The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: (refresh)

Biographies

Should the infobox for Inah Canabarro Lucas include things like "oldest living nun", "oldest living person in South America", and "oldest living person in Latin America", or should those be moved to the article body?

These claims are accurate, but they don’t seem to get much attention in reliable sources. The subject is mainly known for being the oldest living person in the world. Per WP:DUE and WP:RS, should the infobox focus only on what’s most notable and widely covered? For example, Lucile Randon was the oldest nun ever, but even her infobox didn’t list “nun” as something she was known for. Should we treat these extra titles the same way and keep them out of the infobox? Avengingbandit 02:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Mustafa Kemal Atatürk

Should this article include information about Zsa Zsa Gabor's possible relationship with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk?

Do not include any information.
Include as a claim attributed to Zsa Zsa Gabor.
Include in Wikivoice that the relationship occurred.

This statement was added after the RfC began to satisfy WP:RFCNEUTRAL and WP:RFCBRIEF. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 19:58, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Killing of Austin Metcalf

Should the alleged killer's name be included in the article? 12:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jesus

In the previous discussion, one or more users recommended starting an RFC. The proposed image is:

You're of course free to propose other images, or vote for the one already in the infobox. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Northernlion

Should the article use a sketch of Northernlion or no image until a copyright-free alternative is found? — ♠ Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum ♠ 13:33, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Georgie Aldous

The following sub-section should be added as Gender stereotyping, as a fully sourced and relevant biographical topic:

In 2016 British clothing brand Jacamo, owned by N Brown Group, was accused of gender stereotyping after posting an advert on Twitter showing a model next to a "real man". Aldous criticised the advert publicly and stated he thought the advert was "homophobic".^[1] His criticism was widely reported.^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6] He explained his position: "I feel like I am constantly trying to be shoved into a category that I do not want to be in, I feel like I should have to like football, not like the colour pink, shouldn’t dye my hair and should have a girlfriend because I'm a man."^[7]

Martinevans123 (talk) 09:26, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Killing of Brian Thompson

This discussion has been going on long enough. This article currently documents Tufekci's comments and her arguments for why the shooting is indicative of a Second Gilded Age. Should these comments be included, and how?

Option A: Keep Tufekci's comments, but provide other academic sources disputing her claims (please provide).
Option B: Keep her comments. (status quo)
Option C: Remove her comments.
Option D: Remove the Academic Commentators section entirely, along with her comments. (as of the current revision, there is no longer an Academic Commentators section)

guninvalid (talk) 06:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association

1) Should the articles of any NBA players say that they are often considered one of the greatest players of all time?

Example: [Hakeem] Olajuwon is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

2) If the answer to the previous question is yes, what standard should be used? Note: this question is optional

2a) Every NBA 75 player is listed as one of the greatest.

2b) The following list of basketball players:

2c) The statement is only included if sources discussing the player's legacy commonly state that that player is one of the greatest in the history of basketball, or use equivalent superlative language.

Example of sourcing for the claim of Bill Russell being one of the greatest of all time: NBA legend, the greatest winner in basketball history, is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time, basketball great, NBA great, one of the greatest players of all-time, the ultimate winner.

2d) Any other criteria; if this option is selected, please do not simply give a different list of basketball players, but rather a different standard from which the inclusion or exclusion of a given player can be assessed through application of some common criteria.

Context: Various historical NBA players have been called "one of the greatest", "the greatest of all-time", or "the greatest at a position" by the press, magazines, books, former players, experts, etc. These terms are very subjective in nature and cover a 75+ year history, but can be sourced none-the-less. Discussions have ranged from the terms being vital to non-encyclopedic, from leaving the term in a player legacy section to prominently being displayed in the lead to not using the term at all. Please help us out with a yes or no on the term "greatest" in the lead section and the reasoning behind it. Thanks.

Pinging previous discussion contributors: @Fyunck(click), Left guide, Wamalotpark, Bagumba, Johnnynumerofive, Somarain, Zagalejo, Eg224, Jessintime, Orlando Davis, Assadzadeh, GOAT Bones231012, Anonymous7432, and Boles P94:

Ladtrack (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Economy, trade, and companies

Talk:Killing of Brian Thompson

This discussion has been going on long enough. This article currently documents Tufekci's comments and her arguments for why the shooting is indicative of a Second Gilded Age. Should these comments be included, and how?

Option A: Keep Tufekci's comments, but provide other academic sources disputing her claims (please provide).
Option B: Keep her comments. (status quo)
Option C: Remove her comments.
Option D: Remove the Academic Commentators section entirely, along with her comments. (as of the current revision, there is no longer an Academic Commentators section)

guninvalid (talk) 06:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

History and geography

Talk:Gaza genocide

Should the article, including the opening sentence of the lead section, state the Gaza Genocide in wikivoice as fact?:

Yes Example opening sentence: The Gaza genocide is the ongoing systematic destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza by Israel during the Gaza war. or equivalent (new proposed version)
No Example opening sentence: According to a United Nations special committee, Amnesty International, and other experts and human rights organisations, Israel has committed genocide against the Palestinian people during its ongoing invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip as part of the Gaza war. (previous stable version) Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Spanish Civil War

Should the "Interpretations; civil war in perspective" section (for reference copied above) be in or out? Hh1718 (talk) 09:29, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom

Should the entry for the United States in the table note that the modern-day territory of the United States is much larger than the one it had at independence? Glide08 (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Azov Brigade

Relevant previous RFCs: 1 2

Previous discussion: 1

Currently the lede states: The 12th Special Operations Brigade "Azov" ... is a formation of the National Guard of Ukraine.

RFC question: Should the first sentence in the lede be changed to The 12th Special Operations Brigade "Azov" ... is a far-right formation of the National Guard of Ukraine?

1. Yes
2. No

Notified WP:Ukraine and WP:NPOV/N. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 10:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jesus

In the previous discussion, one or more users recommended starting an RFC. The proposed image is:

You're of course free to propose other images, or vote for the one already in the infobox. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Somali Civil War (2009–present)

From what I’ve seen for a few months now, the map currently in use is incredibly outdated, and something needs to be done about it. I’ll leave the following two options I suggested here below; Zabezt (talk) 03:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Iqrit

Should we keep the link to Electronic Intifada under "external links"?(link in question: Iqrit, Electronic Intifada) Huldra (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Killing of Brian Thompson

This discussion has been going on long enough. This article currently documents Tufekci's comments and her arguments for why the shooting is indicative of a Second Gilded Age. Should these comments be included, and how?

Option A: Keep Tufekci's comments, but provide other academic sources disputing her claims (please provide).
Option B: Keep her comments. (status quo)
Option C: Remove her comments.
Option D: Remove the Academic Commentators section entirely, along with her comments. (as of the current revision, there is no longer an Academic Commentators section)

guninvalid (talk) 06:10, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Mir Jumla's invasion of Assam

What should the result be given as in the infobox?

Mughal victory
See Aftermath: The state of the page at the time of this RfC being posted
Ahom victory

LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 09:24, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Urdu

Should Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, be referred to as "Modern Standard Urdu" in the same ways as Hindi, the official language of India, is referred to as: "Modern Standard Hindi?" Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Language and linguistics

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Michael Caine

Which phrase should be used: "retired English actor" or "English retired actor"? The former follows the linguistic rule that age should come before origin (see Adjective#Order). Other editors are claiming this adjective order implies that the actor has retired from being English. Barry Wom (talk) 05:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Help talk:IPA/Standard German

Should add the voiceless diacritics underneath/above the lenes, as in ⟨b̥ d̥ ɡ̊⟩ for transcriptions involving Swiss and Austrian Standard German? Even though the word- and morpheme-final orthographic ⟨b d g⟩ aren't fortified, they aren't voiced either and the bare symbols ⟨b d ɡ⟩ might be more confusing than ⟨p t k⟩ (used previously, in alignment with pronunciation dictionaries) by the official IPA standards, not less. [ˈhabsbʊrɡ] doesn't feature a voiced-voiceless-voiced sequence in the middle, nor is the final sound voiced.

There's also a question of [b̥v̥ d̥z̥ d̥ʒ̊ v̥ z̥ ʒ̊ ɣ̊] - are they in any way relevant in the southern standards? Any important allophonies we should transcribe? Then, what about [ʝ̊]? Does that exist?

And should we then switch to transcribing the voiced labiodental with ⟨ʋ⟩ as far as the southern varieties are concerned? Sol505000 (talk) 11:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Urdu

Should Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, be referred to as "Modern Standard Urdu" in the same ways as Hindi, the official language of India, is referred to as: "Modern Standard Hindi?" Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Maths, science, and technology

Talk:Cumulative density function

Should the page cumulative density function be:

Option A: a redirect to cumulative distribution function
Option B: a disambig between that article and probability density function
Option C: an article with expository content, or
Option D: deleted (would probably require further process) --Trovatore (talk) 21:12, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Implicational propositional calculus

On 22 April 2025 (02:19) I updated the article Implicational propositional calculus. A few hours later the update was reverted with the argument that "I am missing the whole point which is to avoid using falsum in the formulas". Could a third party please verify that claim.

Aside from that, in my opinion the article needs substantial improvements:

The article should place implicational calculus in its historical context by tracing its development from ‘’Begriffsschrift’’, through ‘’Principia Mathematica’’, and on to later contributions by the Lwów–Warsaw school, Gentzen, and others. This would reveal the evolution from the axiomatic Hilbert-style proof systems to the more intuitive methods of analytic tableaux, natural deduction or sequent calculus.
The article should highlight that implicational calculus — with $\bot$ — adequately covers classical logic, but does not suffice for full intuitionistic logic, where conjunction ( $\land$ ) and disjunction ( $\lor$ ) are essential, rather than merely syntactic sugar. This important distinction should not be overlooked.

As to the sections,

The section Completeness is either undocumented or based on (forbidden) original research. The reader loses track in the midst of formal derivations.
The section The Bernays–Tarski axiom system should either be relocated to the article List of axiomatic systems in logic or better justified in context. Highlighting one alternative among a plethora of axiom systems appears arbitrary and lacks relevance to the broader purpose of the article.
The section Satisfiability and validity discusses the NP-complexity of the propositional satisfiability problem. Either the computational complexity angle should be considered as beyond the scope of the article and removed, or should be addressed with appropriate context. Note that the examples provided implicitly use the method of analytic tableaux, while the article only deploys Hilbert-style deduction systems.
The section Adding an axiom schema illustrates that adding non-tautologies —think of a bare propositional variable $P$ — as axioms makes the system inconsistent. This is a trivial point and comes across as unprofessional. The section should be removed.
The section An alternative axiomatization is undocumented and lacks references. Without a proper citation, it appears to be original research and should either be sourced or omitted.

––– Marc Schroeder (talk) 12:52, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Polyvagal theory

Should the following sentences be removed from the Lead of Polyvagal Theory?

There is consensus among experts that the assumptions of the polyvagal theory are untenable.^[8] Ian Oelsner (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Art, architecture, literature, and media

Talk:List of programs broadcast by CBS

With lack of guidance from the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television, should the page include the month and year shows were reported as being in development in sortable list format as in this version ? Some context is that there is an informal practice to remove shows from that list when there has been no update in about three years. newsjunkie (talk) 17:21, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

RFC: What should Screenrant.com be designated as?

Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jesus

In the previous discussion, one or more users recommended starting an RFC. The proposed image is:

You're of course free to propose other images, or vote for the one already in the infobox. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Forspoken

Should we add Square Enix's (the game's publisher) comments that Forspoken's sales were "lacklustre" to the lead? The proposed wording is to add "Square Enix described the game's sales as "lackluster"." at the end of the third paragraph in the lead. OceanHok (talk) 17:09, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Billie Eilish discography

It has been bothering me for a while that some of Eilish's songs that are assigned as singles, since not every standalone release is a single. That is why I think we should move certain songs into promotional singles category. I have put it into a numbered list, to explain why these examples should be switched:

"Come Out and Play" (2018) – song released to be used in a commercial, not tied to any project (besides being a bonus track on Japanese edition of When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go? (2019)). No airplay release, no physical release either.
"When I Was Older" (2019) – song inspired by a movie Roma (2018), later included in soundtrack album for it and as a bonus track on Japanese edition of her debut album. No airplay release, no physical release either.
"Wish You Were Gay" (2019) – song released as more of a charity single, but it also was included in the standard track listing of her debut album. It did not got neither airplay, nor physical release, and was pushed so close to the album release date, I would categorize it as a promo single.
"Lost Cause" (2021) – another example of song getting pushed close to the album's release, with no airplay and physical release. The song's release date was also unusual, and it is actually the first song on that list that was promoted by a music video, however non-singles also can get visual independent of the album (ex. "Xanny" from her debut album).
"Male Fantasy" (2021) – even though I have created the article about this one, now I do not believe that since some magazines call a song a single it should be categorized as such. It got only music video treatment and a single performance during its "single release" month, not much promotion, especially knowing that it did not appeared on any physical formats or on radios. It did not even had its own separate digital release.
"Hotline (Edit)" (2023) – literally just a portion of previously released single should definitely not be counted as a separate single release. No airplay release, no physical release either.

Update: I think, there are actually more examples than I initially thought of. I am less knowledgeable about her dbeut EP days, that is why I have not included her earlier singles in the list.

"Bored" (2017) and "Lo Vas a Olvidar" (2021) – another soundtrack songs with no physical release, or airplay release.
"Watch", "Copycat", "Idontwannabeyouanymore", and "My Boy" (all 2017) – all of these songs were released shortly one at another in anticipation of the EP, some of them got remixed versions released, but still no physical or radio release.
"&Burn", "Bitches Broken Hearts", and "Party Favor" (all 2018) – all of these songs were issued as standalone releases before getting added as bonus tracks of her debut EP. No radio release, however "Party Favor" was released physically, even before its digital release, but it still does not make it official single.

infsai (talk) 03:32, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Tetris

Should Tetris be defined as a video game, a series of video games, or a video game genre? Lazman321 (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)

Does WP:GNG allow for album reviews containing substantive, in-depth analysis to ground the notability of a song article, or does the categorical prohibition in WP:NSONG apply?

If a song article has substantive in-depth coverage across multiple reliable sources, but they are all album reviews, it can still be notable under WP:GNG despite plainly failing WP:NSONG. WP:NSONG should be modified to remove the prohibition on album reviews to establish notability, and refer to WP:SIGCOV.
A song being substantively covered across multiple reliably-sourced album reviews is not a sufficient basis for notability—a notable song should be the subject of multiple non-trivial published works. NSONG should be clarified as superseding GNG for songs.
No change is necessary and the current wording of WP:NSONG is sufficiently clear (please explain your rationale).

Flip^and Flopped ツ 17:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Novels

Should book review aggregator websites be included in articles? Οἶδα (talk) 09:23, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Politics, government, and law

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom

Should the entry for the United States in the table note that the modern-day territory of the United States is much larger than the one it had at independence? Glide08 (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Killing of Austin Metcalf

Should the alleged killer's name be included in the article? 12:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Azov Brigade

Relevant previous RFCs: 1 2

Previous discussion: 1

Currently the lede states: The 12th Special Operations Brigade "Azov" ... is a formation of the National Guard of Ukraine.

RFC question: Should the first sentence in the lede be changed to The 12th Special Operations Brigade "Azov" ... is a far-right formation of the National Guard of Ukraine?

1. Yes
2. No

Notified WP:Ukraine and WP:NPOV/N. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 10:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jeffersonian democracy

This page has been using Template:Infobox political party for several years at this point (since 5 September 2020), and I'd like to make the case that this infobox should either be removed, replaced, or greatly overhauled. It's not helpful to portray individual ideologies as if they were organised political parties with their own ideologies and it seems like the infobox on this page (as well as on pages such as Anti-Federalism) is causing repeated content disputes.

On top of that, almost none of the currently-utilised parameters in the infobox are appropriate:

"Ideology" — Jeffersonian democracy is itself an ideology, or at the very least an ideological movement.

"Dissolved" — How can an ideology or a political philosophy be dissolved?

"Colors" — Ideologies can't have colors.

"Historical leaders" — Again, this isn't a party, there can't therefore be a leader.

"Merged into" — As Jeffersonian democracy wasn't an organised party, there's no entity to merge into anything.

Options: Remove or Keep (referring to the infobox) – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 08:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Somali Civil War (2009–present)

From what I’ve seen for a few months now, the map currently in use is incredibly outdated, and something needs to be done about it. I’ll leave the following two options I suggested here below; Zabezt (talk) 03:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Reform UK

Should the political position in the infobox and in the opening line of the "Ideology and platform" be changed to "right-wing to far-right" given the number of sources that have now been introduced in the "Ideology and platform" for far-right? Helper201 (talk) 20:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Russian invasion of Ukraine

Should the United States and/or NATO be added to the infobox of this article after the publication of the recent NYT article: Entous, Adam (29 March 2025). "The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 30 March 2025. Romanov loyalist (talk) 14:23, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Urdu

Should Urdu, the national language of Pakistan, be referred to as "Modern Standard Urdu" in the same ways as Hindi, the official language of India, is referred to as: "Modern Standard Hindi?" Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Religion and philosophy

Talk:2025 papal conclave

In light of the above discussion, I've decided to start a RfC on papabili sections and lists. Should there be papabili sections in papal conclave articles, and should there be lists of papabili in said sections? 73.8.239.215 (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

Is the handwritten ~~testimony~~ letter of Geneviève Esquier, a former French Catholic journalist for the French Catholic publication L'Homme Nouveau, a reliable primary source for her own words ~~and testimony~~?

For previous discussions leading up to this RfC, please see the article talk page and tangential RSN discussion. Arkenstrone (talk) 20:29, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Society, sports, and culture

Talk:Gaza genocide

Should the article, including the opening sentence of the lead section, state the Gaza Genocide in wikivoice as fact?:

Yes Example opening sentence: The Gaza genocide is the ongoing systematic destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza by Israel during the Gaza war. or equivalent (new proposed version)
No Example opening sentence: According to a United Nations special committee, Amnesty International, and other experts and human rights organisations, Israel has committed genocide against the Palestinian people during its ongoing invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip as part of the Gaza war. (previous stable version) Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:British Pakistanis

Is it appropriate for this article to include the material about grooming gangs currently included here, either in its present form or modified? Reopened by Cordless Larry (talk) 07:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Tetris

Should Tetris be defined as a video game, a series of video games, or a video game genre? Lazman321 (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Copts

As part of a broader discussion concerning improvements to the Copts article, @Epenkimi has presented several sources to support a statement about Copts being "directly" descended from the ancient Egyptians. I contend, however, that these sources, while perhaps valuable in understanding Coptic self-perception, do not constitute authoritative evidence from disciplines such as population genetics or anthropology, which I consider to be the appropriate fields for assessing a claim about "direct" descent, which is a term I don't think is sufficiently defined to begin with. Consequently, I believe that the statement, if included at all, must be properly qualified to reflect the nature of the sources (the quality and reliability of which have been called into question) and the absence of similarly assertive references to the term or conclusion in peer-reviewed genetic or anthropological material.

In addition to advocating for the inclusion of this claim, @Epenkimi has suggested repeating the assertion in several sections and sub-sections of the article, articulated in various formulations. I disagree with this approach and have argued that mention of the topic should be confined, if mentioned at all, to the "Identity" section, where it can be contextualized and addressed with nuance.

Our positions are too far apart, and efforts at compromise have not brought us closer to resolution. Accordingly, I believe it would now be most constructive to invite community input on this matter so we can proceed in either direction with broad consensus.

As further clarification, this dispute centers on the scientific validity of using the term “direct” descent, especially when based on non-scientific sources. The intention is not to deny or distance the Copts from any particular ancestry, nor is it meant to create a binary conflict between Coptic and non-Coptic Egyptians. Neither position, be it version 1, 2, 3 or 4 attempts to rule out any specific origin. Instead, the primary concern is whether the claim, as worded, is sufficiently and explicitly supported by reliable evidence. One side holds that it is, while the other maintains that it is not. Turnopoems (talk) 16:38, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association

1) Should the articles of any NBA players say that they are often considered one of the greatest players of all time?

Example: [Hakeem] Olajuwon is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

2) If the answer to the previous question is yes, what standard should be used? Note: this question is optional

2a) Every NBA 75 player is listed as one of the greatest.

2b) The following list of basketball players:

2c) The statement is only included if sources discussing the player's legacy commonly state that that player is one of the greatest in the history of basketball, or use equivalent superlative language.

Example of sourcing for the claim of Bill Russell being one of the greatest of all time: NBA legend, the greatest winner in basketball history, is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time, basketball great, NBA great, one of the greatest players of all-time, the ultimate winner.

2d) Any other criteria; if this option is selected, please do not simply give a different list of basketball players, but rather a different standard from which the inclusion or exclusion of a given player can be assessed through application of some common criteria.

Context: Various historical NBA players have been called "one of the greatest", "the greatest of all-time", or "the greatest at a position" by the press, magazines, books, former players, experts, etc. These terms are very subjective in nature and cover a 75+ year history, but can be sourced none-the-less. Discussions have ranged from the terms being vital to non-encyclopedic, from leaving the term in a player legacy section to prominently being displayed in the lead to not using the term at all. Please help us out with a yes or no on the term "greatest" in the lead section and the reasoning behind it. Thanks.

Pinging previous discussion contributors: @Fyunck(click), Left guide, Wamalotpark, Bagumba, Johnnynumerofive, Somarain, Zagalejo, Eg224, Jessintime, Orlando Davis, Assadzadeh, GOAT Bones231012, Anonymous7432, and Boles P94:

Ladtrack (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia style and naming

Portal talk:Pacific Northwest

I'm curious if "Cascadia" can accurately be considered an alternate name for the Pacific Northwest, as in the infobox. Sources I can find do not use them interchangeably. Cascadia sources often refer back to Pacific Northwest, but there is very little usage the other way around.

Key Question: Is Cascadia a commonly used alternate name for Pacific Northwest?

Don.steinbarge (talk) 10:21, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Inah Canabarro Lucas

Should the infobox for Inah Canabarro Lucas include things like "oldest living nun", "oldest living person in South America", and "oldest living person in Latin America", or should those be moved to the article body?

These claims are accurate, but they don’t seem to get much attention in reliable sources. The subject is mainly known for being the oldest living person in the world. Per WP:DUE and WP:RS, should the infobox focus only on what’s most notable and widely covered? For example, Lucile Randon was the oldest nun ever, but even her infobox didn’t list “nun” as something she was known for. Should we treat these extra titles the same way and keep them out of the infobox? Avengingbandit 02:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Is there support to upgrade Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts to a guideline? 04:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

I would like to formally understand what the community would think of a date-fixing bot. Such a bot would fix dates in articles to conform either {{Use dmy dates}} or {{Use mdy dates}}. To be clear, this bot would not revert any good faith changes that add content and dates of the wrong format; instead, it will just change the date format. In my opinion, there are a few different ways such a bot could be implemented (or not):

Option 1: no bot, everything stays as is
Option 2a: a supervised bot (so every edit is manually reviewed before publication) that would have to pass BRFA to be implemented. I think this would alleviate any concerns of the bot creating errors based on context (such as changing date formats in quotes, links, references, etc.)
Option 2b: an automatic bot that does something similar in proposal 2a, but wouldn't actually have its edits be checked before implementation
Option 3: some other solution; no guarantee that this is actually feasible

Thanks for your consideration – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

RfC to determine how reflinks are linked or not in the |work= field as done by bot. -- GreenC 20:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Citing sources

Is consistently using the capitalization used by sources (except for all-caps titles) considered an acceptable reference formatting style? 17:27, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia policies and guidelines

Talk:Ramon Casas

Should the lead of the article for the painter Ramon Casas label the subject "Catalan", rather than "Spanish"? While the question may appear minor, it is not, inasmuch as it is an example of low-level disputes that seem to occur regularly regarding Catalan/Spanish questions, e.g., the articles Empúries or Siege of Gerona. Bdushaw (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Should articles created under a conflict of interest be allowed to run on Did you know? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:44, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Graham Rossini

Is it appropriate for articles created for payment to appear on Did You Know. Thriley (talk) 17:28, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Killing of Austin Metcalf

Should the alleged killer's name be included in the article? 12:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Torture

Can we have a see also section on this page? Recent edits to include one have been reverted. Helper201 (talk) 05:26, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)

Does WP:GNG allow for album reviews containing substantive, in-depth analysis to ground the notability of a song article, or does the categorical prohibition in WP:NSONG apply?

If a song article has substantive in-depth coverage across multiple reliable sources, but they are all album reviews, it can still be notable under WP:GNG despite plainly failing WP:NSONG. WP:NSONG should be modified to remove the prohibition on album reviews to establish notability, and refer to WP:SIGCOV.
A song being substantively covered across multiple reliably-sourced album reviews is not a sufficient basis for notability—a notable song should be the subject of multiple non-trivial published works. NSONG should be clarified as superseding GNG for songs.
No change is necessary and the current wording of WP:NSONG is sufficiently clear (please explain your rationale).

Flip^and Flopped ツ 17:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

WikiProjects and collaborations

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association

1) Should the articles of any NBA players say that they are often considered one of the greatest players of all time?

Example: [Hakeem] Olajuwon is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

2) If the answer to the previous question is yes, what standard should be used? Note: this question is optional

2a) Every NBA 75 player is listed as one of the greatest.

2b) The following list of basketball players:

2c) The statement is only included if sources discussing the player's legacy commonly state that that player is one of the greatest in the history of basketball, or use equivalent superlative language.

Example of sourcing for the claim of Bill Russell being one of the greatest of all time: NBA legend, the greatest winner in basketball history, is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time, basketball great, NBA great, one of the greatest players of all-time, the ultimate winner.

2d) Any other criteria; if this option is selected, please do not simply give a different list of basketball players, but rather a different standard from which the inclusion or exclusion of a given player can be assessed through application of some common criteria.

Context: Various historical NBA players have been called "one of the greatest", "the greatest of all-time", or "the greatest at a position" by the press, magazines, books, former players, experts, etc. These terms are very subjective in nature and cover a 75+ year history, but can be sourced none-the-less. Discussions have ranged from the terms being vital to non-encyclopedic, from leaving the term in a player legacy section to prominently being displayed in the lead to not using the term at all. Please help us out with a yes or no on the term "greatest" in the lead section and the reasoning behind it. Thanks.

Pinging previous discussion contributors: @Fyunck(click), Left guide, Wamalotpark, Bagumba, Johnnynumerofive, Somarain, Zagalejo, Eg224, Jessintime, Orlando Davis, Assadzadeh, GOAT Bones231012, Anonymous7432, and Boles P94:

Ladtrack (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia technical issues and templates

Template talk:Current

Should Template:Current be changed to the shorter version in this sandbox diff? Toadspike [Talk] 11:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Template talk:Korean/auto

Read this page for the full project proposal.

Summary: proposing that this template ({{Korean/auto}}) and {{Infobox Korean name/auto}} gradually replace their predecessor templates {{Korean}} and {{Infobox Korean name}}. These new templates have semi-automatic romanization, as well as a number of other new features. For rationale and specifics, see the linked page above. seefooddiet (talk) 20:14, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

RfC to determine how reflinks are linked or not in the |work= field as done by bot. -- GreenC 20:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia proposals

Unsorted

User names

Shortcuts

Navigation: Archives • Instructions for closing administrators • Purge page cache

This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:

Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.

Do NOT post here if:

the user in question has made no recent edits.
you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).

Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:

has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
is not already blocked.

If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.

Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.

Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList

Reports

Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.

Place your report below this line. Please put new reports on the top of the list.

Tales of Arcadia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result was: user has requested a rename, no strong consensus formed here but they have agreed to change their name in light of some of the opposition camp's arguments. Primefac (talk) 20:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Tales of Arcadia (talk · contribs)

Their username is that of an animated television show franchise, Tales of Arcadia, which they freely admit on their user page. This user mainly edits the German Wikipedia, which has a different username policy that is more accepting of what we would call promotional names. For that reason I attempted to discuss it with them instead of blocking them for what seems a clear violation to me, but they do not wish to voluntarily change their username(likely because it is a valid username on the German Wikipedia). They declined my offer of alternatives(creating a new account for their use here, adding "fan" to their username). I dislike bringing this up, but I feel it's a clear violation. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

First of all, I would like to make a clear statement at the beginning: I'm willing to any discussion about my username, because I really like to contribute to the Wikipedia project and don't want to leave it (and especially not in this way). But I don't agree with the position of 331dot, so I have proposed that we can start a discussion here if needed.

As I have understand the policy usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, organization, website, product, musical group or band, team, club, creative group, or organized event are not allowed. And 331dot has the opinion that Tales of Arcadia which is also the name of a TV franchise is considered as product.

But the word Arcadia itself has a very long history and refers to a "vision of pastoralism and harmony with nature" as well as to different places, movies, games and a lot of more as you can see here. The phrase Tales of on the other hand is used for movies and books very commonly. So in my opinion the term Tales of Arcadia is just a sequence of a commonly title suffix (Tales of) and a mystical place (Arcadia). DreamWorks (the creator of the franchise) wouldn't be able to protect this name as brand or product because it could refer to any of the stories who are telled about the place of Arcadia. They have just chosen this title to awake a mystical tension.

And because of that I don't see where the user policy would forbid this name. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 19:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Note that you were editing articles related to the franchise, and you say on your userpage that your name is based on the franchise, so it's not a coincidence or related to a broader concept. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

I have never declined that I have edited articles in the past who are related to the franchise. But as everyone can see all contributions were minor changes and none of them were promotional. And I also have edited articles who are not related to the franchise. But my main focus is the German Wikipedia. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

To 331dot, Bishonen, Drmies, 1AmNobody24, Salvidrim! and all other readers. I would like to add some further explanation to my first statement:

When I created my account in the end of 2023 I have choosen my username with a explicit reference to the TV franchise. I've always communicated this clearly as all of you can see on my user page. The justification that my user name consists of the terms Tales of and the place Arcadia shouldn't mean that I'm denying my reference to the franchise rather I only wanted to explain that in my own opinion the name Tales of Arcadia wouldn't be protectable as a product name or brand by DreamWorks or any other company because it consists of a common phrase and a mystical place. Again: I'm not denying that my user name was choosen with reference to the franchise. But I also never have promoted the franchise here or on any other project.

So I think the question we now need to clarify is, how names with reference to fictional content should be handled. Are names who are equal to the title of franchises, movies, series or books allowed or not? What about other fictional content like characters or places? If such names are generally not allowed here, then I fully agree with you and my name needs to be changed? But aren't there also a lot of other users who would needed to be renamed then?

To be honest, what was really shocking for me, is the fact that I have contributed to the Wikipedia a lots of time before now (more than 1 year later) this username warning has reached me. I've become very comfortable with the name and thus I don't wanted to give up my name without a discussion in the community. And this is exactly what we are here for. I don't want to waste the time of anyone here, but please also keep in mind, how frustrating this whole process is for me.

So please let us come back to the root question how we should handle names with a fictional reference. Maybe one of the already voted users may change their mind and hopefully some other users will contribute to this discussion as well.

Finally, a friendly request to all administrators who still think my name is against the policy: Please do not just block my account, without giving my the chance to react once the discussion here is completed. I always was patient with all of you and was respecting every opinion. Sincerely Tales of Arcadia (talk) 21:57, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Since it seems that sadly no further comments are posted here I'm willing to change my username because of most of you have voted to disallow the name. Please give me time till tomorrow evening (German time) to think of a new name. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Currently I have a few names in my mind. I'll need to think of a bit which one to choose and probably request a rename tomorrow. Keep you updated here. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Allow Technically it is the name of a product, but it's a creative work. People regularly name themselves after their favourite characters, books, songs, and so on, and I can't see how that causes disruption. They aren't selling something, and it's not promotional in the typical sense we think of on Wikipedia. And it would be a shame to block an active deWiki contributor from resources such as TWL for an issue as trivial as this. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:40, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
I suggested that they simply add the word "fan" to their current username to resolve this. That's a policy compliant way for them to still indicate their personal interest in this franchise. 331dot (talk) 23:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
I can't see how "fan of named creative work" (a username which explicitly promotes a product) is in anyway less problematic than a username which is "named create work".
And @Bishonen, you haven't seen this because it's on their deWiki page, but the argument they've adopted directly a result of a member of the deWiki Arbcom telling them this would work. If you think they should be blocked for it, you may do so, I suppose, but it has no bearing on their username. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Because it indicates an individual. Their current name suggests to those that see it an association with the topic or that they represent the topic. If my name was New England Patriots or Boston Red Sox, the same would apply. It's not disallowed to indicate an interest in a topic. "RedSoxFan" would be completely acceptable. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Both the examples you've highlighted would be WP:ORGNAME violations, not because they take their names from products, because they take the names of a coorporations, and in a way that could easily imply shared use. I understand what you're trying to illustrate with them, however, I really do, but I'd like to get back to the user at hand. In this particular case, while the user has taken their name from a product, they have taken their name from a particular subset of products: the subset of creative works. I so understand where you're coming from on this issue - and the name does, fairly obviously, make a reference to a product, I cannot disagree with you there. But there's a reason I'm focusing on the fact that it's a creative work. These are strange, because unlike other products, people may often name themselves after movies, tv shows, poems, songs, characters, without any intent to advertise the product in question. (Yes, characters are products.) Could these be blocked instantly? By the letter of the policy, yes, you could have likely blocked instantly without any need for the RFCUN. Admins do, semi-regularly. You chose not to, so you already accept that there is some difference between this username and other product usernames. (I've been assuming that it's because it's a creative work: is there some other reason?) However, given that they are an active contributor on deWiki, given that they have not engaged in promotional or disruptive editing on any Wiki, and given that there has been no real argument that their username has caused disruption, mislead other editors as to their identity, and given that their editor clearly discloses where their username came from, their lack of personal connection to the movies, and given that this past week of discussion with a goal of trying to force them to make their disclosure in their name has prevented both of you from improving the encyclopedia, would it not be better to WP:IAR and say "it's against the letter of the law, but not the spirit?". And I'm saying this as a stickler for making people follow the exact terms of the Creative Commons licenses and plagiarism policies. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 00:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
I chose not to block only due to the differing username policies between here and the German Wikipedia. When I've done this with other editors in this situation, they're usually willing to either rename or create an account just to use here. This is the first one I've had decline. And their response here was to claim that this was a coincidence, wiklawyering it. ("I'm from Boston and I wear red socks, so "Boston Red Sox" is okay as my name") 331dot (talk) 00:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Ah, I think there's been a bit of a translation issue here. I don't believe Arcadia is claiming their username is a coincidence, they're more arguing that it is more likely to be perceived as a coincidence than it is to be perceived as promotion. This is most likely due to the fact that our policy places such a focus on "unambiguous". They believe that if they can show their username is not unambiguously that of a product, they can keep it. They like their username, so they're doing that. They've also taken this argument from their mentor at de:Benutzer Diskussion:Tales of Arcadia#Antwort auf deine Anfrage. I still understand that this has produced a somewhat wiki-lawyer-like approach, and I get why that's frustrating to deal with. However, I'd urge you to look past that, if for no other reason that it has no effect on their username.
And apologies if I'm coming across as dismissive of your concerns or arguments. I understand where you're coming from - it's just that I was blocked on svWiki last year for a username violation. I was unblocked rather quickly, thankfully, once another administrator pointed out that I wasn't a creep, just a lesbian and productive enWiki editor. But if I hadn't been unblocked, then it would have actively hampered my ability to edit enWiki articles. Everytime somebody looked at my global contributions they would have seen I was blocked on other Wikis, I would have lost access to the Wiki library, and it would have prevented me from making my occasional minor edits on svWiki. Username blocks are needed, to prevent obviously disruptive usernames that make other editor uncomfortable, to enforce local policies surrounding the use of shared accounts, or as a quick way of getting rid of spammers/accounts which are obviously not here in good faith. This editor is here in good faith, and nobody has made any claim otherwise. Yes, you're right on a technicality. But what good does forcing them to make their name explicitly promotional actually do? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Don't allow. Tales of Arcadia, are you aware of the concept of wikilawyering? That's what your argument about "just a sequence of a commonly title suffix (Tales of) and a mystical place (Arcadia) is. 331dot has been extremely patient with you on your own page. Unless you promptly take their good advice (which contains several alternatives for you) without any more messing around, I would recommend them to block you for egregious timewasting. Bishonen | tålk 23:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC).
I think you have misunderstand me. (Maybe because I‘m not a native English speaker.) I have never declined the reference to the TV series. Everyone can read this on my user page. I only wanted to say that the name (in my opinion) is not really a protected product namr which can be considered as product. And again: I was and I‘am always open to a discussion. And I‘ve never posted anything which was promotional. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 12:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Don't allow. If 331dot is technically, right, then they're right, no? 331dot made what seems like a perfectly good suggestion, and they were nice enough not to block for what three administrators now think is a violation of our user name policy. The word "Arcadia" is used frequently, but "tales of Arcadia" as a phrase, independent of that show/franchise/whatever, is not, as a Google Books search confirms, delivering nothing but hits for the show. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Allow. There are many users with the suffix "Tales of..." in their usernames here, indicating that it is commonly used. Some of the names may refer to culture or to places. As an editor of articles on classical antiquity I did not know about the animated series. I thought of the various tales of Arcadia, narrated during the centuries and of the famous paintings, depicting the stories. It may be my fault, but I cannot see an unique name and the promotion of a single product in this name. --Regiomontanus (talk) 03:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Just noting (from a pedantic/administrative point of view) that there are five users with names starting with "Tales of" (which, again pedantically, is a prefix, not a suffix). Primefac (talk) 13:35, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Disallow Not sure if this is a bit far-fetched, but if they're editing Tales of Arcadia, I'd count the name as a violation of WP:MISLEADNAME #3: Usernames that imply that the account has explicit ownership of certain articles, content, or topic areas. Nobody (talk) 06:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
@1AmNobody24 That's an interesting idea; I'd like to hear more. How would you generalise that to usernames in general that make reference to a particular article subject? For example, we have a lot of accounts whose usernames are directly taken from superhero movies/franchises. (Just search User:Superman and see how many you get). Do you believe those are misleading and at risk of scaring off other editors? Thinking more broadly, how about usernames that just, in general, overlap with the article title? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
The honest answer is 'It depends'. Would I find Superman editing Superman a misleadname? No. Would I find USA Gov editing Federal government of the United States a misleadname? Yes. There are others were I'm also unsure how I'd handle them, for example: If Swoop edited Philadelphia Eagles would you see the connection with Swoop (Philadelphia Eagles) a misleadname? Nobody (talk) 07:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
'It depends' is a perfectly acceptable answer. Interestingly, I'd probably be okay with Swoop (but as an Eagles fan, that could be pure bias =P ), USA Gov directly implies both a real-world, legal, authority over the article content and, as the name of an organization, fails on several fronts. I'm with you on Superman though. Just to take this a bit further, what implications would you get from a user who took their name from a specific movie? Or maybe a specific song? For the sake of argument on the song one, say the editor explicitly named themselves after the song, then edited the article extensively. Would that be misleading to you? If not, then why? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Given that my own user name is partially inspired by a movie, I'd say it depends on the movie title and how they edited the article. This applies for any creative work. Nobody (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I hadn't put that together. Bob Odenkirk was great in that. The argument this user has used, that their name is not immediately obvious as the name of a creative work, actually does apply in your case. To answer GLL query about a song, a song is also arguably a product, but it isn't a franchise. There is no implied authority in naming one self after a single song.

I have to say I don't think I've seen this specific situation before. If someone was named User:LordoftheRings and started editing about Gandalf I'm not so sure we would block them. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 21:37, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
I agree that just editing a article that seems related wouldn't probably lead to a block, they'd be asked if theres a COI and move on. I'm more interested in what you'd think if they're edits were clearly promotional. Would you simply think it's a fan or would it cross your mind that it could be a paid editor trying to improve the presentation of their product? Nobody (talk) 07:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

But doesn‘t it count how these edits were made? All are minor changes, like fixing links or other small things. I‘ve never promoted anything. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 13:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Questioning - Would we allow User:IncredibleHulk to edit Marvel articles? Would we allow User:BladeRunner to edit articles about the franchise? I don't find absolute clarity in the rules about whether usernames that are titles or fictional elements of creative works are allowed or disallowed, and I don't find that this is unambiguously covered under the "product" category. I raise this question with disregard to the pseudoarguments put forward that this is just common "Tales of" prefix with some general "Arcadia" concept, I'm assuming the username is directly named after the series, and still questioning applicable policy. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 06:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I have chosen my name after the franchise. Everyone can read this on my user page. But because it‘s fictional, I haven‘t considered it as product. And no one of my edits were promotional. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 06:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who is themselves named after a fictional character, I can edit Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy articles all day long if I want to. So yes, we would allow the Incredible Hulk name to edit Marvel articles. I think Blade Runner is arguable as well, as that is the name of the franchise, but also a role,as Deckard was a "blade runner" before he retired. The difference here is that they are clearly not named after a character, they are named after the franchise. The body of work is a product not a character. I don't think there is any ill intent here, but technically the name seems to run afoul of ORGNAME which explicitly mentions product names as usernames. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 21:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
That being said, I'm not sure a block would really serve to prevent harm to the encyclopedia. If it was "Tales of Arcadia Official" that would imply special authority. I'm not entirely convinced that this does. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Allow per Beeblebrox's explanation that this username isn't disruptive enough to the project and revise WP:ORGNAME to accommodate good-faith usernames named after pop culture works/characters/etc. Indeed, we should not enforce policies to our letter, but rather revise them to their spirit. ミラP@Miraclepine 05:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
My main concern here is that the name of the franchise doesn't denote an individual- I already told the user that adding "fan" to their username would be completely satisfactory. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.

^ "Jacamo's Push For Diversity In Fashion Backfired Spectacularly". HuffPost UK. 2016-11-01. Retrieved 2024-12-22.
^ https://her.ie/life/mens-clothing-brand-causes-outrage-with-homophobic-campaign-317913
^ https://www.joe.co.uk/life/clothing-brand-causes-outrage-with-homophobic-ad-campaign-95181
^ "Jacamo clothing firm apologises after 'gender stereotyping' in Twitter advert". BBC News. 2016-10-31. Retrieved 2024-12-20.
^ Lee, Josh (2016-10-31). "Clothing brand Jacamo issue an apology after being called out for "homophobic" online campaign". Attitude. Retrieved 2024-12-22.
^ Baret, Julie (2016-10-31). "Les "vrais mecs" et l'homophobie d'une marque anglaise". TÊTU (in French). Retrieved 2024-12-22.
^ "Clothing retailer blasted for "Homophobic" Twitter campaign". THEGAYUK. 2016-10-31. Retrieved 2024-12-20.
^ Grossman, Paul (2023). "Fundamental challenges and likely refutations of the five basic premises of the polyvagal theory". Biological Psychology. 180. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2023.108589. PMID 37230290.

[1] "Jacamo's Push For Diversity In Fashion Backfired Spectacularly". HuffPost UK. 2016-11-01. Retrieved 2024-12-22.

[2] ttps://her.ie/life/mens-clothing-brand-causes-outrage-with-homophobic-campaign-317913

[3] ttps://www.joe.co.uk/life/clothing-brand-causes-outrage-with-homophobic-ad-campaign-95181

[4] "Jacamo clothing firm apologises after 'gender stereotyping' in Twitter advert". BBC News. 2016-10-31. Retrieved 2024-12-20.

[5] Lee, Josh (2016-10-31). "Clothing brand Jacamo issue an apology after being called out for "homophobic" online campaign". Attitude. Retrieved 2024-12-22.

[6] Baret, Julie (2016-10-31). "Les "vrais mecs" et l'homophobie d'une marque anglaise". TÊTU (in French). Retrieved 2024-12-22.

[7] "Clothing retailer blasted for "Homophobic" Twitter campaign". THEGAYUK. 2016-10-31. Retrieved 2024-12-20.

[Grossman23-8] Grossman, Paul (2023). "Fundamental challenges and likely refutations of the five basic premises of the polyvagal theory". Biological Psychology. 180. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2023.108589. PMID 37230290.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

v t e Requests for comment (All)
Articles (All)	Biographies (bio) Economy, trade, and companies (econ) History and geography (hist) Language and linguistics (lang) Maths, science, and technology (sci) Media, the arts, and architecture (media) Politics, government, and law (pol) Religion and philosophy (reli) Society, sports, and culture (soc)
Non-articles (All)	Wikipedia style and naming (style) Wikipedia policies and guidelines (policy) WikiProjects and collaborations (proj) Wikipedia technical issues and templates (tech) Wikipedia proposals (prop) Unsorted
Instructions	To add a discussion to this list: Add the tag `{{rfc\|xxx}}` at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, `{{rfc\|xxx\|yyy}}`, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category.
For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot.

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Wikipedia noticeboards