 0 0 0 1 1
    RfD 0 0 0 13 13
    AfD 0 0 0 0 0

    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Brion Vibber Interviews

    (Initiated 54 days ago on 22 February 2024) * Pppery * it has begun... 16:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 March 17#Template:Officially used writing systems in India

    (Initiated 30 days ago on 17 March 2024) Frietjes (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth (21st nomination)

    (Initiated 15 days ago on 1 April 2024) Would also appreciate the closing admin determining whether there is a consensus to title blacklist, in addition to whether there is a consensus to delete. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, and i'll leave it to you to implement the title blacklist, Pppery :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Place new discussions concerning XfDs above this line using a level 3 heading

    Other types of closing requests


    (Initiated 101 days ago on 6 January 2024) The discussion wasn't inactive for 7 days. It seems there's no clear consensus on merging those two articles into one. (talk) 18:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    It's been over a month. So, it could be a good time to close that discussion. (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 94 days ago on 13 January 2024) – Requested move open for 2 months, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Has now been open for three months. 2601:249:9301:D570:9012:4870:54CD:5F95 (talk) 04:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 92 days ago on 15 January 2024) – Requested move open for 2 months, needs closure. (talk) 18:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Now has been open for three months. (talk) 15:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Maersk Hangzhou#Second merge proposal

    (Initiated 83 days ago on 24 January 2024) Merge discussion involving CTOPS that has been open for 2 weeks now. Needs closure. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @WeatherWriter: I would give it a few days as the discussion is now active with new comments. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As nominator, I support a non consensus closure of this discussion so we can create an RFC to discuss how
    WP:ONEEVENT applies in this situation. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply


    (Initiated 77 days ago on 30 January 2024) Listing multiple non-unanimous merge discussions from January that have run their course.

    AATalk 13:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply


    (Initiated 77 days ago on 30 January 2024)

    AATalk 13:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply


    (Initiated 70 days ago on 6 February 2024) Requested move open for nearly 2 months. Natg 19 (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 67 days ago on 9 February 2024) – Requested move open for nearly 2 months, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:2 World Trade Center#Split proposal 16 February 2024

    (Initiated 60 days ago on 16 February 2024) Split discussion started over a month ago. TarnishedPathtalk 11:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 59 days ago on 17 February 2024) – Requested move open for over a month, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 53 days ago on 23 February 2024) – Requested move open for over a month, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    ed. put'er there 18:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply


    (Initiated 47 days ago on 29 February 2024) – Requested move open for a month, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 47 days ago on 29 February 2024) – Requested move open for a month, needs closure. Natg 19 (talk) 21:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    (Initiated 24 days ago on 23 March 2024) Please review or relist this discussion. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Place new discussions concerning other types of closing requests above this line using a level 3 heading