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
| Should the term "notability" be replaced with the term "suitability" (as in "a suitable topic") or "eligibility" (as in "an eligible topic"), over a transitional period, in order to reduce newcomer confusion? During the three-month transitional period, the new term would be mentioned as an alternative. Then, it would replace the old term in policies and guidelines, and "notability" would be mentioned as an alternative. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Newspapers/Notability
| Can we adopt re-classify this informal essay on notability of newspapers as a formal Wikipedia:Guideline?
Wikipedia:WikiProject Newspapers/Notability→ Wikipedia:Notability (newspapers) Having a guideline for notability of newspapers addresses the challenge of supporting recent increased interest in developing Wikipedia's relationship with fact-checking, journalism, reliable media, and newspapers in particular. One existing closely related guideline is for books. Here is that, and several comparable essays for media. |
| Should the following be added as a section at Wikipedia:User pages § What may I have in my user pages?, which allows editors to opt-out of seeing floating decorative elements? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:02, 16 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Which version on the Origins section better reflects the sources neutrally and accurately, in accordance with Wikipedia's neutrality (WP:NPOV) and verifiability (WP:V) policies? Aeengath (talk) 10:34, 14 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the WP:DYKFICTION guideline apply to mythology, religious stories (for example, stories from the Old Testament or the New Testament), or folklore? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC) |