User:TerryE/Requests for comment

WP:RFC

For Request for checkuser, see WP:SPI.

For Redirects for creation, see WP:AFC/R.

For automatic linking of RFC expressions, see WP:RFCAUTO.

Requests for comment (RfC) is an informal, lightweight process for requesting outside input, and dispute resolution, with respect to article content, user conduct, and Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Please note that there are other dispute resolution alternatives which might be sought first.

A list of all current RFCs can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All (WP:RFC/A).

Introduction

The RfC process is one of the options available under the dispute resolution request process. All parties involved should take reasonable steps to resolve the issue before using this process.

Discuss the matter on the talk page first and attempt to reach consensus first. Remember that independent editors will review look at such discussions and the arguments that the parties in the dispute present.
If the dispute related to detailed technical or subject matter specific details, then many independent editors will not be able to help constructivly, so it may be worthwhile to ask for help at the relevant WikiProject first.
If you are unsure and simply wish to seek the advice of an expert editor then ask for this using Editor assistance.
If the issue is between two editors, you can simply and quickly ask for a Third opinion.
If you want general help in improving an article, such as to featured status, then list it at Peer review.

All editors (including anonymous or IP users) are welcome to raise an RfC or to provide comment or opinion, and to assist in reaching agreements, by responding to requests for comment. However parties need to bare in mind:

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; all articles must follow Neutral point of view, Verifiability, and No original research.
RfCs are not votes. Discussion controls the outcome; it is not a matter of counting up the number of votes.
Try not to be confrontational. Be friendly and civil, and assume good faith in other editors' actions.
Mediate where possible - identify common ground, attempt to draw editors together rather than push them apart.
If necessary, educate users by referring to the appropriate Wikipedia policies or style page.

If your request relates to

a Wikipedia user, see Request comment on users below.
a specific page then see Request comment through talk pages below. If your issue is wider or relates to multiple pages then you must still pick a primary talk page to host this discussion and this process applies to that page.

Request comment through talk pages

Issues by topic area (View all)
Article topics (View all)
Biographies	(watch)	`{{rfc\|bio}}`
Economy, trade, and companies	(watch)	`{{rfc\|econ}}`
History and geography	(watch)	`{{rfc\|hist}}`
Language and linguistics	(watch)	`{{rfc\|lang}}`
Maths, science, and technology	(watch)	`{{rfc\|sci}}`
Media, the arts, and architecture	(watch)	`{{rfc\|media}}`
Politics, government, and law	(watch)	`{{rfc\|pol}}`
Religion and philosophy	(watch)	`{{rfc\|reli}}`
Society, sports, and culture	(watch)	`{{rfc\|soc}}`
Project-wide topics (View all)
Wikipedia style and naming	(watch)	`{{rfc\|style}}`
Wikipedia policies and guidelines	(watch)	`{{rfc\|policy}}`
WikiProjects and collaborations	(watch)	`{{rfc\|proj}}`
Wikipedia technical issues and templates	(watch)	`{{rfc\|tech}}`
Wikipedia proposals	(watch)	`{{rfc\|prop}}`
Unsorted
Unsorted RfCs	(watch)	`{{rfc}}`

The table on the right shows the categories for requests through talk pages. All request must be allocated a primary category from this list by the requesting editor. This category relates to the main subject area of the request, but in some circumstances it may be appropriate to identify multiple categories; for example an RfC at the biography article for an artist falls under "Biograpy" and "Art, architecture, literature, and media". If you are not certain in which area an issue belongs, pick the one that's closest.

Also remember that by raising an RfC you are seeking to attract other editors to your discussion. Think of the RfC text as an abstract of the issue that will appear on the topic area queue that aims to do this. So phrase your RfC in a way which will interest them: be brief; focus on the main point(s); and be neutral in your framing. You can always provide more detail or state alternative viewpoints in the talk page body itself.

You have two options for creating such an RFC:

You can add a special {{rfctag}} to the talk page and a bot will handle the mechanics.

Or you can add it manually

Most users find that the {{rfctag}} is the easiest to use.

Request comment on users

The processes for user request are different to those for talk page related processes.

In the case of spam, page blanking, and other blatant vandalism,

In the case an offensive or confusing user name in violation of Wikipedia username policy,

In cases where specific users who repeatedly violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines, a user-conduct RfC is for discussing this issue may be raised. However, this should only be done after careful consideration and lighter processes such as the use of Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts to get an outside view. Also bear in mind that an RfC may bring close scrutiny on all involved editors, and that repetitive, burdensome, or unwarranted filing of meritless RfCs is an abuse of the dispute resolution process. RfC is not a venue for personal attack.

Introduction

Request comment through talk pages

Request comment on users

See also