Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Reminder of civility norms at RfA
Discussion about refining proposals from Phase I of WP:RFA2024 to add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and require links for claims of specific policy violations. --19:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Administrator recall
Discussion about refining the implementation details of proposals from Phase I of WP:RFA2024 for community-based recall of administrators. --19:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors
Discussion following up on a successful proposal from Phase I of WP:RFA2024 to have named admins/crats to monitor infractions. --19:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Mentoring process
Discussion following up on a successful proposal from Phase I of WP:RFA2024 which called for better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process. --19:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
Would it be good to have clearer guidelines on the usage of the "criminal charges" parameter? Criminal charges appear to be much like wedding engagements. They are short-lived preludes to longterm events: Convictions or marriages (write your own joke :)
Considering charges can be dropped against someone, would making the guidelines clearer to limit charges to only those that actually resulted in criminal prosecution? (Whether acquitted or found guilty.) If not, what examples could there be of someone having a lead-level fact relating to a criminal charge that was dropped and didn't result in criminal proceedings (that are not currently ongoing)? 92.12.76.138 (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
Template talk:Infobox criminal
The guideline currently states that the "criminal_charges" parameter is "What the criminal is accused of (note that this is different from what the criminal is -- later -- convicted of)". Obviously the person can't be a criminal if they've only been accused of a crime, or even charged with one. However this Infobox seems to be restricted to use with notable convicted criminals. So this would imply that "criminal_charges" in this case relates solely to crimes they are currently wanted for (ie. which they have not been tried for yet).
I think there's a chance this parameter could be used to list charges that did not lead to convictions after being processed in the legal system (either because they were dropped, dismissed or otherwise found not-guilty). A short note could help clarify the correct use cases: "What the criminal is currently wanted to be tried for. Do not list charges that were dropped, dismissed or which went to trial and did not lead to conviction." 2A00:23EE:2848:15B0:E196:F555:C031:6D7C (talk) 00:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
With the |birth_place= parameter having the corresponding |birth_date= parameter and the |death_place= parameter having the corresponding |death_date= parameter, do you agree to have the |burial_place= parameter given the corresponding |burial_date= parameter? 4theloveofallthings (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
|
Wikipedia talk:Missing Wikipedians
This page is currently hitting the post-expand limit, meaning that the templates used to display the missing Wikipedians' names stop working midway through the Wsection. This is resulting in the editors' names not being displayed, and instead being replaced with (e.g.) Template:User2. I therefore think this page should be split, but I'm not quite sure what the best way of doing it would be. A few possible ideas that came to my mind were:
I welcome any feedback and opinions on this proposal, as well as other ideas for how best to split this page. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] RFC tag added 13:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |