• 
  1 (current image)
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9

Which image should be used for the infobox of the article? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

FropFrop (talk) 03:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

There are two freely licensed photographs of the statue:

• A wider, uncropped version: [1]
• A more tightly cropped version: [2]

Both are images of a modern public monument commemorating Kusaila, and have been proposed as alternatives to a previously used fictional drawing: [3], which was removed due to sourcing concerns. This RfC seeks input on whether either image should be used, and if so, which version is more appropriate.

(For additional context, see: Talk:Kusaila#c-ElijahUHC-20250602183300-Image_Change:_Statue_of_Kusaila_from_Bouhmama)

ElijahUHC (Talk) 22:26, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

• Trump began his second presidency by pardoning around 1,500 January 6 rioters and initiating mass layoffs of federal workers.

I believe this merits an RfC because I have proposed this change before and each discussion ends without a consensus. Bill Williams 18:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

His bureaucratic career, including his role as Chief Secretary of the Government of Haryana, has been the subject of sustained public and legal scrutiny due to a series of controversies and administrative decisions that attracted criticism from courts, media, and civil society.

This statement was added after the RfC began to satisfy WP:RFCNEUTRAL and WP:RFCBRIEF. 03:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Some Kashmiris, along with numerous other commentators, have described these policies as "settler colonialism".

In 2019, the Indian government revoked the special status previously granted to Jammu and Kashmir, and extended the Constitution of India to the state in full, enabling non-Kashmiris to purchase property and settle down in Kashmir. Also related is the issuance of domicile status to non-Kashmiris, qualifying them for jobs and college seats. Fears have been expressed that these changes would result in a change in demographics in Kashmir, with non-locals settling in the area.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

FropFrop (talk) 03:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Cinderella157 (talk) 03:41, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

There are two freely licensed photographs of the statue:

• A wider, uncropped version: [4]
• A more tightly cropped version: [5]

Both are images of a modern public monument commemorating Kusaila, and have been proposed as alternatives to a previously used fictional drawing: [6], which was removed due to sourcing concerns. This RfC seeks input on whether either image should be used, and if so, which version is more appropriate.

(For additional context, see: Talk:Kusaila#c-ElijahUHC-20250602183300-Image_Change:_Statue_of_Kusaila_from_Bouhmama)

ElijahUHC (Talk) 22:26, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

1. Can sources dating from the 16th to 19th centuries be used as evidence that Hugh was from Italy?
2. Can Mario Moiraghi be used as a reliable sources for Hugh's life? Adam Bishop (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

The disagreement comes in with which one should be used. The side I am on argues the tables give the most complete view of the variants while providing a quick reference lookup for data within the article. The side for the guidelines in the style argues that the tables violate Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE due to being too information dense, and that the singular variant model is more readable and better for reader understanding.

My request for comment is whether We should follow the style guide, or We should use the existing data tables. Bimmons (talk) 04:16, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

There is consensus among experts that the assumptions of the polyvagal theory are untenable.^[1] Ian Oelsner (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

"The Misandry Myth: An Inaccurate Stereotype About Feminists’ Attitudes Toward Men" is currently included in the final sentence of the article's intro and the final paragraph of the article itself. Some users have argued that the source is WP:PRIMARY, and that it is therefore against Wikipedia's guidelines to use it to claim empirical proof of controversial claims, such as "The false idea that misandry is commonplace among feminists is so widespread that it has been called the 'misandry myth' by 40 topic experts" and "feminist views of men were no different than that of non-feminists or men towards men." Other users have argued that the source is WP:SECONDARY, and that it is therefore fine to include. Additionally, some users have argued that calling the authors "40 topic experts" is not adequately supported, while other users feel that being author of an academic article is enough reason to be called a "topic expert." Dekadoka (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

• Option 1: Generally reliable
• Option 2: Additional considerations
• Option 3: Generally unreliable
• Option 4: Generally unreliable, with deprecation

(2405:6E00:2803:665A:C4CF:6FF:FECE:950B (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

• Option A: Donkey Kong (First game featuring Mario (character))
• Option B: Mario Bros (First game with the series name branding)
• Option C: Super Mario Bros (First game of the mainline Super Mario series)

Mk8mlyb (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

• 
  1 (current image)
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9

Which image should be used for the infobox of the article? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Some Kashmiris, along with numerous other commentators, have described these policies as "settler colonialism".

In 2019, the Indian government revoked the special status previously granted to Jammu and Kashmir, and extended the Constitution of India to the state in full, enabling non-Kashmiris to purchase property and settle down in Kashmir. Also related is the issuance of domicile status to non-Kashmiris, qualifying them for jobs and college seats. Fears have been expressed that these changes would result in a change in demographics in Kashmir, with non-locals settling in the area.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

"The Misandry Myth: An Inaccurate Stereotype About Feminists’ Attitudes Toward Men" is currently included in the final sentence of the article's intro and the final paragraph of the article itself. Some users have argued that the source is WP:PRIMARY, and that it is therefore against Wikipedia's guidelines to use it to claim empirical proof of controversial claims, such as "The false idea that misandry is commonplace among feminists is so widespread that it has been called the 'misandry myth' by 40 topic experts" and "feminist views of men were no different than that of non-feminists or men towards men." Other users have argued that the source is WP:SECONDARY, and that it is therefore fine to include. Additionally, some users have argued that calling the authors "40 topic experts" is not adequately supported, while other users feel that being author of an academic article is enough reason to be called a "topic expert." Dekadoka (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

• Trump began his second presidency by pardoning around 1,500 January 6 rioters and initiating mass layoffs of federal workers.

I believe this merits an RfC because I have proposed this change before and each discussion ends without a consensus. Bill Williams 18:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Some Kashmiris, along with numerous other commentators, have described these policies as "settler colonialism".

In 2019, the Indian government revoked the special status previously granted to Jammu and Kashmir, and extended the Constitution of India to the state in full, enabling non-Kashmiris to purchase property and settle down in Kashmir. Also related is the issuance of domicile status to non-Kashmiris, qualifying them for jobs and college seats. Fears have been expressed that these changes would result in a change in demographics in Kashmir, with non-locals settling in the area.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

"The Misandry Myth: An Inaccurate Stereotype About Feminists’ Attitudes Toward Men" is currently included in the final sentence of the article's intro and the final paragraph of the article itself. Some users have argued that the source is WP:PRIMARY, and that it is therefore against Wikipedia's guidelines to use it to claim empirical proof of controversial claims, such as "The false idea that misandry is commonplace among feminists is so widespread that it has been called the 'misandry myth' by 40 topic experts" and "feminist views of men were no different than that of non-feminists or men towards men." Other users have argued that the source is WP:SECONDARY, and that it is therefore fine to include. Additionally, some users have argued that calling the authors "40 topic experts" is not adequately supported, while other users feel that being author of an academic article is enough reason to be called a "topic expert." Dekadoka (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

• 
  1 (current image)
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9

Which image should be used for the infobox of the article? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at RSN: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Google N-grams and 'consistent' answers

Should Google Ngram be deprecated in rename/move discussions?

• Yes
• No

@Cinderella157, Dicklyon, Sammy D III, Myceteae, Gawaon, Andy Dingley, Intothatdarkness, SchreiberBike, Hawkeye7, Blueboar, Rally Wonk, Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction, FactOrOpinion, NatGertler, Yesterday, all my dreams..., Randy Kryn, Chicdat, AjaxSmack, SMcCandlish, and Kowal2701: Pinging participants in the MOS:CAPS discussion, the RSN discussion, and those who might be interested in this RfC. I also left an rfc notice at Village Pump (policy), WikiProject English Language, WP:NCCAPS. If I forgot someone, I am terribly sorry. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 13:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Cinderella157 (talk) 03:41, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at RSN: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Google N-grams and 'consistent' answers

Should Google Ngram be deprecated in rename/move discussions?

• Yes
• No

@Cinderella157, Dicklyon, Sammy D III, Myceteae, Gawaon, Andy Dingley, Intothatdarkness, SchreiberBike, Hawkeye7, Blueboar, Rally Wonk, Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction, FactOrOpinion, NatGertler, Yesterday, all my dreams..., Randy Kryn, Chicdat, AjaxSmack, SMcCandlish, and Kowal2701: Pinging participants in the MOS:CAPS discussion, the RSN discussion, and those who might be interested in this RfC. I also left an rfc notice at Village Pump (policy), WikiProject English Language, WP:NCCAPS. If I forgot someone, I am terribly sorry. TurboSuperA+_(connect) 13:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

1. It should be added to the well-written criterion as
   1. well-written: its prose is engaging, understandable to a broad audience, and of a professional standard;
   2. well-written: its prose is engaging, understandable to its audience, and of a professional standard;
2. It should be a separate criterion: 1g. Understandable to its audience.
3. Status quo: no explicit mention

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Cinderella157 (talk) 03:41, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Is putting "The" at the beginning of an article title an acceptable innovation for WP:NATURAL disambiguation?

Context: Recently, a move request at Hulk (comics) to Hulk resulted in a "no consensus" close. Multiple editors, while perhaps opposing the proposed move, suggested moving Hulk (comics) to The Hulk instead (as The Hulk already redirects there). One editor intelligently noticed that WP:THE currently is directly opposed to that, as per its dictum that The Joker redirect to Joker (comics), and not vice-versa. But should that be the case?

Please respond support if you believe adding "the" is OK in order to disambiguate.

Please respond oppose if you think adding "the" should not be allowed, as is currently the case.

Thanks for helping Wikipedia.

For additional context, the article currently located at Hulk was then at Hulk (comics).

The RfC was closed as follows:

Result: The definite article may be used to disambiguate articles in certain circumstances.

There were 8 supports and 4 opposes. One oppose was based on the objection that the DABNAME guidance would be affected, but how this was the case was not explained and it doesn't seem true to me (nothing stemming from what has been discussed here would mean we would not retain the DAB page Hulk, for example). A second oppose was made on the basis that "the" should only be used if it is part of the formal name of the article subject. However, that argument seems contrary to WP:COMMONNAME. A third oppose suggests that "the" is insufficient disambiguation because we use it in many articles. I can't work out if there is a typo in the comment or not, but this doesn't make sense to me as an argument. The fourth oppose was on the basis that it would be confusing. I don't think any of these are knockout arguments, and so the numerical victory of the supports should be recognised.

There also seems to be consensus that the applciation of the principle should be resticted to article titles where there is genuine natural disambiguation (e.g. one this is commonly called "The Foo", the other is called "Foo" and not normally "The Foo") and a genuine need for disambiguation. There also seems to be consensus that a case-by-case approach should be taken and common sense applied to avoid unnecessary confusion, and so that conflicting considerations can be taken into account.

To the best of my knowledge, no change was ever implemented after the closure of that RfC, and it has not been overturned or overruled by a subsequent RfC.

Should WP:THE include some language that indicates that use of a definite article to achieve natural disambiguation is acceptable?

An example of proposed language (although this is open to change) could be something like this as a third condition, after the first two listed:

3. Use of definite articles is acceptable as a form of natural disambiguation, if the article is not the primary topic for the article title without parenthetical disambiguation.

Here are some articles whose titles might be different if this were to pass (all of these have redirects in the format of "the x"):

Charleston (dance) → The Charleston

Madonna (art) → The Madonna

Roundhouse (venue) → The Roundhouse

Penguin (character) → The Penguin

Politics (Aristotle) → The Politics

Ladtrack (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

His bureaucratic career, including his role as Chief Secretary of the Government of Haryana, has been the subject of sustained public and legal scrutiny due to a series of controversies and administrative decisions that attracted criticism from courts, media, and civil society.

This statement was added after the RfC began to satisfy WP:RFCNEUTRAL and WP:RFCBRIEF. 03:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

1. Keep: Keep the series sidebars unchanged.
2. Remove images: Remove the presidential seal and signature found on the bottom of series sidebars.
3. Convert to navbox: Convert to a navbox for the bottom of related articles.

Kaito-san (talk/contribs) 20:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Editors are encouraged to visit for an example of this implementation. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 18:27, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

1. It should be added to the well-written criterion as
   1. well-written: its prose is engaging, understandable to a broad audience, and of a professional standard;
   2. well-written: its prose is engaging, understandable to its audience, and of a professional standard;
2. It should be a separate criterion: 1g. Understandable to its audience.
3. Status quo: no explicit mention

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:45, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

GloryToCalifornia (talk) 03:49, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

This is a statement-and-agreement-style RfC. 05:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)