Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
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) |
An Executive Order was signed today, March 1, by President Trump titled "Designating English as the Language of the United States". The main portions of note are within Section 3. Designating an Official Language for the United States:
That being said, Executive Orders are not legislation and are limited to the Executive Branch's interpretation of existing law. They can also be overturned by the next president. This EO also seems to be largely symbolic and does not require any substantial changes to federal programs per the NYT, except that agencies are no longer required to support "programs for people with limited English proficiency" per NPR. Usually, from what I can tell as well, official languages of countries are designated either in a country's constitution or through the legislative process. There have also been attempts to codify English as the official language through legislative means with more teeth, force of law, and would require official documents, laws, communications, and such, to be in English, as mentioned in the article English Language Unity Act and as seen by H.R. 997 from the 118th Congress, but those efforts have never been signed into law. However, there is an argument that the Executive Branch could set policy in this space, though it is unprecedented. There's also a middle ground, such as including a note stating that "English is the official language of the Executive Branch per EO [number], but is not stated in the constitution or in federal law", similar to the way that we currently do for states. There's also an argument to wait and see how folks react. As such here are the options I envisioned, though I am open to other options. Should we include "English" as the official language of the United States?
Note that there is another RFC taking place at Talk:Languages of the United States § English as official language Extending the RFC's time to cook up more responses by adding an extra timestamp. Tarlby 05:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC) |
| 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) |
Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States
| The narrow question is which term to use in article mainspace: "illegal immigrant" versus "undocumented immigrant". The issue focuses on the adjective applied to the noun immigrant—the individual. (This issue is distinguished from using the term "illegal immigration" (the act of immigrating) which is not at issue in this RfC.)
Of course, this RfC does not affect discussion of the terms themselves in the article. I suggest that editors reply with Illegal or Undocumented or other specific adjective. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Euthanasia in the United States
| Firstly, let me set out that I am opening this RFC because similar questions to mine have arisen on this talk page over the years without responses, so I think it is due time to call an RFC, as it would be apparent there would be little if anyone that would respond, given the lack of prior responses on this talk page.
This page is currently very misleading. Assisted suicide and euthanasia are two separate and different things. Euthanasia is ending the life of another person or animal that is either terminally ill or undergoing unacceptable suffering. Assisted suicide on the other hand one person aiding another in taking their own life. Note: I placed in italics what the key difference is. This distinction is further exemplified by the fact that there is a page called Assisted suicide in the United States. However, this page uses the term "assisted suicide" multiple times, seemingly conflating euthanasia with assisted suicide, despite the two being distinct and different; therefore, misleading the reader. The whole section for Maine for example only refers to assisted dying, not euthanasia, which this article is about, along with multiple other uses of the term assisted suicide throughout the page. So where do we go from here? Do we take down the page and put it into draft status until these issues are fixed, or are there people that are willing to run through the page and correct the conflations between assisted suicide and euthanasia and eliminate any use of the former term from this article? I can't say it’s something I have the time to do personally. Helper201 (talk) 00:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Does {{Infobox ethnic group}} belong to this article? (The nom was rewritten to address the expressed neutrality concern). --Altenmann >talk 19:19, 26 March 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
| How should weather disaster articles (such as tornadoes, tropical cyclones, floods, winter storms, ect...) deal with damage estimates for the infobox? (Five-Related Questions; See Background Below) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:13, 23 March 2025 (UTC) |
Which ideologies should be listed in the Five Star Movement's infobox?
Please indicate which ideology to include and in what order to list them. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
| What is the reliabilty of Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor?
|
On the Americans article, I removed religion from the InfoBox, arguing that it oversimplifies it, especially terms like Majority, Minority and Traditionally oversimplify stuff. It was reverted. I am asking fellow editors, what should the article have?
|
| I propose this modification for infobox into {{Infobox writer}}, with the inclusion of political career. Following multiple discussions at: |
| Should the 1911–1912 anthem of the Great Qing, "Cup of Solid Gold", be included in the infobox?
diff with, diff without 129.97.124.166 (talk) 02:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the three-paragraph version of the Rhetoric section discussed above be implemented? Riposte97 (talk) 10:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election
| Should opinion polls by pollsters which are not members of the British Polling Council be excluded from this article? Chessrat (talk, contributions) 23:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the sentence on the Unite the Right rally include more context?
|
| Hello everyone! Should the government type of China be changed from "Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist republic" to "Unitary Marxist–Leninist one-party socialist republic under authoritarian dictatorship"?
In my opinion, it doesnt make sense to label Russia, Belarus and North Korea as authoritarian/totalitarian dictatorships but exclude China despite overwhelming amount of sources calling it an authoritarian dictatorship. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should this article focus on all Holocaust victims, including non-Jews, or should it focus solely on and be intended only for Jewish victims? (Edit for clarification: this RfC is about redefining the scope of the article) ☆SuperNinja2☆ TALK! 20:24, 8 March 2025 (UTC) |