Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Should the first sentence continue to read "Thomas Niedermayer [...] was kidnapped by the Provisional IRA" or be reverted back to "Thomas Niedermayer [...] was kidnapped and killed by the Provisional IRA"?
My Comment: We need to settle once and for all what the opening sentence ought to say about Niedermayer's abduction and death. For many years the sentence read that Niedermayer was "kidnapped and killed by the Provisional IRA"; in 2018 this was changed to "kidnapped and died in the hands of the Provisional IRA". In December 2023 this was even further toned down to say only "kidnapped by the Provisional IRA", with his death only mentioned in a subsequent sentence. I do not believe this to fully capture the severity of the case; to merely say he was kidnapped could imply he was ultimately rescued by the authorities or released by his captors. I believe the original wording of "kidnapped and killed" ought to be restored. The user "Kathleen's Bike" appears to contend that the word "killed" exclusively refers to cases in which there was a murder conviction, I believe this to be a dishonest statement; manslaughter and murder are both forms of homicide, which is a broad category referring to the death of a human at the hands of another human; nobody disputes that both Mr Niedermayer and his kidnappers were humans, therefore his death was by definition a homicide since the cause of death was determined to be physical violence inflicted by his captors due to the presence of injuries to his skull inflicted prior to death which showed no signs of healing. Whether or not his death was the intended outcome of the assault is immaterial. Even if the (doubtful) claim Niedermayer died from a coincidental unrelated heart attack is true, the failure of his captors to seek medical treatment would be considered criminal negligence since by abducting him they held all responsibility for his welfare. Under British law the crime of manslaughter[1] comprises: 1) intent to murder with mitigating circumstances, 2) gross negligence manslaughter, and 3) unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter. The latter two do not include the intent to kill but in which death resulted from an act one could reasonable foresee could be dangerous to life; assault with a blunt instrument, particularly to the head, resulting in death certainly qualifies. 78.147.140.112 (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
Which of the following images should serve as the infobox picture for Hermann Göring?
|
I have to admit that I am a bit puzzled reading through the previous RfC regarding the use of an infobox on this page—I was not aware that infoboxes were considered controversial.
However, given 3 years have passed since that consensus was formed, I would like to see if there was still a consensus against the inclusion of an infobox among the editors of this article. Ithinkiplaygames (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
How should Nina Dobrev's nationality be described in the article's lede paragraph?
This RFC aims to resolve a long-standing debate. Some argue that Dobrev's dual nationality should be mentioned in the lede while others insist that her Bulgarian nationality is not relevant to her acting career. Anthony Whitaker (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC) |
Should the article include the words "convicted child sex offender" in first sentence ? PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC) |
Should the stage name of an artist be styled in all caps if that is the way the artist explicitly wishes it to be styled, and that is how it is most often styled in sources? I.e. should "MF Doom" should be styled as "MF DOOM" per ?
Example of source containing the correct styling: https://web.archive.org/web/20240624134441/https://www.npr.org/2021/01/01/952519277/mf-doom-enigmatic-rapper-and-producer-dead-at-49 Criedley (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Titles of European monarchs
In the absence of a need to disambiguate, how should we title the articles of European imperial and royal monarchs?
If you support multiple options, please rank your preferences to assist the closer in identifying consensus. 22:06, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
These two sources, among many others, are currently being used in the Muhammad article.
Should both be replaced with other sources, thereby deeming these two sources unreliable? — Kaalakaa (talk) 05:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC) |
Should the king's role as the honorary and ceremonial -- but not technically hereditary -- Head of the Commonwealth be mentioned in the main "bio" infobox? If so, in what manner? Should it be mentioned in the article's lead section? 109.255.211.6 (talk) 01:56, 14 June 2024 (UTC) |
Issue: In a 2017 RfC, it was determined that this article should not refer to Donald Trump as a "liar" or statements by Trump as "lies". This consensus has recently been challenged in this discussion.
Question: Should consensus 22 (not calling Trump a "liar" in Wikipedia's voice) be cancelled? |
Should the first sentence say Swedish-born French, Swedish-Frenchor some other option? Should we omit von Sydow's nationality in the first sentence and explain it later? |
A dispute has arisen over whether the final sentence of the lede's third paragraph should reflect that Brezhnev's policies badly strained the Soviet economy (A) "in later years following his death " or (B) "during the later years of his rule and long after his death". Based on the evidence presented in the body of the article, which of the aforementioned interpretations is acceptable for the article's lede? Emiya1980 (talk) 20:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC) |
Talk:Sutherland Springs church shooting
Should we include "motherfuckers" in this article? Three options: -- GreenC 15:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC) |
Should the ancient kingdom of Macedon be described as Greek at the time of Alexander the Great?
If you have time, please read the arguments in the references in footnote (d) in Alexander the Great's page already posted online above (see "Questioning Alexander the Great's identity) but if you do not have much time, please focus on Fine (1983) who summarizes modern scholarship as "almost unanimously recognizes them as Greeks" but did not qualify the timeline and did not use the phrases "reached consensus" nor "reached unanimity". Based on the references in footnote (d), the debate regarding this matter has been ongoing for decades among historians but only references that sided with the argument that the ancient Macedonians were Greek are included in the references in footnote (d). I am not a historian, hence, I do not have access to published books nor to scientific journals. My only references are from tertiary, but reputable, sources: (1) from MIT.edu that states: "all historians admit that by Roman times the ancient Macedonians were fully homogenized with the rest of Greeks, and that Macedonia stopped existing as a separate socio-cultural entity some 600 years before any contact with the first Slavs in the Balkans."; (2) Encyclopedia Britannica and (3) National Geographic Society, the latter two of which describe the kingdom of Macedon on the topic Alexander the Great as "ancient", not "ancient Greek". Two editors above argue that the MIT.edu source is dated and was published "during the Clinton administration". I do not know exactly when the MIT page was published. In addition, the two editors claim they have consensus, because there are two vs. one (me) and based on this consensus, the "ancient Greek kingdom of Macedon" is the proper description. As a compromise, I asked the two editors to add a subtopic under Alexander the Great's page that describes the debate among historians that includes both arguments, and revert to "ancient" to describe the kingdom of Macedon until the historians have reached consensus on this matter. Please comment. 142.186.63.204 (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC) |
- ^ Regnal name and nominals
Name # - ^ Title, regnal name, and nominals
Title name # - ^ Regnal name, nominals, and realm
Name # of country - ^ Title, regnal name, nominals, and realm
Title name # of country - ^ Regnal name, nominals, title, and realm
Name #, title of country - ^ Regnal name, nominals, title, and realm
Name # (title of country) - ^ Regnal name, nominals, and realm
Name # (country) - ^ Regnal name, nominals, title, and realm
Name #, title of country