Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, sports, and culture
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
| Are independent, secondary sources considered reliable to state the Staffordshire Bull Terrier was formerly known by the names "Bull and Terrier", "Bull Terrier", "Pit dog", "Half and Half" and "Bulldog Terrier"? Cavalryman (talk) 02:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC) |
A significant amount of Talk page discussion and reverting has focused on the question of whether or not to include a summary of the subsection of the article dealing with Controversies in the lead section. The RFC is to determine if consensus among editors is that article should or should not include a summary of the Controversies section in the lead section, and what form it should take if consensus is that some version of a summary of the Controversies section should be included in the lead section.
Editors are requested to await the conclusion of the RFC before adding further edits about Controversies into the lead section. ErnestKrause (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2022 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports
| What should the naming scheme for equestrian events[lower-alpha 1] be altered to? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC) |
| Question: Is there sufficient material in the body of the article for the following sentence (with refs as indicated) to be added to the lede:
"According to language pundit William Safire, the term derives from the older phrase "right-wing nut",<ref name=safire2008 /> and although it is occasionally directed at extremists on the political left, it is primarily aimed at those on the far-right.<ref name=safire2006 /><ref name=safire2008 /><ref name="nytimeswingnut" /><ref name=lexico />" This version of the article can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC) |
| Should there be a mention of the desecrations of the Terry Fox statue and the National War Memorial in the lead section of the article? -"Ghost of Dan Gurney" 20:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC) |
What changes should be made to the first sentence of this article?
|
| Should Ukrainian crisis be a disambiguation page? (Rather than an article on the 2014 crisis that resulted in the Russian annexation of Crimea.)
Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC) |
| Is it permissible to use "African American" or "Black American" in the lead sentence? Sundayclose (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2022 (UTC) |
Talk:College and university rankings
| Should the Academic Influence rankings be included in this article? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC) |
Talk:List of online encyclopedias
| Hi All,
I would like to expand this list with online encyclopedias that do not have their own Wikipedia articles. I believe they are relevant to Wikipedia but don't necessarily need their own articles (other encyclopedia lists also have items without an article). I would use this list compiled for Wikidata properties - plenty of important, academic encyclopedias. When I tried to start expanding the list, my edits were reverted by @MrOllie:. See our discussion about this here. One of his concerns was that the list would be filled with fan wikis - this can be avoided easily that the list only includes non-open reference works. Anyway, could you chip in and tell if it's okay for me to expand the article? Thanks. Adam Harangozó (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability
Abolish the current version of NSPORTS. This page, far from being rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article, does not help the decision process, but actively hampers it. Examples are countless of one group of editors (whether it be football, olympics, or plenty of others) arguing that an article should be kept because (correctly or not) its subject "passes N[some random sport]" or that "sportsperson from long time ago, there WP:MUSTBESOURCES"; and others correctly arguing that the existing coverage is not sufficient to write an encyclopedia article (as opposed to a database entry). This leads to needless conflict, pointless AfDs and DRVs, and above all bureaucratic waste of time. Abolishing this guideline and falling back directly to GNG would also help in reducing issues of WP:BIAS and the disproportionate amount of (usually white, male, European) sports figures that are included, as well as make policy more understandable to newer and more experienced editors alike by avoiding issues of WP:CREEP. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC) |
| This is a proposal to explicitly permit the use of dash-separated titles for sports events, where such a construction is presently inconsistent with WP:AT. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC) |
Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire agreement
| Should Zangezur corridor be merged into 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh ceasefire agreement (this page)? See filer's original question for details. El_C 22:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC) |
| Shall the content proposed below, on human rights violations, in either of the two forms proposed below, be added to the article?
Robert McClenon (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC) |
- ↑ This would include all pages with titles of the same form as Equestrian at the Summer Olympics, a scheme not limited to Olympics themselves; as well as the whole of the category tree, starting with Category:Equestrian at multi-sport events