Column key

Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ RfC: update Democracy Now! from WP:MREL to WP:GENREL? (68.7k) An RfC is underway to reclassify Democracy Now! from 'marginally reliable' (MREL) to 'generally reliable' (GENREL) on Wikipedia's Perennial Sources list. Supporters argue the source is factually accurate despite ideological bias; opponents cite strong left-wing bias and question whether editorial independence has been demonstrated.	65.6	102 5/15–5/27	31	29.2	7	Policy RfC Vote (by 6/19)	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Participate to support upgrade. Reliability should be judged on factual accuracy, not ideological orientation; current MREL status reflects outdated 2013 consensus.
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Contentious topic procedure: awareness, warnings, renewal, and banners (1.1k) ArbCom proposes four amendments to the contentious topics procedure: replacing awareness requirements with warnings, cautioning against repeated warnings, eliminating page restriction renewal, and reducing banner blindness. Discussion is directed to the Arbitration Requests/Motions page.	56.0	2 5/27	2	17.5	7	Policy RfC	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Participate at ArbCom motion page. Assess whether warning changes could chill editor participation in contentious topic areas or improve fairness.
Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Contentious topic procedure: awareness, warnings, renewal, and banners (1.1k) ArbCom proposes four amendments to contentious topics procedure: replacing awareness requirements with warnings, cautioning against repeated warnings, eliminating page restriction renewal, and reducing banner blindness. Discussion is open for community comment.	54.5	2 5/27	2	15.7	7	Policy RfC	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Participate at WP:ARCA to ensure warning procedures don't create chilling effects on good-faith editors in controversial topic areas.
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Contentious topic procedure: awareness, warnings, renewal, and banners (0.6k) ArbCom has proposed motions regarding contentious topic procedures including awareness, warnings, renewal, and banners. Community discussion on the merits is directed to the Motions page rather than this talk page.	49.7	2 5/27	2	14.5	6	Policy RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Participate at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Community discussion to ensure contentious topic procedures remain transparent and fair.
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Integrating WP:YEARS with WP:ITN, with regard to 'Main Year Articles' (6.7k) An RfC proposes that events featured on ITN should automatically qualify for inclusion in main year articles. Opponents argue content inclusion should be based on reliable sources rather than internal wiki processes, while the proposer seeks to centralize discussion and reduce content disputes.	48.8	10 5/7–5/19	8	24.3	4	Policy RfC	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Oppose. Tying content inclusion to internal processes rather than source-based criteria could introduce systematic bias in determining event significance.
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ TarnishedPath & Sean.hoyland (76.1k) An AE request sought enforcement against two editors (TarnishedPath and Sean.hoyland) for alleged battleground behavior in defending another editor across multiple conduct proceedings. TarnishedPath received an indefinite topic ban extension; Sean.hoyland received an informal warning about implying aspersions.	47.8	97 5/5–5/26	15	27.0	6	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Note outcome where sanctions were applied for defending an editor at conduct boards, which may chill participation in administrative proceedings.
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ More comments needed at ongoing RfC which has been dormant since May 18 (0.4k) A notice inviting participation in a dormant RfC concerning source assessment for CWC (presumably a specific source or category). The RfC relates to Wikipedia's source evaluation processes.	47.3	1 5/25	1	11.3	6	Policy RfC	SOURCES Participate in the RfC to ensure source assessment criteria remain quality-based rather than viewpoint-based.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Omniglot (54.4k) An RfC is underway to determine if Omniglot, a self-published linguistics website cited in nearly 2,000 Wikipedia articles, should be deemed unreliable or deprecated and listed on WP:RSPS. Most participants favor finding it generally unreliable (Q1.3) or deprecated (Q1.4), citing lack of transparent sourcing and factual errors.	45.9	92 4/28–5/27	26	29.2	5	RfC	SOURCES Participate if concerned about quality-based vs. ideological exclusion criteria. Ensure deprecation rationale focuses strictly on sourcing quality, not content viewpoint.
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ Don't revert due solely to 'no consensus' (71.3k) Proposal to formalize WP:DRNC (Don't Revert due solely to No Consensus) as policy, requiring substantive rationales for reverts rather than bare 'no consensus' claims. Most commenters oppose formalization while acknowledging the principle, citing concerns about burden on routine cleanup and the legitimacy of reverting to stable versions pending discussion.	43.2	149 5/16–5/26	32	31.0	6	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Support formalizing requirement for substantive revert rationales. Bare 'no consensus' reverts enable stonewalling that suppresses minority viewpoints and discourages new contributors.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Re: 'Churnalism' at WP:SUSTAINED (56.9k) Discussion questions a bold edit to WP:SUSTAINED adding 'churnalism' as disqualifying coverage for notability. Critics argue the term is unfalsifiable and could be weaponized to dismiss reliable sources, while supporters contend press-release reproductions lack independence.	40.7	63 5/25–5/26	8	24.1	7	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Oppose broad churnalism language. Vague criteria risk ideological exclusion of sources; independence failures should require demonstrable evidence, not speculation.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Quick enforcement requests (26.4k) Arbitration enforcement requests concerning extended confirmed protection for Arab-Israeli conflict articles, a 2-week block for alleged sockpuppetry in Russian-Ukrainian topic area, word count limits on an RfC, and allegations of ECR violations with counter-allegations of wikihounding. Most requests have been resolved by administrators.	40.0	45 4/29–5/26	12	25.9	4	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Note blocking patterns in contentious topic areas. ECR restrictions and hounding allegations may affect editor participation on politically sensitive articles.
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Other types of closing requests (4.1k) Closure requests page containing several pending requests including: a source reliability discussion about TheGamer, an original research noticeboard discussion about Zionist claims to Palestine, and two discussions related to Wiki Workers United solidarity actions following WMF Community Tech layoffs. The labor-related items involve potential watchlist messaging and coordination questions.	39.7	13 3/22–5/26	7	20.6	5	RfC	SOURCES GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate in TheGamer source discussion closure to ensure quality-based rather than ideological criteria prevail. Monitor WMF labor solidarity discussions for governance implications.
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Kautilya3 (19.8k) An ArbCom enforcement request against editor Kautilya3 for alleged incivility, battleground conduct, and canvassing accusations under South Asia contentious topics sanctions. The respondent counter-alleges POV-pushing and edit-warring by the filer, with one editor proposing a boomerang topic ban.	39.2	14 5/13–5/26	9	24.6	4	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Observe outcome. Canvassing accusations and civility enforcement in contentious topic areas can disproportionately affect editors with minority viewpoints.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Removal of section in Trickle-down economics (20.6k) Dispute over whether academic economic studies using the term 'trickle-down economics' should be included in the article, given arguments that the term is political rather than a formal economic theory. Editors debate whether excluding such sources constitutes viewpoint-based exclusion or appropriate scope limitation.	38.7	25 5/25–5/27	10	25.1	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Support inclusion of peer-reviewed economic studies. Excluding academic sources because a term is politically contested undermines NPOV coverage of dissenting viewpoints.
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ RFC: Should we remove mentions of public transport access from infoboxes (22.8k) RfC asks whether public transit access information in infoboxes violates WP:NOTGUIDEBOOK or WP:PROMO. Most commenters favor keeping the parameters, arguing transit information is encyclopedic and not inherently promotional.	38.5	47 5/22–5/28	20	29.2	3	RfC	NEUTRALITY
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ WP:ONUS vs WP:NOCON (247.7k) Editors debate whether WP:ONUS (burden on those seeking inclusion) or WP:NOCON (retain status quo absent consensus) should prevail when content disputes end without consensus. Multiple proposals and counter-proposals have been made to amend policy wording, with no resolution reached after over a month.	38.1	363 4/24–5/26	29	31.0	7	Policy	GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure NOCON default protects established content from weaponized ONUS removals targeting disfavored viewpoints.
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Veggies (8.6k) An enforcement request was filed against editor Veggies for alleged battleground conduct and personal attacks in discussions about the Gaza war article. Administrators closed the request with a logged warning rather than a block, citing continued personalization of disputes.	37.2	7 5/25	5	21.5	4	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Observe handling of civility enforcement in contentious topic areas for consistency and proportionality.
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Steele dossier/'Golden Showers' Show in Las Vegas (31.4k) Dispute over whether the Steele dossier article gives undue weight to unverified claims about Donald Trump while omitting exculpatory information. Concerns raised about single-editor dominance, potential WP:OWNERSHIP, and whether the matter should be escalated to Arbitration Enforcement.	37.2	16 5/26–5/27	8	23.2	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate to support inclusion of exculpatory sourced information and balanced coverage per BLP and NPOV requirements.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Proving notability (49.1k) Discussion over wording change to WP:N regarding what happens when notability is challenged. A bold edit replaced nuanced language ('merely asserting sources exist is seldom persuasive') with stricter wording ('notability must be proven'), which was reverted. Editors debate alternative phrasings including 'demonstrated' and 'evidence is required,' with concerns that stricter language could be weaponized in AfDs.	35.8	80 5/6–5/21	14	26.6	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY Oppose proposals strengthening deletion burden. Current nuanced language better protects borderline-notable topics from aggressive deletion.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Catch 22 re ONUS vs NOCON (35.5k) Discussion addresses the tension between WP:ONUS (burden on those adding challenged content) and WP:NOCON (no consensus defaults to status quo), with some editors arguing ONUS enables removal of sourced information without proper justification. An essay clarifying ONUS interpretation is being drafted.	34.5	56 5/12–5/24	13	27.2	7	Policy	GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure ONUS cannot be weaponized to remove well-sourced content representing minority viewpoints without substantive policy-based rationale.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ RfC on presumptive removal of AI-generated content (70.0k) A closed RfC promoted WP:LLMPROD to guideline status, enabling presumptive removal of AI-generated content and edits from users blocked for LLM misuse without prior review. Supporters cite asymmetry between AI content generation speed and human cleanup effort; minor concerns were raised about objection procedures and potential for abuse.	34.4	132 4/28–5/7	57	31.0	8	Policy RfC Vote	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY RfC closed. Ensure implementation includes robust appeals process; presumptive removal powers risk misuse against editors falsely accused of AI use.
Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view (wt: 9) ☞ Clarification on NPOV/due weight for allegations and controversies (24.9k) A proposal to clarify NPOV/due weight guidance for allegations and controversies, specifically suggesting that isolated or short-lived reporting may warrant exclusion even if verifiable. Discussion focuses on whether to add language to WP:BALASP or WP:UNDUE about proportionality for lightly-covered negative content.	34.3	25 4/28–5/26	9	26.4	7	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure any clarification preserves coverage of legitimately notable controversies and does not enable suppression of sourced criticism.
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Edittttor (12.2k) An enforcement request alleges that editor Edittttor violated extended confirmed restrictions (ECR) on Arab-Israeli conflict topics through multiple edits to biographical articles tangentially related to Gaza/Israel. The accused editor argues the edits were minor gnoming outside ECP pages and claims the filer is engaged in wikihounding harassment.	33.8	2 5/27	1	16.4	4	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY NEUTRALITY Observe outcome. Case illustrates ambiguity in ECR scope and potential for selective enforcement against editors with particular viewpoints on contentious topics.
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Potential RfC around Master thesis reliability (96.9k) Proposal to loosen WP:THESIS restrictions on master's thesis reliability, changing from requiring 'significant scholarly influence' to case-by-case evaluation. Supporters argue theses undergo more scrutiny than regularly-cited sources like local news; opponents contend quality is too inconsistent and committee oversight is unreliable.	32.3	124 5/7–5/21	29	28.3	7	Policy	SOURCES Support loosening restrictions. Broader source allowance benefits niche topics and reduces gatekeeping based on citation counts rather than quality.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ ONUS and achieving consensus (11.8k) Discussion proposes rewriting WP:ONUS to clarify that editors seeking to include disputed content must demonstrate 'positive consensus' rather than merely starting a talk page discussion. Participants debate whether the proposed language is too complex and whether terms like 'plausible reason' would enable wikilawyering.	31.6	19 5/12–5/24	6	23.4	7	Policy	GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure revised ONUS language does not create asymmetric burdens that disadvantage inclusion of well-sourced minority viewpoints.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Creative Spirits website on Indigenous Australians (11.4k) Discussion proposes designating creativespirits.info as generally unreliable for Indigenous Australian topics, citing criticism from Indigenous scholars that the site misappropriates and misrepresents Indigenous knowledge. Multiple editors support removing its 208 citations and adding it to WP:RSPSS, with one editor volunteering to replace all citations.	31.2	8 5/24–5/26	5	22.6	7	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Support deprecation. Scholarly consensus from Indigenous academics documents persistent misrepresentation; removing non-expert self-published source improves article accuracy.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Paul Saladino (31.3k) Dispute over whether sources adequately support labeling Paul Saladino as promoting pseudoscience in the article lead and infobox. One editor argued the cited sources were opinion pieces not supporting Wikipedia-voice factual claims; opposing editors maintained the fringe label was warranted. The dissenting editor was subsequently site-banned after an ANI escalation.	31.1	76 5/15–5/22	12	25.9	7	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Review ANI case for procedural fairness. Editor raising WP:V, WP:SYNTH, WP:DUE concerns was banned while substantive objections remained unaddressed.
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Vote now in the 2026 U4C election (1.1k) Announcement of the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election, with voting open to eligible users until 2 June 2026. The U4C oversees UCoC implementation across Wikimedia projects.	30.8	1 5/27	1	11.9	4	RfC Vote (by 6/2)	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Participate in U4C election. Committee influences conduct enforcement affecting editorial diversity and accountability structures.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Proposal to close this noticeboard at VPR (4.9k) A proposal at Village Pump seeks to close the Fringe Theories Noticeboard, with some arguing for consolidation under NPOV. Defenders argue FTN provides specialized enforcement of WP:PARITY and ArbCom precedent, while critics claim the board's culture is dismissive and ineffective for social science topics.	30.7	7 5/20–5/23	6	21.9	8	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Oppose closure. FTN provides specialized venue for applying WP:PARITY; consolidation risks diluting enforcement against fringe theory promotion.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Is Jewish Insider a reliable source (57.5k) Editors dispute whether Jewish Insider is a reliable source for characterizing the International Association of Genocide Scholars, particularly regarding its Israel-genocide resolution. The debate centers on whether the source's perceived bias makes it unsuitable for use in the article lede, with some arguing bias ratings are irrelevant to Wikipedia policy and others citing fact-check failures.	30.4	90 5/25–5/27	14	27.5	5	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Participate to support Jewish Insider's general reliability based on factual record; oppose ideological exclusion absent systematic accuracy failures.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ RfC Announce: How should the theory that earthquakes cause lights in the sky be categorized? (0.3k) An RfC has been opened on Talk:Earthquake light to determine whether earthquake lights should be categorized as a mainstream scientific phenomenon or a fringe theory. The announcement directs editors to the discussion.	29.3	1 5/19	1	13.7	5	RfC	NEUTRALITY Participate in RfC to ensure categorization reflects scientific evidence rather than dismissive fringe labeling.
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (wt: 6) ☞ May 2026 Administrator Elections – Voting Phase (3.0k) Announcement that the May 2026 Administrator Elections voting phase is active, using SecurePoll secret ballot. Candidates need 70% support (55% for recall candidates) with no bureaucrat discussion phase.	29.2	1 5/13	1	14.5	6	RfC Vote (ended 5/20)	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Participate in voting phase to support candidates committed to transparent governance and editorial fairness principles.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Grey area: user-generated demonstrations based on otherwise well sourced statements (56.7k) Discussion on whether WP:Verifiability should clarify that user-created educational demonstrations (images, audio, etc.) of well-sourced concepts are permissible without requiring identical published versions. Participants debate the scope of WP:CALC and whether guidance should be media-specific or address the general principle in WP:V.	29.0	45 5/21–5/28	9	25.5	5	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Support clarifying WP:V to explicitly permit original educational demonstrations of sourced concepts. Overly strict interpretation risks removing valuable explanatory content.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Does WP:ONUS apply to this discussion? (6.9k) Editors discuss the scope and application of WP:ONUS (burden of proof for inclusion) in content disputes, particularly whether disputed material should remain in or out of articles during talk page discussions. Participants debate how default status during disputes affects editorial dynamics and potential for stonewalling.	28.4	14 5/17–5/27	9	24.8	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Participate to support clearer ONUS guidance that prevents asymmetric advantage in content disputes affecting viewpoint balance.
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (wt: 6) ☞ May 2026 Administrator Election – Call for Candidates (3.1k) Announcement of the May 2026 Administrator Election cycle, an alternative pathway to adminship using SecurePoll voting. The notice details the schedule, eligibility requirements, and confirms that elections are equivalent to traditional RfA and valid for regaining adminship after desysopping.	28.1	1 4/29	1	14.5	6	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Participate in candidate discussions to assess candidates' commitment to editorial fairness and governance transparency.
Wikipedia talk:Consensus (wt: 8) ☞ Saying ONLY 'discuss first' should be discouraged (8.5k) Discussion about whether terse edit summaries like 'discuss first' or 'no consensus' should be discouraged in WP:CONSENSUS policy. Proponents argue such summaries provide no substantive guidance; opponents argue adding recommendations creates instruction creep and fodder for wikilawyering.	27.9	18 5/17–5/18	6	23.2	5	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Participate if discussion advances. Clearer revert standards could reduce arbitrary gatekeeping but risk enabling process-based disputes over substance.
Wikipedia talk:Editing policy (wt: 5) ☞ Would something like WP:LLMPROD provide a reasonable course of action for dealing with mass-created articles? (21.1k) Discussion proposes extending LLMPROD-style expedited deletion procedures to mass-created articles lacking prior community approval, potentially via a new technical permission limiting article creation rates. Participants debate whether such restrictions would appropriately address sourcing quality concerns or indiscriminately impede legitimate content creation.	27.7	32 5/18–5/23	8	22.3	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Oppose expedited deletion mechanisms that bypass individual article review. Technical creation limits with admin gatekeeping raise editor retention concerns.
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ WMF Community Tech team has been disbanded, engineers laid off (382.1k) The WMF disbanded the Community Tech team and laid off six engineers, eliminating the dedicated team for the Community Wishlist. Editors are protesting the decision, proposing to undo the disbanding, restore the wishlist's yearly cadence, and some are calling for collective labor action or blocking donation banners.	26.8	622 5/20–5/27	117	32.3	7		GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Participate in discussion. WMF accountability for decisions affecting community software channels and volunteer-editor interface warrants engagement.
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not (wt: 7) ☞ 'Wikipedia is not a chatbot' (1.4k) Discussion about whether to add a 'Wikipedia is not a chatbot' section to WP:NOT. The addition was reverted as superfluous, with debate over whether such misunderstandings warrant policy inclusion.	26.0	3 5/14–5/25	3	18.3	3	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ Names and DAB pages (9.3k) Discussion seeks clarification on whether personal names listed on disambiguation pages under MOS:DABNAME can qualify as primary topics under WP:PTM, particularly when the person is not mononymously known by that name. Participants debate whether names should receive special treatment or follow the same rules as other disambiguation entries.	25.8	15 5/26–5/27	5	24.3	4	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate if proposal emerges. Ensure any clarification does not create systematic bias in how biographical subjects achieve disambiguation prominence.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view (wt: 9) ☞ Religious affiliation and the limits of 'Attribute statements of opinion' (8.8k) Discussion explores whether religious affiliation labels should be applied to scholars cited in religion articles, debating when such attribution serves NPOV versus when it creates bias by implying inherent prejudice. Participants discuss asymmetric labeling where religious scholars are marked but secular critics are not, potentially treating anti-religious positions as default.	25.7	7 5/12–5/23	4	22.4	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate to oppose asymmetric attribution practices that label religious scholars while leaving secular critics unmarked, as this violates NPOV by treating one viewpoint as default.
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Reorganisation and potential changes (6.8k) Proposal to reorganize WP:Reliable sources guideline, potentially elevating WP:CONTEXTMATTERS to a core principle and restructuring sections. Discussion includes concerns about balancing context-based evaluation with categorical source exclusions, and suggestions to remove or relocate sections like WP:RSPRIMARY.	25.0	14 5/12–5/18	5	22.3	7	Policy	SOURCES Participate to ensure reorganization preserves nuanced source evaluation and does not entrench ideological exclusions under quality-based framing.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Can we say in wikivoice that a particular non-fringe theory or opinion is wrong? (90.0k) Editors debate whether Wikipedia can state in wikivoice that a scholarly minority view (14% opposing an IAGS resolution declaring Gaza genocide) is 'wrong,' and whether the article's repeated wikivoice assertions of 'genocide' without legal-sense clarification violate NPOV. Discussion includes due weight, attribution standards, and whether non-voters' silence should be interpreted.	25.0	182 5/11–5/15	19	28.1	7	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure dissenting scholarly views receive proper attribution rather than dismissal; oppose wikivoice declarations that foreclose non-fringe minority positions.
Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy (wt: 6) ☞ RFC: Include LLM usage as a reason to block (230.1k) A closed RfC reached consensus to add persistent unsanctioned LLM usage to the blocking policy's list of common block rationales. Supporters cited increasing LLM-related blocks and volunteer cleanup burden; opponents argued existing policies (disruptive editing) already cover this and worried about conflict with permitted LLM uses.	24.5	441 3/22–5/2	132	31.4	8	Policy RfC Vote	EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Document outcome. This expands blocking pretexts that could be applied subjectively; watch for over-enforcement against good-faith editors unfamiliar with LLM rules.
Wikipedia talk:Tendentious editing (wt: 3) ☞ Vague or misleading edit summaries (10.2k) Proposal to add 'vague or misleading edit summaries' as a characteristic of tendentious editing on the guideline page. Discussion focuses on whether vague summaries indicate tendentiousness or are merely unhelpful, with concerns about potential misuse against good-faith editors.	24.4	17 5/20–5/24	8	20.0	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION NEUTRALITY Oppose expansion. Vague summary criteria could be weaponized against good-faith editors making controversial but legitimate edits, chilling participation.
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ LLM-generated edit summaries (14.5k) Discussion explores whether LLM-generated edit summaries should be more explicitly addressed in guidelines and whether a dedicated warning template is needed. Participants debate whether such summaries are inherently misleading or disruptive, with concerns raised about false positives affecting new editors and ESL users.	24.3	14 5/15–5/19	6	25.4	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate to ensure any new policy does not create pretexts for blocking good-faith editors misidentified as AI users.
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Wrapping up WP:FRINGE/N (116.0k) Proposal to close WP:FRINGE/N (Fringe theories noticeboard) and redirect its traffic to WP:NPOV/N, WP:RS/N, or a merged content-concern noticeboard. Supporters argue FTN attracts a narrow group of editors with shared viewpoints who mock disfavored topics rather than fairly adjudicating fringe issues; opponents say FTN serves a valid function similar to a WikiProject for fringe content.	24.2	208 5/20–5/28	39	29.2	7		NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Participate to support closure or merger. FTN's narrow participant base and documented mockery of disfavored topics undermines NPOV enforcement.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Update WP:V to require verifiability through article sources (19.4k) Proposal to amend WP:V to require that all content be verifiable to sources cited in the article, rather than merely verifiable to sources that could be cited. Opponents argue this is a significant paradigm shift that could hinder article creation and expansion; supporters say it codifies existing practice.	24.1	32 5/8–5/14	14	27.5	7	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Oppose. Stricter citation requirements may disproportionately burden topics with fewer mainstream sources, potentially affecting viewpoint diversity.
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Human mating stratedies (5.9k) Editors allege the Human mating strategies article contains extensive original research and synthesis, with sources misrepresented or used out of context. An AfD has been opened proposing merger with Mate choice in humans.	23.2	6 5/3–5/14	3	17.5	4	RfC	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Observe AfD for outcome. Original research claims appear content-specific rather than raising systemic viewpoint diversity concerns.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Ongoing issues with Roger 8 Roger and Māori topics (92.1k) A topic ban is proposed for editor Roger 8 Roger over alleged POV-pushing and edit warring on Māori-related articles, with claims he promotes fringe/skeptical viewpoints and removes indigenous content. The editor denies wrongdoing and claims others are agenda-driven; a canvassing sub-issue arose regarding the reporting editor.	23.2	109 5/16–5/26	24	30.1	6		NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Observe outcome. Topic bans for minority viewpoints on contested historical/cultural topics may suppress legitimate editorial diversity if applied without clear policy violations.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Canvassing (wt: 5) ☞ @Larry Sanger's 'Policy Scanner ' points at various ANI, AE, and RSN threads that may threaten intellectual diversity (1.0k) A user questions whether WikiProject Intellectual Diversity's Policy Scanner tool constitutes canvassing under Wikipedia guidelines. Larry Sanger responds that it does not, citing precedent from other policy-focused WikiProjects.	23.0	2 5/22–5/26	2	14.8	6	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate if discussion escalates. Defend WPID's Policy Scanner as legitimate coordinated editing analogous to other WikiProjects, not improper canvassing.
Education noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Guidance on current events articles (7.3k) Discussion about adding guidance to WP:ASSIGN discouraging students from editing current events articles due to challenges like frequent edits, edit conflicts, and rapidly changing content. Edits to the guideline were made and refined with apparent consensus.	22.2	12 5/13–5/21	4	16.9	3	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Non-articles (1.4k) An editor asks whether using LLMs to create disambiguation pages violates WP:LLM, arguing disambiguation pages are not technically 'articles.' The page was sent to AfD; discussion addresses scope of LLM prohibition.	21.7	3 5/13–5/23	3	17.3	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION Track outcome. Expansive interpretation of LLM prohibition to non-articles could create pretexts for blocking productive editors.
Wikipedia talk:Deprecated sources (wt: 6) ☞ Zee News (0.5k) An editor asks whether Zee News should be added to the deprecated sources list, noting it is not currently on WP:DEPDOMAINS. Another editor expresses surprise it is not already included.	21.6	3 5/27–5/28	2	15.2	5	Policy	SOURCES Observe discussion. If formal deprecation RfC is opened, evaluate whether proposed exclusion is quality-based or ideologically motivated.
Wikipedia talk:No original research (wt: 7) ☞ A big fish in a small pond (7.9k) Discussion about whether WP:NOR should explicitly permit editors to describe quantitative facts using qualitative terms (e.g., 'small' or 'large') rather than exact numbers. Participants debate whether such clarification is necessary or whether existing policy already accommodates this practice.	20.7	12 5/22–5/27	3	19.5	3	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (wt: 6) ☞ May 2026 Administrator Elections – Discussion Phase (0.4k) Announcement of the discussion phase for the May 2026 Administrator Elections, a formal process for selecting new administrators. The transcluded content likely contains procedural details for the election cycle.	20.0	1 5/8	1	13.1	7	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Participate in discussion phase to advocate for transparent criteria and accountable admin selection processes.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ @DeFacto - IDHT, harassment. (37.2k) AN/I report alleges editor DeFacto engaged in IDHT and harassment in UK politics articles, with underlying disputes about NPOV and article titling. The proposal for 1RR/TBAN was withdrawn by the filer; commenters suggested the filer was inappropriately policing conduct.	19.5	40 5/23–5/26	11	27.3	5		NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY No action warranted. Proposal withdrawn; underlying NPOV disputes on UK politics articles may merit separate observation.
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Bot to create arbitration enforcement editnotices (12.5k) Proposal for a bot to automatically create editnotices for pages protected under arbitration enforcement actions, particularly for contentious topics with 1RR sanctions. Supporters argue this would standardize enforcement, reduce admin workload, and improve editor awareness of restrictions.	18.7	25 5/16–5/27	11	26.1	5		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Participate to ensure editnotices clarify restrictions without creating enforcement pretexts against good-faith editors unfamiliar with topic boundaries.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Rosemeyer2022 (80.2k) ANI report alleges User:Rosemeyer2022 is POV-pushing by removing sourced content about Japanese wartime conduct, citing Chinese propaganda concerns. A topic ban is proposed, with discussion of potential language barriers and AI-assisted translation issues.	18.7	79 5/19–5/27	14	28.4	4		NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Clarification (21.1k) Editors dispute whether Sky News Australia can be used to source non-contentious factual claims (protest locations) given a prior RfC applying 'additional considerations' to the source. One editor is accused of over-applying restrictions and manufacturing consensus against right-leaning Australian sources.	18.2	37 5/9–5/25	9	25.5	5		SOURCES Participate to support proportionate application of source restrictions; oppose overly expansive interpretation of 'contentious' that excludes routine factual claims.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Bureaucrats' noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Two-factor authentication (22.8k) Wikimedia Foundation is mandating two-factor authentication for bureaucrats by June 2026. Discussion focuses on implementation logistics and practicality, with some editors questioning whether the security risk justifies the requirement.	18.2	49 5/26–5/27	19	30.3	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Do notability rules create an unintended bias in favor of the rich? (24.5k) An editor argues that Wikipedia's notability rules create systemic bias favoring wealthy individuals because mainstream media ownership is concentrated among the rich. Respondents debate whether this is a problem Wikipedia should address, with most defending current reliable-source standards as the least biased available approach.	17.9	27 5/27	10	25.1	5		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Participate to support broader recognition of quality alternative media and academic expertise in notability determinations. Current discussion lacks concrete proposal.
Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy (wt: 6) ☞ Adjusting ATD-M (14.8k) Discussion about whether to move or transclude WP:MERGEREASON content into the deletion policy page WP:ATD-M following a PAM-AfD merge RfC. Some editors object that this would effectively elevate an information page to policy status, potentially enabling wikilawyering about merge arguments having policy-level weight.	17.7	39 4/3–5/9	6	21.8	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Observe whether final ATD-M wording creates policy-level authority for merge rationales that could affect coverage of contested topics.
Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion (wt: 5) ☞ Merging NEWCSD into the page (7.0k) A closed proposal to merge WP:NEWCSD (guidance on proposing new speedy deletion criteria) into the main CSD policy page. Opposition centered on concerns about inadvertently elevating guidance to policy status and the existing visibility of the guidance on the talk page.	17.6	16 3/29–5/18	7	21.0	3	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Very Polite Person accuses me of not reading sources (78.0k) An editor was blocked for two weeks following an ANI report documenting aggressive conduct in a content dispute over source reliability at the Earthquake light article. The discussion centered on accusations of not reading sources and confrontational behavior rather than policy changes.	17.6	66 5/18–5/26	17	29.3	3		EDITOR_RETENTION SOURCES
Education noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Should WikiEd be terminated? (50.8k) Discussion debates whether to terminate or reform the WikiEd student-editing program due to concerns about poor-quality student contributions overwhelming volunteer reviewers. Supporters of WikiEd argue it provides structure and accountability for inevitable classroom assignments, while critics contend inadequate instructor oversight burdens established editors.	17.6	65 4/1–5/27	23	24.7	5		EDITOR_RETENTION PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT Participate if RfC emerges. Advocate for reforms that balance new editor onboarding against reviewer burden without creating barriers to good-faith contributors.
Bureaucrats' noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Rereresysop request (Tamzin) (20.7k) Administrator Tamzin requested resysop after a voluntary resignation. An objection was raised citing Tamzin's userspace essay speculating about editorial strikes, but bureaucrats concluded the objection fell outside resysop policy scope and restored the tools.	17.5	35 5/22–5/23	16	25.5	5		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Note precedent: bureaucrats confirmed narrow scope of resysop review, rejecting viewpoint-based objections to tool restoration.
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ This week's article for improvement (42.7k) A proposal to add a 'This Week's Article for Improvement' section to the main page, featuring unprotected articles that newcomers can edit with guidance. Supporters argue it could reverse declining editor registrations and pageviews; discussion focuses on implementation details rather than policy changes.	17.5	61 5/14–5/27	25	29.2	3		EDITOR_RETENTION PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Wikipedia talk:Editing policy (wt: 5) ☞ Mass creation article size (6.1k) Discussion explores whether to add minimum word-count requirements to the mass-creation policy. Participants debate specific thresholds and express concerns about perverse incentives and gaming via AI-generated content.	17.4	10 5/9–5/15	4	18.6	5	Policy	GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY Participate if minimum thresholds could disproportionately affect legitimate stub creation for underrepresented topics or enable pretextual deletions.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Abductive behavior: ICANTHEARYOU, BUILDWP, CAUTIOUS, BOTREQUIRE, etc (34.5k) An editor reports User:Abductive for allegedly making damaging semi-automated edits and refusing to engage constructively when errors are pointed out. The discussion involves conduct standards around tool usage, edit summaries, and responsiveness to criticism.	17.3	37 5/16–5/28	15	28.8	3		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchroCat closed (29.2k) Discussion of the closed SchroCat ArbCom case questions whether prolific content contributors receive more lenient sanctions than less productive editors. Multiple editors debate whether the outcome creates a perception of differential treatment based on content contributions.	17.1	61 5/4–5/21	24	26.5	5		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Note discussion as evidence of community concern about unequal sanction application based on content output rather than conduct alone.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ David Eppstein (32.7k) An editor requests an interaction ban against David Eppstein, citing personal attacks following expiration of a previous 12-month ban. Respondents largely view the complaints as not actionable, with some suggesting both parties could improve their communication.	17.0	26 5/21–5/25	8	25.9	4		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Bangladesh genocide (7.4k) Discussion about whether Pakistani sources denying the Bangladesh genocide constitute fringe content that should be excluded from Wikipedia. Editors argue the sources (a management consultant's self-published book and a self-published documentary by a former Pakistani official) are not reliable historians and represent genocide denial comparable to Holocaust denial.	17.0	8 5/6–5/13	5	21.4	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Observe outcome. Involves applying WP:FRINGE and WP:RS to contested historical narratives where national perspectives diverge significantly.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ AITALKing forumshopper (21.2k) Two accounts were indefinitely blocked for forum shopping, AI-generated comments, and disruptive behavior after a draft article about an independent film was declined for insufficient sourcing. The blocked users argued Wikipedia's sourcing standards disadvantage independent creative works outside mainstream media ecosystems.	16.9	33 5/24–5/27	13	28.1	3		EDITOR_RETENTION NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Sparks19923 - yet another slop agent (9.2k) An editor is reported for suspected LLM use based on edit summaries and editing patterns. The accused acknowledges using AI-assisted Python scripts for citation and MOS compliance work, and discussion ensues about whether this violates WP:NOLLM and how AI detection tools should be weighted.	16.7	17 5/27–5/28	5	23.4	5		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate if sanctions proposed. AI-editing accusations risk chilling legitimate tool-assisted workflows; ensure WP:NOLLM interpretation is proportionate.
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Changes to Autoconfirmed and Extended Confirmed (29.9k) Discussion proposes changes to Autoconfirmed and Extended Confirmed user rights thresholds (edit counts, time requirements, calculation methods) in preparation for a multi-part RfC. Participants debate whether increased requirements would deter vandals/sockpuppets versus discouraging legitimate new editors.	16.6	48 4/30–5/17	19	28.1	6		EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate to oppose increases that disproportionately burden new good-faith editors. Support proposals counting from first edit rather than raising numeric thresholds.
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Forcing WMF employees to use Salesforce Inc is an ethical violation (19.7k) A community member raises concerns about WMF requiring employees to use Slack (proprietary software owned by Salesforce) instead of FOSS alternatives, citing alleged threats of punitive action against internal dissenters. Responses range from requests for evidence to arguments that employer software mandates are normal practice.	16.4	26 5/17–5/23	12	25.9	4		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE Note potential suppression of internal WMF dissent. No immediate community action required absent formal proposal or verified evidence.
Wikipedia talk:No legal threats (wt: 5) ☞ 'Persistent or vexatious complaints may still lead to a ban. ' (0.5k) A user suggests changing the word 'ban' to 'block' in WP:NLT policy text to align with standard terminology distinctions between bans and blocks. No substantive policy change is proposed.	16.4	1 5/26	1	12.3	3	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Fake sourcing (2.0k) An editor proposes strengthening policy language against false attribution of claims to sources, citing frequent encounters with unsourced or misattributed content. Responses question whether stronger language would deter bad actors and suggest automated filters as an alternative.	16.4	3 5/13	3	19.4	5	Policy	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Engage cautiously; stronger verification language could improve accuracy but might also be weaponized against good-faith editors citing contested sources.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Banalnasal (11.3k) Discussion about indefinitely blocking a new user who created an account to nominate an article for deletion using AI-generated text, then became hostile in subsequent interactions. The block was issued for personal attacks and communication difficulties, with some discussion of AI policy (WP:AITALK) implications.	16.4	10 5/24–5/25	7	24.9	4		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Note case where AI use combined with poor English proficiency contributed to indef block rationale. Watch for pattern of AI-pretext blocking.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Guided tours! (17.5k) Discussion proposes expanding use of guided tours to help newcomers understand Wikipedia policies, workflows, and processes like AfD. A prototype AfD tour is being developed to explain deletion discussions and closure procedures.	16.1	23 4/24–5/27	9	24.6	4		EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Support development of AfD tour. Ensure tour content accurately explains that closures weigh argument quality, not vote counts, to prevent systematic bias.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Notability criteria for restaurants at WP? (15.0k) Editors discuss whether restaurant articles featuring on TV shows like Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives should meet notability standards under WP:CORP. Disagreement exists over whether current AfD processes adequately filter non-notable restaurants versus whether stricter standards would unfairly exclude culturally significant establishments.	16.1	18 5/22–5/27	9	24.4	4		NEUTRALITY
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Abstract Wikipedia goes somewhat live and already hosts unattributed enwiki copies... (52.1k) Editors criticize the WMF's Abstract Wikipedia launch as buggy, poorly executed, and wasteful of resources. Discussion focuses on technical failures, attribution issues, and project management concerns, with some calling for the project to be abandoned.	15.7	84 3/25–5/22	20	28.3	3		GOVERNANCE
Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchroCat closed (3.0k) ArbCom has closed the SchroCat case, issuing an indefinite ban to Dronebogus, a three-month ban plus probation to SchroCat, and various restrictions including noticeboard bans and interaction prohibitions to multiple editors including Fortuna imperatrix mundi, Ssilvers, and Tim riley.	15.6	2 5/4	2	16.5	6	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Review case for procedural fairness and proportionality of sanctions, particularly the indefinite ban and broad noticeboard restrictions.
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Basis of the Zionist claim to Palestine (59.7k) Dispute over whether a characterization of the Zionist claim to Palestine in the Zionism article constitutes original research/synthesis. Editor NorthernWinds argues sources do not directly support the contested statement; opposing editors maintain the synthesis is adequately supported by citations.	15.3	103 4/15–5/9	15	25.2	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Participate to support fair treatment of competing characterizations; ensure SYNTH policy is applied consistently regardless of political topic.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Removal of skeptical material and sources at Earthquake light (87.6k) Dispute over whether skeptical material about earthquake lights should be included in the article. One editor argues for including skeptical sources (Robert Sheaffer, Skeptical Inquirer) under WP:PARITY; another contends earthquake lights are mainstream science and skeptical sources are unqualified non-experts.	15.3	127 5/12–5/16	13	26.3	6		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Participate to support inclusion of skeptical viewpoints with appropriate weight per NPOV and PARITY.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Editorialising at Executive Order 14168 (16.3k) Dispute over whether Executive Order 14168 should be described in Wikipedia's voice as 'persecution' of transgender people, or whether this characterization requires attribution. Editors debate applying a prior RfC's outcome, proper use of wikivoice for contested descriptors, and sourcing standards for editorial framing.	14.8	33 5/15–5/17	9	24.5	6		NEUTRALITY Support requiring attribution for 'persecution' descriptor. Wikivoice assertions of contested political characterizations undermine NPOV regardless of source volume.
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ Policy implications of featuring a Wikipedian on the front page (2.1k) Discussion examines whether policies exist or should exist regarding featuring Wikipedia editors on the main page without their consent. Participants express concern about harassment risks and suggest explicit consent should be required.	14.7	4 5/27	4	22.3	4		EDITOR_RETENTION PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT Note discussion as potential precedent for editor privacy protections; no actionable proposal yet.
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Unban request by Davidbena (12.0k) A site-banned editor requested unbanning, citing an honest mistake regarding euphemism use. The request was declined, with commenters noting the appeal did not address all reasons for the original ban, including original research concerns.	14.6	17 5/19–5/22	12	26.5	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Content drift (16.8k) Discussion addresses 'content drift,' where cited URLs remain live but content changes, potentially undermining verifiability. Editors explore documentation gaps and technical solutions but propose no policy changes.	14.6	14 5/20–5/26	7	24.3	3		SOURCES
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ My thoughts (23.8k) Discussion on the LLM article-writing guideline's scope and permanence. Some editors argue the blanket prohibition should include sunset/review clauses or thresholds for reconsideration; others maintain the current guideline is appropriate and reopening debate so soon is disruptive.	14.5	49 4/13–5/8	11	24.6	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate if formal review opens. Support adding explicit criteria for future reassessment to prevent indefinite prohibition without periodic evaluation.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Jordan Lasker profringe issues (4.4k) Editors discuss how to present a BLP subject's work in the race and intelligence contentious topic area. The discussion centers on whether to use stronger language than 'controversial' to describe the subject's research, with participants agreeing sources support more critical framing while respecting BLP and FRINGE policies.	14.4	10 5/24–5/25	4	20.2	5		NEUTRALITY Observe for potential one-sided framing of heterodox research under PROFRINGE; ensure due weight given to subject's own academic standing.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Student newspaper on racism (3.5k) Discussion evaluates whether a student newspaper article about racism allegations against a church is reliable and whether including specific quotes about 'white savior mentality' constitutes undue weight. Participants generally accept the source as reliable but debate appropriate framing and weight.	14.3	6 5/27	5	21.8	4		SOURCES NEUTRALITY Observe outcome. Discussion involves weighing viewpoint inclusion under due weight principles for coverage of racism allegations.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ 'CARET' Drone Incident (13.0k) Discussion about whether a new article on the 'CARET' drone UFO incident meets notability and reliable sourcing standards. Editors debate whether fringe sources like MUFON and blogs can support the article or if it should be redirected/deleted, with disagreement over conduct between participants.	14.3	19 5/23–5/26	5	21.8	4		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Observe AfD outcome. Standard application of WP:FRIND and WP:NOTE to UFO topic; no systemic bias concern evident.
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ New Google search announced (10.8k) Discussion about Google's announced AI-driven search changes and potential impact on Wikipedia's human readership. Participants debate whether Wikipedia should adapt to an audience that may become predominantly AI systems rather than human readers.	14.1	25 5/23–5/27	9	21.5	4		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch (wt: 4) ☞ Ties (6.9k) An editor proposes adding 'ties' (as in 'X has ties to Y') to the Words to Watch guideline due to claimed vagueness. Other editors oppose, arguing the term is precise, widely accepted in academic usage, and not inherently loaded or euphemistic.	14.1	17 5/10–5/13	4	17.8	4	Policy	NEUTRALITY Oppose addition. Term is neutral and precise; proposal appears motivated by content dispute over specific article rather than genuine guideline improvement.
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Antifaschistische Aktion (7.0k) A report alleges that an editor's public political identification with Marxism and Antifa constitutes a conflict of interest affecting their edits to Antifaschistische Aktion and related articles. Respondents argue that holding political opinions does not constitute COI and that the complainant has not attempted talk page discussion.	14.0	9 5/15–5/26	6	21.2	4		NEUTRALITY ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate if escalated. Clarify that ideological affinity alone does not constitute COI; content disputes belong at article talk pages.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Vijay fan won't stop disruption (9.2k) A content dispute over whether a specific BBC quotation should appear in the lead of an article about a Tamil Nadu election. One editor alleges POV-pushing by a fan of a celebrity-politician; the other alleges personal attacks. An uninvolved editor advised both parties to seek talk-page consensus.	14.0	15 5/27	5	23.4	3		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ ConnieC420 (2.4k) Discussion of whether to block or topic-ban an editor who posted a transphobic comment at an AfD, then self-reverted. Participants debate whether the self-reversion warrants leniency or whether a GENSEX topic ban is appropriate.	13.9	7 5/27–5/28	6	23.2	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ The proposal to add the abusefilter-bypass-blocked-external-domains and sboveride To admin group (6.3k) Proposal to grant admins (or a new user group) the ability to bypass spam blacklist restrictions when adding external links. Discussion raises concerns about expanding admin powers versus improving the encyclopedia and creating editing barriers for non-admins.	13.6	14 5/22–5/23	7	23.6	3		GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ AI use (2.7k) Report of an editor continuing to use AI-generated content despite warnings, with responses to warnings also appearing AI-generated. Discussion considers whether the editor has exhausted good-faith allowances and may face sanctions.	13.5	4 5/25–5/26	3	20.5	4		EDITOR_RETENTION Observe how AI-use enforcement affects newer editors; note if sanctions appear disproportionate or applied inconsistently.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ UPE by User:Noddemix (2.4k) Report of undisclosed paid editing by User:Noddemix, who works for Klaviyo. The user acknowledged their employment and offered to step back; discussion includes guidance on COI disclosure requirements.	13.5	6 5/27	5	22.4	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ List of pseudoscience topics (2.4k) An editor flagged that the renamed article 'List of pseudoscience topics' has lost 120kb of content in two weeks, requesting oversight of changes to WP:FRINGE-related content. Discussion devolved into grammar debate without substantive policy discussion.	13.4	9 5/23–5/24	5	20.6	4		NEUTRALITY Review recent deletions from the list for potential viewpoint-based content removal affecting coverage of contested topics.
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Workshopping RfC questions for the default editor for new editors (17.0k) Discussion workshopping RfC questions about whether Visual Editor should be the default for new editors on mobile and/or desktop. The proposal considers VE's new edit check feature for detecting LLM output as a factor, with participants debating question framing and implementation details.	13.4	33 5/12–5/20	7	23.4	4		EDITOR_RETENTION Observe development. Default editor choice affects new editor experience but has minimal direct bearing on viewpoint diversity concerns.
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Reverted removal of nutshell (1.9k) Discussion about formatting of the LLM guideline page (nutshell box removal/reinstatement). A linked RfC on the main guideline is mentioned but not detailed here. One comment disparages 'tech bros' who use AI.	13.4	5 2/27–5/13	4	18.7	3	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION Participate in linked RfC to ensure LLM policy does not become pretext for targeting editors based on stereotypes rather than conduct.
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Pointy editing (5.4k) Dispute over an allegedly pointy article title in a contentious topic area. The reporting editor sought quick enforcement at AE but was reverted; others advise following standard dispute resolution procedures rather than seeking immediate admin intervention.	13.3	10 5/27	4	22.1	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Criticism of social constructionism (18.0k) Dispute over whether expanded criticism of social constructionism in Wikipedia's article gives undue weight to critics or represents legitimate mainstream dissent. Editors disagree on WP:VOICE and WP:DUE application regarding the framing of the Science Wars.	13.3	16 5/10–5/11	4	21.2	5		NEUTRALITY Participate to support inclusion of well-sourced scholarly criticism; resist framing mainstream scientific skepticism as fringe.
Wikipedia talk:Verifiability (wt: 8) ☞ Unavailable sources (4.9k) Discussion about whether sources that cannot be independently verified to exist (not listed in any library catalog) should be accepted under WP:V. No policy change is proposed; participants are seeking clarification of existing policy interpretation.	13.2	10 5/25–5/26	5	22.0	3		SOURCES
Administrative action review (wt: 7) ☞ May 2026 Rollback by Johnbod (29.3k) Dispute over whether an editor's use of rollback to mass-revert another editor's MOS-compliant edits (removing postnominals from lead sentences) was appropriate. Discussion centers on whether rollback use met WP:ROLLBACKUSE criteria when explanation was given on talk page rather than in edit summaries.	12.9	47 5/12–5/17	19	28.1	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Dispute resolution noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (11.1k) Dispute over whether maps in the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations article should depict Western Sahara as part of Morocco or show it as disputed territory. The filing editor argues FIFA and UN Resolution 2797 support showing no border; another editor cites NPOV policy requiring neutral cartographic representation of disputed territories.	12.8	10 5/14–5/26	7	21.3	3		NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Eric Schucht (6.3k) Dispute over one editor's high-volume use of PROD and bold redirects for historic newspaper articles without adequate WP:BEFORE research. Another editor requests admin oversight and proposes restricting the first editor from using PROD/BLAR, suggesting they use AfD instead.	12.7	9 5/25	3	21.1	3		NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ SIModWiki’s conflict of interest and probable paid editing (1.8k) A user reports suspected paid editing and conflict of interest by SIModWiki regarding Warner Bros. content. An admin issued an indefinite block for NOTHERE, with the reporter requesting CheckUser investigation for possible sockpuppets.	12.4	2 5/27	2	18.8	4		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Observe outcome. Paid editing enforcement is legitimate; ensure block rationale is substantiated and not pretextual.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Pilates (5.3k) Discussion about sourcing standards for health claims in the Pilates article, focusing on whether anecdotal evidence or doctor observations should be included alongside scientific evidence under MEDRS guidelines. Editors debate the proper application of reliable source standards to alternative health practices.	12.2	13 5/18–5/22	4	20.3	4		SOURCES NEUTRALITY Observe how MEDRS interpretation affects coverage of alternative health topics; no immediate action needed.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Daily Dead (4.9k) An editor seeks informal feedback on whether Daily Dead, a horror news website with sponsored content, qualifies as a reliable source. Participants generally support its use while avoiding clearly marked sponsored material.	12.1	7 5/22–5/23	4	21.1	3		SOURCES
Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Arbitration motion regarding standard enforcement provision reform (6.9k) ArbCom motion reforming standard enforcement provisions for arbitration restrictions, establishing formal appeals procedures, standards of review for enforcement actions, and conditions under which administrators may modify or revoke sanctions. Changes codify that administrators who revoke enforcement actions out of process may be desysopped and restrict appeals after Committee review.	11.9	2 4/26	2	17.1	8	Policy RfC	GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Scrutinize new barriers to appealing enforcement actions. One-year appeal bans and threat of desysopping for reversing sanctions may chill administrative discretion and editor retention.
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Two-month trial of an incident reporting form (13.0k) The WMF Product Safety and Integrity team is trialing an incident reporting form on English Wikipedia to help editors report potentially bad behavior to appropriate community venues. The system routes reports to existing community processes (ANI, SPI, etc.) rather than creating reports directly, and includes emergency reporting to WMF Trust and Safety.	11.8	20 4/29–5/15	7	23.2	5		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Evaluate whether routing categories and report destinations adequately protect editors from frivolous or retaliatory reporting that could chill participation.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ roostweather.com (2.4k) Discussion questions whether roostweather.com, a self-published amateur weather site used in many UK settlement articles, meets reliable source standards. Participants note the lack of alternative sources for UK temperature records but acknowledge the site's self-published nature.	11.7	6 5/27	3	19.5	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE (2.0k) Editors clarify that WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE correctly specifies 'administrator' rather than 'closer' because only admins can close AfDs as delete. Discussion confirms existing policy wording is accurate and no change is proposed.	11.6	6 5/24–5/25	3	19.4	3		GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Requesting an assessment of consensus (0.8k) Editors request admin assessment of consensus for a time-sensitive action related to a solidarity petition and collective labor action following WMF Community Tech layoffs. The discussion involves watchlist messaging implementation.	11.4	2 5/26–5/27	2	17.3	4		GOVERNANCE Observe consensus assessment process; potential governance implications of labor-related messaging via watchlist system.
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Requesting additional eyes at The Assault on Reason and Liberty Fund (4.0k) Editors dispute whether content criticizing Liberty Fund in two articles constitutes original research and synthesis. Discussion centers on whether sourced rebuttals to Al Gore's criticism are OR/SYNTH and whether the material is due weight.	11.0	5 5/18–5/22	4	18.3	4		NEUTRALITY Engage to ensure balanced treatment of political criticism and responses; OR/SYNTH findings should not asymmetrically suppress one viewpoint.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Ukhrul Times (2.1k) Discussion questions the reliability of Ukhrul Times, a regional Indian news source cited in 80 articles, after AltNews published an investigation alleging it participates in a disinformation network related to Myanmar and rare earth minerals. No formal proposal to deprecate has been made yet.	10.9	1 5/23	1	16.0	5		SOURCES Participate if discussion develops into formal deprecation proposal; ensure regional sources are evaluated on quality not origin.
Wikipedia talk:Large language models (wt: 7) ☞ AI to Illustrate AI, e.g. Itself (1.3k) Discussion about whether AI-generated images should illustrate AI-related articles, with concerns about editorial bias when editors create images to demonstrate specific viewpoints. References existing policy exceptions for AI articles but questions application.	10.9	3 5/27	3	18.2	3		NEUTRALITY
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Using X to provide an example of someone using a particular word (5.1k) A user asks whether citing a subject's X post as a primary source to document their use of a racial slur constitutes original research. Respondents confirm it does, explaining that negative biographical claims require independent secondary sources per BLP policy.	10.9	7 5/21	6	20.1	3		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Unanswered BLP concern regarding disputed paternity claim (1.5k) An editor requests review of a paternity claim stated categorically in a BLP article, arguing it should be attributed rather than stated as fact. Respondents question sourcing and the editor's apparent connection to the article subject.	10.9	4 5/22–5/24	4	18.5	3		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ A messy 'messy' (2.4k) Discussion about whether the word 'messy' in an example about divorce descriptions is appropriate BLP language. Participants debate whether such characterizations should depend on source language and NPOV requirements.	10.9	2 5/27	2	18.1	3		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User: Alanzhnag - more evidence of LLM usage (0.9k) Report alleges continued LLM usage by an editor despite prior warnings and denials. Evidence cited includes formulaic writing patterns and AI-generated citation tags.	10.7	1 5/27	1	16.3	4		EDITOR_RETENTION Observe outcome. AI-usage allegations increasingly used as blocking pretexts; document if sanctions applied without clear policy violation.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Slovenia article – concern regarding neutrality and political framing (1.4k) Editor raises NPOV concerns about the Slovenia article, citing emotionally framed wording, implied political causality linking Janša's government to banking crisis, and politically suggestive references to Trump and Orbán. Discussion opened on article talk page; no formal process initiated.	10.6	1 5/27	1	14.8	5		NEUTRALITY Engage in talk page discussion to support balanced treatment of contested political interpretations and oppose emotionally loaded framing.
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ LiveAbout.com (1.4k) An editor initiated a discussion about the reliability of LiveAbout.com (formerly related to About.com) for use in music and entertainment articles. The discussion is exploratory with no formal proposal yet.	10.6	3 5/21–5/24	2	17.7	3		SOURCES
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Content from an organizations's website (8.7k) Discussion about whether paraphrasing an organization's website description of its membership constitutes synthesis or original research. Editors advise using secondary sources rather than interpreting primary source language about membership criteria.	10.6	19 5/19–5/20	6	20.5	3		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest (wt: 5) ☞ Why is directly Editing an article 'strongly discouraged' for COI editors but creating an entire article in Afc is allowed? (4.5k) An editor questions why COI editors are discouraged from direct mainspace editing but can create entire articles through AfC. Discussion centers on whether AfC review provides sufficient oversight or if this creates a loophole violating COI policy's spirit.	10.4	5 3/28–5/18	4	18.4	5		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY NEUTRALITY Participate if formal proposal emerges. Current policy gap may enable paid editing through AfC with insufficient scrutiny.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Val Morgan (7.3k) A COI report alleges campaign-motivated editing by one user on the Val Morgan article, with a counter-allegation that an admin's revert inadvertently restored problematic content. The accused editor has voluntarily reverted their edits; the reporting user disclosed they also work for Val Morgan.	10.4	7 5/22	3	18.5	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Age regression in hypnotherapy (1.2k) Editor raises concerns that the article on age regression in hypnotherapy lacks appropriate skeptical framing in the lead and relies on poor sources. Proposes adding language similar to hypnotherapy article noting lack of scientific evidence.	10.4	1 5/24	1	14.7	5		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Participate if discussion moves toward categorical dismissal of therapeutic perspectives rather than balanced presentation of mainstream and minority views.
Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion (wt: 5) ☞ Clarification of C1 (3.4k) Discussion seeks clarification on whether emptying a category and then requesting speedy deletion under C1 is procedurally acceptable or circumvents proper CfD review. Participants note documentation gaps between CSD criteria and related instructions.	10.3	5 5/5–5/6	4	18.2	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ MUFON (0.6k) A query about whether MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) qualifies as a reliable source for Wikipedia content, specifically regarding the 'CARET' Drone sightings article. One response indicates it does not meet RS standards except for self-referential claims.	10.3	2 5/25	2	17.2	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#RfC: BLPSPS and spoken (0.6k) An RfC asks whether video-recorded statements by a biographical subject in self-published sources can be used for claims about themselves under WP:BLPSPS. The outcome could expand or restrict permissible sourcing for BLP content.	10.1	1 4/6	1	15.2	6	Policy RfC	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Participate in RfC. Broader allowance for self-published video supports subject self-representation; restrictive outcome may limit viewpoint expression.
Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view (wt: 9) ☞ BALANCE and majority rules (28.2k) Discussion about how WP:BALANCE and WP:NPOV should be applied when reliable sources disagree but are not equal in prominence. Editors debate whether majority-source views should be stated in wikivoice or attributed, with examples including conspiracy theory labeling and controversial gestures.	10.1	44 4/29–5/2	8	25.9	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate to reinforce that minority scholarly views deserve attribution rather than dismissal when reputable sources genuinely dispute a claim.
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not (wt: 7) ☞ Suggestion: add 'Wikipedia should not be a random collection of facts' or similar sentence. (1.6k) Editor suggests adding language about Wikipedia not being a 'random collection of facts' to WP:NOT. Another editor objects that the phrase is too vague to serve as a guideline.	10.1	2 5/8–5/9	2	16.9	3	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Türkiye Today (1.2k) An editor questions the reliability of Türkiye Today after an article reported casualties contradicted by other sources. No formal reliability determination was reached, with case-by-case evaluation suggested.	9.9	3 5/14–5/22	2	17.6	3		SOURCES
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ BLP1E and Robert Miracle (0.9k) Editors question whether an article about Robert Miracle should exist under WP:BLP1E (single event coverage for living persons). An AfD has been initiated.	9.7	4 5/22–5/23	3	17.1	3		NEUTRALITY
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Identification of programming language in ChiWriter (7.3k) Discussion about whether extracting programming language information from executable binaries constitutes original research under WP:OR. The issue was resolved when a secondary source was found to support the claim.	9.7	9 5/5–5/20	4	18.7	3		NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Global welcoming policy in effect (1.9k) A global welcoming policy has been enacted following a Meta RfC, restricting automated welcome messages to new cross-wiki visitors. Discussion focuses on implementation details and enforcement mechanisms.	9.7	5 5/13–5/22	5	17.8	3		EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ Flags of the World (1.2k) Discussion proposes adding mirror sites of Flags of the World (already listed as unreliable) to its perennial sources entry to improve clarity for editors. The suggestion aims to help editors recognize mirrors that may not be obviously connected to the main unreliable source.	9.6	2 5/6	2	16.7	4	Policy	SOURCES Low priority. Proposal is administrative cleanup of existing unreliable designation, not a substantive reliability dispute.
Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks (wt: 5) ☞ Establishing a no personal attacks noticeboard (8.5k) A proposal to create a dedicated noticeboard for reporting personal attacks, noting that the previous WP:PAIN noticeboard was closed in 2007. Discussion includes mention of the WMF's new Incident Reporting System pilot and concerns about potential abuse of reporting mechanisms, while some editors argue current noticeboards are sufficient.	9.6	14 2/16–5/11	9	22.2	5		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate if discussion advances. New reporting infrastructure could affect editor participation and accountability mechanisms—ensure concerns about abuse potential and fairness are raised.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Electrohomeopathy (0.4k) A user flagged recent expansion of the Electrohomeopathy article by a new editor for review at the Fringe theories noticeboard. Discussion notes the expansion appears acceptable except for one sentence.	9.5	2 5/25	2	15.9	3		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Closing discussions (wt: 6) ☞ Suggestion re CloseChallenge (2.5k) Editors propose clarifying the closure challenge process, including limiting request content to prevent re-litigation, renaming the section to less confrontational language, and allowing automatic reversion of non-admin closures when challenged on non-RfC discussions. Some editors argue closures are being used to shut down disfavored discussions rather than reflect consensus.	9.5	3 11/4–5/4	3	17.8	6	Policy	GOVERNANCE Participate to ensure closure challenge reforms do not entrench premature closures that suppress ongoing legitimate discussion.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Jordan Lasker (0.3k) A notice directs attention to talk page discussions about Jordan Lasker, specifically regarding characterization of his race and intelligence research as pseudoscience entering mainstream academia. No specific proposal or action is made in this post.	9.3	1 5/23	1	13.8	5		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Participate in talk page discussion to ensure due weight for academic criticism without prejudging researcher as fringe.
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#RfC: BLPSPS and spoken (0.6k) An RfC at BLP/N asks whether video-recorded statements by a subject in self-published sources can be used for claims about themselves. This may affect how primary/self-published sources are evaluated for living persons.	9.3	1 4/6	1	15.2	5	Policy RfC	SOURCES NEUTRALITY Participate in RfC to ensure self-published sources remain usable where appropriate for subject self-description.
Wikipedia talk:Large language models (wt: 7) ☞ How do I prove that a page is not generated by an AI? (0.4k) An editor complains that their self-written content was falsely flagged as AI-generated and asks how to appeal or prove human authorship. No policy change is proposed.	9.2	1 5/26	1	13.9	4		EDITOR_RETENTION Document case as evidence of false-positive AI detection affecting good-faith editors; support clearer appeal pathways.
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ WikiAnnotate paid research study - geographic restrictions now removed (1.5k) A research study (WikiAnnotate) seeks Wikipedia editors to annotate article quality to train an AI model. Geographic restrictions for paid participation have been removed.	9.1	3 5/14–5/24	3	15.6	3		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Vela supernova remnant and Younger Dryas (1.3k) An editor flags recent additions to Vela supernova remnant and Younger Dryas articles that may give undue weight to a marginally-accepted hypothesis linking the supernova to climate change. The editor seeks input before reverting.	8.9	1 5/28	1	14.8	3		NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Gaming the system (wt: 3) ☞ Does 'gaming to retain the tools' have consensus? (1.0k) Editor questions whether a recent guideline addition citing an essay on 'gaming to retain the tools' reflects consensus, suggesting it may be better placed in 'See also' rather than as definitive guideline text. The addition was made by the essay's author.	8.7	1 5/7	1	11.0	5	Policy	GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate if discussion develops. The framing of admin tool retention as 'gaming' could affect accountability standards.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Natural languages (8.8k) Discussion about whether natural languages are exempt from GNG requirements, prompted by an article on an extinct language with minimal secondary sourcing. Participants debate whether GNG applies uniformly across topic areas or if distant historical and scientific subjects receive informal exceptions.	8.7	20 5/3–5/9	7	23.0	5		NEUTRALITY Participate if AfD outcome prompts formal GNG exemption proposal; inconsistent notability standards across fields warrant scrutiny.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ AI slop ANI report about TOGAF (3.4k) Discussion about an ANI report alleging COI promotion of one person's critical viewpoint about TOGAF. Editors are collaborating to address potential SYNTH and DUE WEIGHT issues in criticism sections across related enterprise architecture articles.	8.6	7 5/14–5/17	3	18.9	3		NEUTRALITY SOURCES
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Subject of 'High-capacity magazines' outside of legal sphere (0.6k) Following an AfD merge decision, editors are debating whether non-legal aspects of high-capacity magazines deserve coverage under WP:DUE weight standards. The discussion centers on whether the topic warrants independent treatment or is UNDUE outside legal contexts.	8.5	1 5/19	1	14.2	5		NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure technical and non-legal perspectives on firearms topics receive fair due weight consideration.
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Nick Shirley - WP:SYNTH connection dispute (1.5k) Dispute over whether fraud charges against a daycare owner should be included in journalist Nick Shirley's biography based on his prior video coverage of the daycare. Editors disagree on whether sources establish sufficient connection, citing SYNTH, DUE, and ONUS policies.	8.3	1 5/24	1	14.0	3		NEUTRALITY
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Ya Liu (1.5k) An IP editor requests review of allegedly non-neutral phrasing in a BLP regarding disciplinary proceedings. A responding editor requests a specific edit proposal but declines personal involvement due to appearance of bias concerns.	8.2	3 5/19–5/20	2	16.0	3		NEUTRALITY
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Did an AI agent really blog about being attacked on Wikipedia and then file a complaint? (2.1k) A user asks about a reported incident where an AI agent (Claude) edited Wikipedia, was blocked using a refusal string, then blogged about the experience and filed an on-wiki complaint before having talk page access revoked. Another user confirms the incident occurred and provides references.	8.2	3 5/23	2	14.4	3		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ May 2026 Wikimedia Café meetups regarding the Wikimedia Foundation Annual Plan (2.4k) Announcement of two Wikimedia Café sessions in late May 2026 to discuss the Wikimedia Foundation's 2026-2027 Annual Plan. Participants are encouraged to read a summary and provide feedback on Meta.	8.2	1 5/21	1	12.5	4		GOVERNANCE PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT Participate in sessions to ensure community input on WMF priorities reaches Foundation planners.
Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy (wt: 6) ☞ Some simpler language about proxying? (0.8k) Discussion about whether to add explicit language prohibiting blocked users from soliciting proxying via their talk pages. One editor notes exceptions should exist for legitimate concerns like BLP violations.	8.0	2 5/3	2	15.5	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Oppose restricting blocked editors' communication channels without clear abuse evidence. Existing policy handles misuse adequately.
Wikipedia talk:Consensus (wt: 8) ☞ NOCON hidden note (10.2k) Editors debate whether WP:NOCON is a standalone rule or merely a summary of other policies, and whether a hidden note clarifying this should be visible. The dispute centers on whether NOCON or WP:ONUS takes precedence when there is no consensus on content retention.	8.0	18 2/26–2/28	6	23.3	7	Policy	GOVERNANCE NEUTRALITY Participate to support NOCON as independent policy guidance. Status quo defaults affect which viewpoints survive disputed content, making this a core fairness issue.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Potential max size for talk pages (3.9k) Discussion about whether to add guidance on maximum talk page sizes due to mobile loading issues, prompted by an ANI discussion about mandatory archiving. The proposal was withdrawn after participants noted the technical complexity and advised against hasty guideline changes.	8.0	8 5/4–5/5	3	16.3	3	Policy	GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy (wt: 6) ☞ Why does 'indefinite' block say 'infinite' now?? (3.0k) Editors noticed that the displayed text for indefinite blocks changed from 'indefinite' to 'infinite' due to a UI/software change. Discussion clarifies this is a MediaWiki interface issue being addressed at the interface administrators' noticeboard, not a policy change.	7.9	10 5/11–5/12	6	20.6	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Francesco Alarico della Scala (0.6k) An editor raises NPOV concerns about the article on Francesco Alarico della Scala, noting lengthy quotes praising North Korea. No specific proposal or remedial action is suggested; the editor is seeking others to review.	7.9	1 5/22	1	14.2	3		NEUTRALITY
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Hillsdale College lawsuit (0.4k) A user requests input on whether a lawsuit should be mentioned in the Hillsdale College article, citing balance issues. The discussion is taking place on the article's talk page.	7.9	1 5/20	1	13.9	4		NEUTRALITY Participate in talk page discussion to ensure due weight principles are applied fairly regardless of institutional viewpoint.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Wong Kar-wai controversy section (0.4k) A request for input on whether to retain or remove a controversy section in the Wong Kar-wai biography article. The discussion centers on whether the content constitutes appropriate coverage or 'attack content.'	7.9	1 5/20	1	13.9	4		NEUTRALITY Participate at article talk page to ensure controversy content receives due weight rather than deletion as 'attack content.'
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Reconstructing history of WP:CFDS criteria (0.3k) A notice directing editors to a discussion about reconstructing the historical development of criteria for speedy category deletions at CfDS. The discussion appears to be archival/documentary rather than proposing changes.	7.8	1 5/23	1	13.7	3		GOVERNANCE
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Wasian (0.3k) A user requests attention to a Talk page discussion about the removal of criticism content from the article on Wasian identity. No specific NPOV concern is detailed in this notice.	7.7	1 5/22	1	13.7	3		NEUTRALITY
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Willow Wealth (1.5k) A user reports another editor for alleged NPOV violations on the Willow Wealth article, claiming undue negative weight. The reporter appears to have their own potential COI and seeks pre-approval for edits to the Controversies section.	7.6	3 5/8–5/18	2	16.0	3		NEUTRALITY ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers (wt: 4) ☞ Proposed addition for internal processes (1.0k) An editor proposes adding a section to WP:BITE addressing how experienced editors should be welcomed when engaging with complex internal processes like DYK, GAN, FAC, and ArbCom elections. The proposal argues that high barriers to participation in Wikipedia governance processes contribute to low engagement rates.	7.6	1 5/5	1	11.9	4	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Caliph of the Islamic State (3.2k) Discussion concerns whether the article 'Caliph of the Islamic State' violates NPOV by presenting the ISIS leadership title without contextualizing scholarly rejection of the term's legitimacy. A potential POV fork issue was also identified with a pre-existing article on ISIS leaders.	7.5	8 4/28–5/9	4	19.9	5		NEUTRALITY Observe how NPOV is applied to contested political-religious terminology and framing of non-state actors.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Outside views required at International Association of Genocide Scholars (0.4k) A content dispute at International Association of Genocide Scholars has reached an impasse, and outside opinions are being requested. No specific NPOV concern or proposed policy change is detailed in this notice.	7.5	1 5/21	1	13.9	3		NEUTRALITY
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Raw milk, ivermectin, psychedelics, and sunshine (4.6k) Discussion shares a news source about RFK Jr.'s health policy positions on alternative therapies and tanning beds, suggesting it could improve fringe-related articles. No specific edits proposed; debate centers on whether the thread is forum-appropriate and closure procedures.	7.4	12 5/8–5/9	7	22.5	3		NEUTRALITY SOURCES
Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Maghreb closed (2.9k) ArbCom has closed the Maghreb case, issuing topic bans (including one indefinite site ban) and novel remedies treating three editors as a 'single user' for dispute resolution purposes. Multiple editors received significant restrictions with appeal windows of 6-12 months.	7.4	2 4/28	2	16.5	5	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION Note novel 'single user' remedy as potential precedent for future cases affecting editor participation rights.
Wikipedia talk:Consensus (wt: 8) ☞ IAR and local consensus (2.7k) Discussion explores how editors can legitimately invoke WP:IAR (Ignore All Rules) at the local level without being overridden by claims of inappropriate local consensus. Participants suggest consensus-building, RfCs, and the inherent need for IAR invocations to withstand community scrutiny.	7.4	5 4/22–5/9	3	19.6	5		GOVERNANCE Participate if proposal to modify WP:LOCALCON emerges; IAR flexibility supports editorial autonomy against rigid rule enforcement.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Red Light Therapy (5.0k) Editors discuss whether Low-level laser therapy (which Red light therapy redirects to) should be treated as pseudoscience versus legitimate medical treatment. The discussion focuses on article quality and sourcing but no formal proposal or action has been made.	7.3	9 4/30–5/9	4	20.3	4		NEUTRALITY Participate if discussion moves toward fringe classification to ensure due weight for legitimate medical research on phototherapy.
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ www.cremieux.xyz/archive (0.6k) Request to whitelist cremieux.xyz/archive domain for use as external link on Jordan Lasker article. Requester argues it is the subject's official website and relevant to notability.	7.2	1 5/23	1	11.5	4		SOURCES Track outcome. Whitelisting decisions for independent commentators may indicate openness to heterodox source inclusion.
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2026 Issue 9 (12.0k) WMF Bulletin covering various Foundation activities including transparency report on user data disclosure requests, Wikinews closure by Board decision, CAPTCHA replacement, autoconfirmation policy changes, and annual planning feedback requests. A user noted an apparent discrepancy in the transparency report statistics.	7.2	2 5/12–5/13	2	18.4	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Editing policy (wt: 5) ☞ AI information (10.6k) A bold edit added language to Wikipedia's Editing Policy summarizing the general prohibition on AI-generated content (articles, images, sources, comments). Discussion focused on wording refinements; the change was implemented and archived.	7.2	23 4/11–4/13	8	21.9	6	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION NEUTRALITY Note consolidation of AI restrictions into core editing policy. Assess whether broad prohibition language could be used as pretext for blocking editors.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Year x in Country y (3.3k) Editors discuss whether 'Year X in Country Y' articles require standard notability sourcing or fall under WP:NLIST exceptions. One editor suggests most such articles fail sourcing and selection criteria and should potentially be mass-deleted, but no formal proposal has been made.	7.2	5 5/3–5/11	4	20.0	3		NEUTRALITY
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Jordan Lasker (0.4k) A BLP article subject has engaged on the talk page alleging libel, with edit warring reported. The reporter requests additional editor attention to resolve content disputes.	7.1	1 5/21	1	13.1	3		NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ Salem media group (5.5k) An editor proposes consolidating RedState and PJ Media under their parent company Salem Media Group on the perennial sources list. Discussion clarifies that any such change requires RSN consensus and that corporate ownership alone does not determine reliability.	7.1	6 5/10–5/11	2	17.8	4		SOURCES Observe RSN if discussion opens. Ensure reliability assessments focus on accuracy, not political orientation per WP:RSBIAS.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Black triangle (UFO) (3.0k) Discussion about removing or reducing content on the Black triangle (UFO) article citing WP:UNDUE weight concerns and reliance on primary military sources. Editors blocked an IP and sockpuppet accounts pushing disputed content.	7.0	7 5/3–5/9	4	19.9	4		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Observe whether UNDUE rationale is applied consistently or used to exclude legitimate dissenting scientific perspectives on UFO phenomena.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Beaver Creek Indians (5.9k) Dispute over sources in an article about the Beaver Creek Indians, with concerns about source verification failures, potential original research, and POV editing regarding the tribe's racial/ethnic classification. Discussion involves whether sources accurately support claims about Native American ancestry.	6.9	2 5/8–5/9	2	17.8	5		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Observe for patterns of source misrepresentation affecting minority group articles; no immediate action needed.
Wikipedia talk:Perennial proposals (wt: 4) ☞ Verifiability (0.6k) A user questions Wikipedia's principle of requiring verifiability over truth, asking how this standard applies when claims meet Wikipedia's criteria but may not be true. No concrete proposal for change is made.	6.9	1 5/26	1	11.5	3		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) (wt: 5) ☞ Candidate notability (80.0k) Discussion proposes adding guideline text to WP:POLITICIAN clarifying that routine campaign coverage for failed sub-national candidates should generally not count toward notability. Participants debate whether this codifies existing consensus or improperly restricts GNG, with some arguing campaign coverage is already appropriately discounted in practice while others see need for explicit guidance.	6.9	115 12/16–3/13	21	26.5	7	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure proposed guideline does not systematically exclude coverage of politically disfavored candidates or entrench bias in notability assessments.
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Draft:Giorgio Jerzy Rayzacher (0.7k) A report alleges that editor Belliricchiperfidi is the subject of the draft article Giorgio Jerzy Rayzacher, noting the user has been indefinitely blocked on French and Italian Wikipedias for COI policy breaches. The report requests review for potential self-promotion.	6.9	1 5/17	1	13.4	4		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Observe outcome. Standard COI enforcement case with cross-wiki precedent; no diversity-specific concern evident.
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Biased and Independent Sources (5.4k) An editor asks for clarification about the relationship between biased sources and independent sources in the reliable sources guideline. The discussion focuses on explaining existing policy rather than proposing changes, with one editor expressing frustration about perceived non-enforcement of sourcing policies.	6.8	11 5/9–5/10	3	20.1	3		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Large language models (wt: 7) ☞ Still an essay? (17.6k) Editors debate whether WP:LLMS should remain an essay or be formally vetted as an information page. Concerns include whether language about 'competence' undermines the WP:NOLLM ban and whether the page's status requires community vetting via RfC or PROPOSAL.	6.6	18 4/10–4/13	4	21.1	5	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Participate if formal process emerges. Ensure LLM guidance does not become pretext for blocking good-faith editors unfamiliar with evolving rules.
Wikipedia talk:Ownership of content (wt: 3) ☞ Abolish FAOWN and possibly “stewardship” entirely? (84.7k) Proposal to abolish or substantially revise WP:FAOWN (Featured Article Ownership) and the concept of 'stewardship,' arguing these sections legitimize ownership behavior and create barriers for newer editors. Opponents contend FAOWN protects article quality and that stewardship is essential for maintaining Featured Articles.	6.6	120 3/24–4/15	20	24.7	7	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Support revision. FAOWN's vague wording enables established editors to exclude newcomers from high-quality articles, harming editorial diversity and retention.
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee (wt: 6) ☞ Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Bot to create arbitration enforcement editnotices (0.7k) A proposal at Village Pump discusses creating a bot to automatically generate editnotices for pages under arbitration enforcement. This would affect how editors are notified about ArbCom-related restrictions.	6.5	1 5/16	1	13.4	4		GOVERNANCE ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Review linked VPP discussion to assess whether automated editnotices could affect editor awareness of sanctions or create chilling effects.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Request to remove heamar.co.uk from blacklist (1.3k) Request to remove a commercial tooling website from the spam blacklist, arguing the site provides useful technical information. Declined by admin citing coordinated promotional editing from multiple temp accounts.	6.5	2 5/15	2	15.0	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Does this fall under an exception? (13.5k) Editors discuss whether using LLMs for technical formatting tasks (date conversion, citation templates, wikitext help) falls under existing copyediting exceptions in the LLM guideline. A proposal to explicitly permit such technical assistance with human review has emerging support.	6.4	23 3/26–3/28	9	23.5	7	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION Support expanding exception to cover technical edits. Overly restrictive LLM rules create unnecessary blocking pretexts and drive away competent editors.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Skeptoid at RSNB (0.9k) A cross-post alerts editors to a Reliable Sources Noticeboard discussion about Skeptoid, a skeptic website. The thread includes dismissive comments characterizing participants in the RSN discussion as sealioning.	6.1	3 5/9–5/10	2	16.5	4		SOURCES NEUTRALITY Participate in linked RSN discussion to ensure skeptic-oriented sources are evaluated on quality, not ideological alignment.
Wikipedia talk:Consensus (wt: 8) ☞ Move WP:ONUS to this policy? - preliminary discussion (69.7k) Editors are discussing whether to relocate WP:ONUS (burden of proof for disputed content) from WP:V to WP:Consensus or WP:Editing policy. Disagreement exists about whether ONUS conceptually belongs with consensus-building rules or editing procedures, with some noting ambiguity in what ONUS actually means.	5.9	140 4/18–3/4	11	26.4	5	Policy	GOVERNANCE Participate if RFC proceeds. ONUS placement affects how consensus burden is interpreted in content disputes, which can impact minority viewpoints.
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch (wt: 4) ☞ 'Diagnosis' as a euphemism (2.4k) An editor raises concern that 'diagnosis' is being misused as a euphemism for 'condition' or 'illness,' particularly in disability-related contexts. Discussion is preliminary, with one editor requesting evidence of widespread misuse before considering adding it to the Words to Watch guideline.	5.9	5 4/11–5/12	3	15.9	3		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ This whole fiasco... (9.5k) Discussion about whether Wikipedia's prohibition on AI-generated content should be grounded in ideological ('by humans, for humans') principles rather than quality-based arguments. Participants debate whether this would prevent recurring relitigation and whether it conflicts with WMF's AI initiatives.	5.9	15 4/25	9	23.2	6	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate in essay development. An ideological framing could entrench anti-AI blocking pretexts; prefer quality-based standards that permit evidence-based revision.
Wikipedia talk:Paid-contribution disclosure (wt: 5) ☞ Update lead for COI (1.1k) Discussion about whether to add language to the lead of the paid-contribution disclosure page emphasizing that paid editors are discouraged from direct mainspace editing. An edit was made to make the COI guideline link more prominent.	5.9	3 4/20	3	16.3	5	Policy	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Observe outcome. Strengthening COI visibility in disclosure policy affects paid editing enforcement and editor clarity.
Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks (wt: 5) ☞ Do we differentiate between direct and indirect personal attacks? (2.4k) A user asks whether indirect personal attacks (criticizing a group rather than an individual) should be treated the same as direct personal attacks under NPA policy. Respondents suggest such comments may fall under civility concerns rather than personal attacks.	5.8	4 6/10–5/10	3	16.8	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Civility (wt: 6) ☞ Profanity (2.9k) A user proposes banning profanity like 'fuck' from editor interactions, with discussion clarifying that insults already violate WP:NPA. A bold edit to WP:NPA was reportedly made but the proposal lacks broader consensus.	5.8	10 3/7–4/7	4	19.0	4	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION No action needed. Proposal is informal and unlikely to advance; existing NPA policy already addresses personal attacks.
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Guideline worded as a policy (15.3k) Discussion about whether the LLM guideline's prohibitory language is appropriate for a guideline rather than a policy. Some editors argue the wording overstates its authority, while others contend there is no practical difference between policies and guidelines and that strong wording reduces disruption.	5.8	27 3/31–4/10	7	22.5	6	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Participate to ensure LLM guideline language permits legitimate edge-case uses and does not enable pretextual blocking of good-faith editors.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:No original research (wt: 7) ☞ Contradiction in definition of original research (79.4k) Discussion addresses a perceived contradiction in WP:NOR's definition of original research versus synthesis. One editor proposes clarifying language to replace 'original research' with 'not allowed' plus a footnote; others debate whether the current wording adequately prevents misuse of sources.	5.7	143 3/10–3/27	10	25.1	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Engage if proposal weakens synthesis prohibition, as this could enable POV-pushing through selective source combination.
Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest (wt: 5) ☞ Concerns regarding expert participation under current COI guidance (14.2k) An editor proposes refining the COI guideline to distinguish between promotional conflict and informational expertise, arguing that current guidance disproportionately discourages subject-matter experts while leaving ideological or activist-driven editing unexamined. Respondents are divided, with some supporting reform and others defending current practice as adequate.	5.7	16 1/30–3/28	8	22.1	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Participate to support clearer distinction between promotional and informational contributions; current framing may suppress expert participation while under-addressing ideological bias.
Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion (wt: 5) ☞ Retire R3 (13.6k) Discussion on whether to retire speedy deletion criterion R3 (implausible typo redirects), with concerns raised about frequent misapplication. Opponents argue the criterion remains useful and RfD would be overburdened; supporters cite evidence that 30-50% of R3 deletions may be incorrect.	5.7	20 2/20–4/22	15	24.9	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Oppose retirement. R3 misuse is better addressed through clarification or edit filters than elimination; incorrect deletions harm content preservation.
Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy (wt: 6) ☞ I would propose a new block: (0.6k) A user proposes a new restriction mechanism for civility issues: limiting editors to discussions they are pinged into, with extended confirmed users or admins able to issue escalating short blocks via a button. No formal proposal or policy text drafted.	5.7	1 4/30	1	13.4	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Oppose. Proposal would lower blocking threshold and expand blocking authority beyond admins, risking abuse against disfavored editors.
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ Washington Post (0.2k) A discussion about the Washington Post was initiated on the Perennial Sources talk page but has been moved to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard for further discussion.	5.6	1 5/14	1	13.6	3		SOURCES Follow discussion at RSN to track any proposed changes to Washington Post's source classification.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Non-neutrality of article on parapsychology (0.3k) An editor requests input on a Talk page discussion alleging NPOV violations in the Parapsychology article. The underlying dispute concerns whether the article gives appropriate weight to viewpoints on a topic often classified as fringe science.	5.6	1 5/10	1	13.8	5		NEUTRALITY Participate in Talk discussion to ensure dissenting scientific viewpoints receive due weight under NPOV, not dismissal via fringe-theory framing.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ IHRA definition of antisemitism (0.6k) Discussion about whether criticism of the IHRA antisemitism definition's alleged conflation of Israel criticism with antisemitism should be mentioned in the article's opening paragraph under WP:DUE weight guidelines. No formal proposal yet, just seeking input on due weight interpretation.	5.5	1 5/9	1	14.2	5		NEUTRALITY Participate in talk page discussion. Support including notable criticism in lede if reliably sourced, per due weight principles.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Great British PAC (1.1k) Editors discuss whether labeling a political organization as 'far-right' in the lead violates NPOV when sources use 'hard-right' instead. Debate centers on whether editorial characterization should match exact source language.	5.5	2 4/28–5/6	2	16.7	5		NEUTRALITY Participate to support precise sourcing over editorial inference when characterizing political organizations' ideological positioning.
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Motion to Repeal (6.6k) An editor proposed repealing the LLM content guideline, arguing AI will eventually be integrated into academic work and fact-checked AI content should be permitted. The discussion was hatted as disruptive relitigation of a month-old RfC, with opponents noting consensus can change but hasn't shifted yet.	5.5	17 4/24	5	20.4	6	Policy	GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Note closure rationale. Premature proposals may be shut down as disruptive even when raising legitimate long-term concerns about technology policy.
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Texas sharpshooter fallacy (0.3k) A user requests input on whether content about electrosmog (characterized as fringe) was appropriately removed from the Texas sharpshooter fallacy article. No formal proposal or policy change is involved.	5.4	1 5/13	1	13.8	3		NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Canvassing (wt: 5) ☞ Pinging vs talkpage notifications (1.6k) Discussion about whether the canvassing guideline should explicitly mention pinging in addition to talk page notifications. Edits were made to clarify that either method is acceptable without creating new wikilawyering opportunities around notification methods.	5.3	5 4/6	2	15.1	4	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION No action needed. Minor clarifying edit already made; does not substantively change canvassing enforcement.
Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion (wt: 5) ☞ Clarification on G15 (3.8k) Discussion about whether AI-generated draft content that acknowledges lack of reliable source coverage qualifies under CSD G15 (content intended for user communication). Participants disagree on interpretation, with no formal proposal to modify criteria.	5.3	6 5/1–5/6	5	19.2	3		NEUTRALITY
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Talk:United States UAP files#UFO or UAP in article title and wikivoice (0.2k) A notice directing editors to a talk page discussion about whether to use 'UFO' or 'UAP' in an article title and in Wikipedia's neutral voice. No substantive discussion or proposal is included in this notice.	5.3	1 5/13	1	13.5	3		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) (wt: 5) ☞ WP:NPRODUCER (7.2k) Discussion examines whether film producers qualify under WP:NCREATIVE for inherited notability, prompted by an AfD. Editors debate whether producers play a sufficiently major creative role to meet the guideline's requirements.	5.1	19 3/4–3/5	6	20.4	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate if discussion moves toward formal clarification. Ensure any guideline change maintains consistent standards across creative professions.
Wikipedia talk:Oversight (wt: 4) ☞ OSPOL 4 and 5 (4.7k) Discussion about whether two Oversight criteria (attack usernames and vandalism removal) should be removed since RevDel tools now exist. Participants clarified that criterion 4 (hideuser for attack usernames) is still needed, and the outdated footnote was removed.	5.1	8 3/25	4	17.5	3	Policy	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Proposal to add note on citation scraping (4.6k) An editor proposes adding guidance clarifying that LLMs may be used to find citations (not generate content) if manually verified. Most respondents agree the current guideline already permits this use and no change is needed. A separate notice links to a Village Pump discussion on presumptive deletion for AI-blocked users.	5.1	7 4/10–4/11	6	20.9	5	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION SOURCES Support clarifying language permitting LLM-assisted source discovery with human verification. Prevents overcriminalization of legitimate research tools.
Wikipedia talk:Ignore all rules (wt: 5) ☞ Question (0.7k) A user asks whether WP:IAR permits bypassing extended confirmed protection (WP:CT) restrictions to create articles that would otherwise meet content standards. A respondent advises against invoking IAR when one has to ask permission.	5.0	2 5/10	2	14.5	3		GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not (wt: 7) ☞ WP:NOTNEWS rewrite? (5.2k) Discussion considers whether to rewrite WP:NOTNEWS policy, with some editors concerned about loosening standards for breaking news coverage while others raise broader questions about Wikipedia's governance structure. No concrete proposal has been drafted yet.	4.9	14 4/6–4/15	3	19.2	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Participate if proposal emerges. A loosened NOTNEWS could affect how current events receive due weight; stricter enforcement could exclude legitimate coverage.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) (wt: 4) ☞ NCORP is completely broken (10.9k) An editor argues NCORP's reliance on press coverage creates regional and sectoral bias, disadvantaging companies from underrepresented areas despite objective significance metrics like revenue or market cap. Respondents defend the current source-based approach, noting it prevents promotional content and reflects community consensus.	4.9	15 3/8–3/9	5	19.0	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY SOURCES Note arguments that source-based notability disadvantages non-Western and niche-industry topics. Discussion closed without substantive engagement on bias concerns.
Neutral point of view/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Millsaps College article – section weight and neutrality (1.6k) An editor affiliated with Millsaps College raises concerns about undue weight and attribution in a section covering a professor's dismissal. They propose a shorter version and request input from uninvolved editors on balance.	4.9	1 5/6	1	15.0	5		NEUTRALITY Participate to ensure coverage of academic freedom controversies is not minimized due to institutional COI pressure.
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch (wt: 4) ☞ Should “fake news” be added to Words to watch? (2.8k) Proposal to add 'fake news' to MOS:LABEL as a value-laden term requiring attribution. Discussion considers whether this is a MoS or NPOV matter, with one editor weakly opposing inclusion.	4.8	4 3/24–3/31	3	16.0	6	Policy	NEUTRALITY Support adding 'fake news' to words to watch. Encourages attribution and prevents politically charged labels from being applied as neutral fact.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Misleading? (54.6k) Discussion questions whether the AFC submission decline template accurately represents Wikipedia policy on source requirements (multiple, in-depth, secondary, independent). Participants debate whether core policies actually mandate all these criteria, with some arguing the template language is misleading and overstates requirements.	4.8	105 1/26–4/29	17	27.5	5		NEUTRALITY SOURCES Note outcome. Stricter-than-policy AFC template language may gatekeep borderline-notable topics; template reform could reduce arbitrary rejections.
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ The London Economic article (1.3k) Two editors request whitelist exceptions for The London Economic articles, citing prior whitelisting and the author's credentials. No broader discussion of blacklist policy or reliability standards is present.	4.8	2 4/8–5/10	2	14.1	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ In what ways are LLMs useful? (4.4k) Editors discuss legitimate use cases for LLMs in Wikipedia editing, such as citation formatting, error-checking, and technical tasks. Some express concern that the guideline may be too restrictive and should clarify permitted uses like copyediting assistance.	4.8	8 2/17–4/8	7	21.6	4	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION Participate to advocate explicit carve-outs for routine technical LLM uses; overly broad restrictions could deter productive editors.
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Why is Heritage.org blacklisted (0.8k) Editor questions why Heritage.org is blacklisted after attempting to add a link. Responders direct to the prior RfC that established the blacklisting.	4.7	3 5/7	3	16.1	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers (wt: 4) ☞ Added link that defines newcomer (0.8k) An editor added a link to an essay defining 'newcomer' in the WP:BITE guideline, citing WP:PGBOLD. One other editor expressed support for the clarification.	4.6	2 1/30–3/14	2	13.7	3	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Paid-contribution disclosure (wt: 5) ☞ Disclosing in edit summary, not the best... (1.9k) Discussion proposes removing the edit summary option for paid-editing disclosure, arguing it is too difficult for reviewers to locate. A respondent notes this would require adopting an alternative disclosure policy under Wikimedia Terms of Use.	4.3	2 4/7	2	15.2	5	Policy	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY Support strengthening disclosure requirements. Clearer paid-editing transparency improves accountability and reduces covert influence.
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Why do we allow to insert section anchors WITHIN other people's comments? (7.6k) Discussion questions whether the talk page guidelines should continue allowing editors to insert anchor templates within others' comments. Participants generally agree the practice is rare and that changing the guideline would be unnecessary instruction creep.	4.3	24 1/16–4/15	8	20.7	3	Policy	GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch (wt: 4) ☞ 'Weasel words' (4.2k) Discussion about whether the 'weasel words' guideline inappropriately requires in-text attribution for sourced statements. The editor argues the current formulation conflates unsourced claims with properly cited scholarly consensus, potentially forcing awkward attribution that misrepresents how common a view is.	4.3	2 4/10	2	14.9	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Engage to clarify that sourced consensus statements should not require named attribution, which can distort due weight by implying minority status.
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not (wt: 7) ☞ Long nutshell (3.8k) Discussion about shortening the WP:NOT nutshell summary, which had expanded significantly. Editors generally support condensing it back to a briefer format while preserving key points about Wikipedia being an encyclopedia with specific scope boundaries.	4.3	5 4/12–4/23	5	20.9	3	Policy	NEUTRALITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Perennial proposals (wt: 4) ☞ Should the argument about 'she for ships' go here? (4.0k) An editor proposes documenting the perennial debate over whether to ban 'she' for ships in the Manual of Style as a recognized recurring proposal. The discussion touches on whether specialized editing communities should control style conventions in their topic areas versus broader community preferences.	4.2	4 5/6–5/7	2	14.9	3		NEUTRALITY
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Expired domain abuse—templifica.com redirects (1.5k) Editor reports expired domains previously cited as sources now redirect to a commercial template site, suggesting SEO link-building abuse. Request made for review and possible blacklisting; discussion redirected to URL change requests page.	4.1	2 5/8	2	13.3	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) (wt: 4) ☞ WP:LISTED (1.4k) Discussion about whether WP:LISTED guidance encouraging searches before nominating publicly traded companies for deletion should be removed or retained. One editor argues the advice is outdated and invites refbombing; others contend it addresses inadequate WP:BEFORE searches for companies.	4.0	3 3/7–3/8	3	15.5	4	Policy	NEUTRALITY Retain LISTED guidance. Removing pre-deletion search encouragement could disadvantage corporate article subjects relative to other topics.
Wikipedia talk:No legal threats (wt: 5) ☞ Perceived legal threats: defamation (2.3k) Editor argues that the 'Perceived legal threats' section is internally inconsistent and holds editors to an impossible standard of avoiding language others might 'incorrectly' interpret as threats. A second editor disagrees, viewing the text as advisory guidance to reduce drama rather than a blocking standard.	4.0	2 3/4–3/20	2	15.4	4	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION NEUTRALITY Support clarifying that editors cannot be sanctioned for others' incorrect interpretations. Overbroad threat policies chill legitimate participation.
Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy (wt: 6) ☞ Implementing the PAM-AfD merge (0.7k) Discussion about implementing a merger between PAM (Proposed Article Merger) and AfD (Articles for Deletion) processes following an RfC. Includes debate about where to place MERGEREASON content after the merge.	4.0	2 3/24–4/4	2	15.4	4	Policy	NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE Review linked discussions to assess whether merged deletion/merger process affects fair treatment of contested topics.
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch (wt: 4) ☞ Is 'hate group' covered by MOS:LABEL? (0.6k) Editor asks whether 'hate group' should be treated as a contentious label under MOS:LABEL, arguing it is subjective and should require attribution rather than appearing in Wikipedia's voice. No formal proposal or consensus process has been initiated.	3.8	1 3/17	1	11.5	5	Policy	NEUTRALITY Participate if discussion develops. Adding 'hate group' to MOS:LABEL would protect groups from unattributed characterization in wikivoice.
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ Nimdzi (0.9k) A user requests whitelisting of nimdzi.com for use as a source. An editor opposes, citing prior sockpuppet spamming of the link and identifying the requester as a paid editor.	3.7	1 5/8	1	11.8	3		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Request to remove unofficialnetworks.com from blacklist (1.6k) A user requested removal of unofficialnetworks.com from the spam blacklist, noting it appears to be a legitimate snow sports news site blacklisted 15+ years ago due to a different ownership. The request was granted after review.	3.7	2 5/4–5/5	2	15.1	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:External links (wt: 4) ☞ ELMAYBE#2 (3.2k) An editor proposes removing outdated guidance in WP:ELMAYBE #2 about large pages and plugin requirements, arguing page size is no longer a significant factor for external link inclusion. Discussion focuses on whether the guidance remains relevant for very large downloads rather than typical web pages.	3.6	6 3/29	2	14.7	3	Policy	SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Merging in parts of Wikipedia:Large language models? (0.5k) A user suggests merging explanatory content from Wikipedia:Large language models into the guideline page to provide rationale for the LLM writing restrictions. No formal proposal or opposition has been posted yet.	3.4	1 3/28	1	13.1	3	Policy	EDITOR_RETENTION
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Motion to Reopen Debate (12.2k) An editor challenges the hatting/closure of a discussion about LLM policy, arguing it constitutes improper cloture and censorship. Multiple editors defend the closure as appropriate given a recent RfC with near-unanimous consensus, citing WP:BLUDGEON and procedural norms.	3.2	33 4/24	7	22.3	5		GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION No action warranted; motion withdrawn and procedural dispute resolved without prejudice to future discussion.
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Wikipedia:Large language model/Noticeboard (9.2k) Proposal to create a dedicated noticeboard for LLM-related discussions, advice, and dispute resolution. Some editors support a specialized venue for policy compliance guidance, while others argue existing forums (Teahouse, Help Desk, AINB) are sufficient.	3.1	17 3/27–3/28	6	21.4	5		EDITOR_RETENTION GOVERNANCE Participate if venue develops. A dedicated noticeboard could either provide safe space for LLM users or become a reporting mechanism with sanctions.
Wikipedia talk:Edit warring (wt: 5) ☞ Here's a thought (12.0k) An editor proposes exempting registered users from 3RR when reverting Temporary accounts, arguing current dispute resolution mechanisms fail for low-traffic articles. Other editors suggest existing procedures are adequate; no formal proposal has been made.	3.0	14 11/18–4/6	6	20.7	5		GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION Oppose differential 3RR treatment based on account type. Creates two-tier editing rights contrary to open participation principles.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Why secondary? (9.1k) An editor asks why Wikipedia notability requires secondary rather than primary sources. Respondents explain the historical conflation of 'secondary' with 'independent,' the value of analytical sources for encyclopedic context, and practical reasons for the current heuristic.	2.9	16 4/20–4/27	10	24.6	3		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ I'm confused about this policy (7.2k) An editor seeks clarification on the LLM content prohibition policy, asking whether AI-assisted articles can be published if verified. Respondents explain the prohibition is categorical, citing volunteer burden and AI training concerns, though some question whether existing tools adequately address content quality regardless of origin.	2.8	16 3/22–3/28	6	21.3	4		EDITOR_RETENTION Note discussion of AI-blocking rationales and potential chilling effect on editors who use AI tools in research workflows.
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ Why isn't this a policy? (4.6k) A user asks why WP:Notability is a guideline rather than a policy. Respondents explain that notability tolerates more exceptions than policy, that editors disagree on what constitutes notability, and that not all standalone pages must meet WP:N. No concrete proposal to change status is made.	2.7	14 4/17	7	22.5	3		NEUTRALITY GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Large language models (wt: 7) ☞ What if AI keeps improving? (4.4k) A user asks whether the LLM guideline could be removed if AI improves. Respondents argue hallucination is intrinsic to LLMs, policies must address current technology, and speculation about future capabilities is not actionable.	2.6	8 12/25–4/11	6	21.8	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Foreign-language Wikipedia reliability discussions (4.8k) Discussion explores whether reliability determinations from non-English Wikipedias should influence English Wikipedia's source assessments. Consensus holds that foreign-language discussions may provide useful information but cannot determine reliability here due to differing standards.	2.6	10 3/18–4/20	5	22.0	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Museum websites and museum display board information (4.9k) An editor asks about guidance for using museum websites and display boards as sources, noting variable quality across institutions. Respondents indicate these are handled case-by-case and generally accepted for uncontroversial claims, with no policy change proposed.	2.5	8 3/9–3/10	4	21.1	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Mike Caulfield's SIFT method (2.8k) An editor asks whether Mike Caulfield's SIFT method for evaluating news source reliability is useful for Wikipedia. Respondents note it does not align with Wikipedia's specific reliability standards and that bias is not disqualifying under WP:RSBIAS.	2.5	7 3/16–3/19	4	20.7	3		SOURCES
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ HQ-11 (9.4k) Dispute over whether reading text from a product nameplate visible in a Weibo photo constitutes original research for the HQ-11 article. Discussion also touches on reliability of Chinese-language sources including military magazines and archived exhibition coverage.	2.4	14 4/12–4/25	5	19.8	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Is Google Translate an LLM? (3.7k) Editors discuss whether Google Translate qualifies as an LLM under Wikipedia's guidelines, given its recent integration of Gemini. The consensus is that the 'Advanced' mode uses Gemini while 'Classic' uses older transformer models, with guidance at WP:LLMTRANSLATE recommended for either.	2.4	8 4/6–4/7	5	20.0	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Shortcuts (3.4k) Discussion about retargeting Wikipedia shortcuts (WP:LLM, WP:LLMPOLICY) to point to the new guideline page on LLM use in article writing. Participants debate whether changing shortcuts would cause confusion given 2200+ existing uses.	2.4	6 3/28–3/31	5	20.0	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view (wt: 9) ☞ WP:NPOV's application under objective qualities (2.0k) An editor asks how NPOV applies to subjects considered objectively immoral. Experienced editors explain that policy requires neutral description of actions with attributed sourced opinions on morality, rather than editorial judgment.	2.4	4 2/24–3/19	3	20.3	3		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers (wt: 4) ☞ There is a serious problem here (1.5k) An editor raises concern that admins may be the primary source of 'biting' newcomers through trivial blocks, questioning enforcement of the BITE guideline. Responders redirect to existing admin conduct policies and note that admins have lost tools for such behavior.	2.1	3 4/8–4/18	3	15.6	4		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Ignore all rules (wt: 5) ☞ Maybe add more clarification (2.4k) A user asks whether WP:IAR permits blocked users to create new accounts to contribute constructively. Respondents clarify that IAR does not override block enforcement and that proper unblock procedures should be followed.	2.0	5 4/10	3	16.8	3		GOVERNANCE EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Large language models (wt: 7) ☞ Use of AI to find sources? (1.3k) An editor asks whether using AI to find academic sources is permitted under LLM policy. Another editor confirms that using AI for source discovery (not content generation) is allowed under current rules.	2.0	3 4/14–4/15	2	16.8	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ archivep75mbjunhxc6x4j5mwjmomyxb573v42baldlqu56ruil2oiad.onion (1.7k) Request to whitelist an Internet Archive .onion domain for use in the Internet Archive article, citing utility for editors and readers facing censorship. Discussion seeks clarification on intended use.	1.9	3 4/16–4/17	3	15.7	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Paid-contribution disclosure (wt: 5) ☞ Shouldn't paid editing not be allowed at all? (1.1k) A user questions whether paid editing should be banned entirely due to NPOV concerns. Another editor argues that a complete ban would reduce transparency by driving paid editors underground.	1.8	3 3/23–3/24	2	14.8	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest (wt: 5) ☞ Self-written source (0.9k) An editor reports that another user added citations to an article where the citation author is the same person as the Wikipedia editor. Discussion notes this relates to WP:REFSPAM but no policy change is proposed.	1.8	2 3/23	2	14.7	3		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Pakistani films (0.3k) A user has posted a notification about a debate on a personal talk page regarding verifiability of publications used for Pakistani film articles. No concrete policy proposal is presented here.	1.8	1 4/11	1	14.8	3		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers (wt: 4) ☞ Is it considered biting if one specific person keeps reverting you page after page? (1.2k) A user asks whether repeated reversions by one editor across multiple pages constitutes 'biting' newcomers, arguing that editors should seek sources before reverting. A responder explains practical constraints on source verification that justify quick reversions.	1.7	2 3/23–3/24	2	14.0	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ The FAQ (1.9k) Editor critiques the FAQ section of the LLM writing guideline, arguing it is defensive, relies on an essay rather than policy for justification, and should acknowledge counterarguments to strict enforcement. No concrete proposal to change the guideline itself is made.	1.7	1 3/28	1	14.1	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Canvassing (wt: 5) ☞ Dunno which appropriate venues to notify outside WikiProjects (0.9k) Editor asks for guidance on where to notify others about discussions outside WikiProjects without violating canvassing rules, citing concerns about WikiProject inactivity. No policy change is proposed.	1.5	1 3/16	1	12.7	3		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Revision deletion (wt: 4) ☞ RD1 and external links (0.5k) Editor asks whether RD1 (revision deletion criterion for copyright violations) applies to external links to copyrighted material, or if blanking suffices. No formal proposal or change suggested.	1.4	1 4/13	1	11.4	3		GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Disruptive editing (wt: 4) ☞ No exemptions and no distinctions needed, right? (1.1k) An editor asks clarifying questions about whether the disruptive editing guideline applies equally to all users regardless of status (vandals, admins, experienced editors, newbies) and seeks clarification on the guideline's scope and intended audience.	0.0	4 4/17	2	14.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY EDITOR_RETENTION
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ Prague Clock Simulator (0.8k) An IP editor requests whitelisting a .xyz domain hosting a Prague astronomical clock simulator for use as an external link. Another editor opposes based on WP:EL guidelines regarding simulators.	0.0	1 5/8	1	11.7	2		SOURCES
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ E. J. Anosike (1.5k) Report of undisclosed conflict of interest where an editor claims to work with a sports figure's media team while denying paid editing. The editor continued making edits after being notified of COI concerns.	0.0	1 5/17	1	14.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ duomo.wirklich.xyz The Milano Astronomical Suncalendar (0.9k) A request to whitelist a personal website about Milan Cathedral's astronomical calendar was declined per WP:EL policy on personal websites. The requester argued the link provides unique information available on German Wikipedia.	0.0	1 5/22	1	11.8	1		SOURCES
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Darren Spedale (1.0k) Report of promotional editing on a biography of a living person, with an editor repeatedly restoring promotional content after removal. Standard BLP enforcement issue with no policy implications.	0.0	1 5/19	1	13.7	1
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ Amnesty International and ADL (0.3k) A discussion about Amnesty International and ADL as sources was moved to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. No substantive content remains at this location.	0.0	1 5/16	1	13.7	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Clarification about archived editing rules (1.8k) An editor seeks clarification on whether fixing a mistaken category link in an archived talk page discussion would violate the guideline against edits that 'change substantive meaning or disrupt context.' This is a narrow implementation question about existing archive-editing rules.	0.0	1 5/22	1	12.3	2		GOVERNANCE
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ Sedo (0.7k) Routine request to whitelist sedo.com for use in the Sedo article's infobox and external links section. Request was approved and added to the spam-whitelist.	0.0	2 4/26–5/1	2	13.7	1		SOURCES
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ National Center on Sexual Exploitation (0.3k) A user flagged an edit to the National Center on Sexual Exploitation article for review at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard. The page was subsequently protected, with the reporter considering the issue resolved.	0.0	1 5/21	1	13.7	2		NEUTRALITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ AMI Labs (1.2k) An editor requests whitelisting the official website of Advanced Machine Intelligence Labs, which uses a blacklisted TLD (.xyz). The request was declined with a workaround suggested, and the article's notability was questioned.	0.0	4 5/10–5/11	2	14.0	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ goaloo.app (1.1k) Routine spam-blacklist addition request for goaloo.app due to football bio refspam. An administrator added the domain to the blacklist and blocked associated proxy IPs.	0.0	2 5/22	2	14.8	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ munley.com (1.2k) A user requests whitelisting of a law firm's official website for use on Wikidata and Wikipedia articles. The request was declined procedurally and redirected to the correct process for globally blacklisted domains.	0.0	2 4/15–4/17	2	14.0	1		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Oversight (wt: 4) ☞ Edit request (17th April 2026) (1.0k) An edit request proposes adding guidance about open proxy usage when accessing IRC for oversight requests. The request was declined as potentially inaccurate.	0.0	2 4/17	2	13.9	1
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Wikipedia:Help_desk#External_links_to_IMDb (0.2k) A user invites discussion at the Help desk about whether IMDb external links are being added excessively to articles. This is a general question about linking practices rather than a policy proposal.	0.0	1 5/11	1	10.0	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:No original research (wt: 7) ☞ Pakistani films (0.3k) A user is soliciting participation in a discussion on their talk page about verifiability of publications used for Pakistani film articles. The discussion is hosted on a user talk page rather than a policy venue.	0.0	1 4/11	1	13.9	2		SOURCES
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Possible LLM use found (0.3k) A discussion about possible LLM use was moved first to Village pump (policy) and then to the AI noticeboard. No substantive discussion remains in this section.	0.0	2 5/27	1	11.0	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Past in the future situations (1.4k) Discussion about how to handle events (business openings/closures) that were announced but lack reliable source confirmation after the fact. One editor suggests using {{asof}} templates or omitting unverified claims.	0.0	2 5/1–5/3	2	15.0	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ florahospitality.com (1.3k) A domain (florahospitality.com) was added to the spam blacklist due to multi-account promotional spam across multiple diffs. The request was fulfilled without dispute.	0.0	2 5/14	2	15.0	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Content assessment (wt: 3) ☞ Link change request (2.2k) A new editor requests updating an outdated example link in the content assessment grading scheme. The request was withdrawn after being informed of past discussions on similar matters.	0.0	4 3/24–4/4	3	15.0	0
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ artdedente.com.au (1.2k) A request to blacklist a domain (artdedente.com.au) for suspected spam was declined because only two accounts added it, below the informal threshold of three. Both accounts were blocked.	0.0	3 5/17	2	14.9	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Merge notices (0.4k) A user asks whether duplicate merge notice templates on talk pages are necessary, citing specific examples where multiple templates about the same merge clutter the page.	0.0	1 5/7	1	11.3	1
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ business.ticketmaster.com (0.8k) A request to whitelist a Ticketmaster subdomain for use in an article infobox was declined because the page lacks useful content. This is a routine technical request with no policy implications.	0.0	2 4/10–4/17	2	13.8	0
Education noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Undisclosed class at Beloved (novel) (1.5k) An editor reported a suspected undisclosed student editing assignment at the Beloved (novel) article. Follow-up determined the activity was an edit-a-thon rather than a class assignment.	0.0	3 4/19–5/6	1	11.3	2
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Wiki Loves Pride banner (0.6k) Organizer of Wiki Loves Pride 2026 asks whether the community agrees to extend the CentralNotice banner display from 15 days to the full month of June. This is a procedural question about banner duration, not a policy change proposal.	0.0	1 5/27	1	11.6	2		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Adding red links to the app version of Wikipedia (0.5k) Discussion about adding red links to the Wikipedia mobile app has been moved to the technical Village Pump. No substantive content remains in this section.	0.0	1 5/26	1	14.1	0
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Merge proposals (1.1k) A routine request for closure of a stalled merge proposal concerning articles about a legal case and related FBI raid. No policy issues or contentious viewpoint matters are raised.	0.0	2 3/17–5/22	1	12.9	2
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:Beatrack reported by User:~2026-30068-30 (Result: Page protected) (1.9k) An edit-warring report over content in an article about women's testimony in Islam. The dispute involves whether cited material from Princeton University Press should be included, with one editor repeatedly reverting additions.	0.0	2 5/27	1	14.1	2		NEUTRALITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ muziquemagazine.com (1.4k) A user requested whitelisting of muziquemagazine.com to cite an interview for a new article. The request was declined by two editors who identified the site as a blackhat SEO blog lacking reliability.	0.0	2 4/9	2	14.1	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Content assessment (wt: 3) ☞ Assessment of one's own contributions (0.8k) An editor asks whether self-assessment of articles using WP:RATER is acceptable. Respondents confirm it is permitted up to B-Class, with higher ratings requiring outside review.	0.0	3 4/14	3	14.2	1
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ What category does an English language novel from Spain go into? (1.4k) A user asks how to categorize an English-language novel written by a Spanish author, noting inconsistencies in novel categorization schemes. Discussion focuses on taxonomy of literary works by language, nationality, and publication country.	0.0	2 5/24	2	14.1	0
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ St Leonard's Catholic School, Durham (0.6k) A user reports a suspected undisclosed conflict of interest involving a single-purpose account editing an article about a school. The reported editor has not responded to inquiries about their connection to the subject.	0.0	1 5/23	1	13.3	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Ext link to official website of 1win (1.5k) A user requests adding a clickable official website link for 1win despite domain spam-blocking, citing WP:ELOFFICIAL. A responder notes the URL is already displayed in the infobox and declines to make it clickable.	0.0	3 5/10–5/11	2	13.3	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ P.E. Moskowitz (0.5k) An editor requested whitelisting of a .xyz personal website domain to cite pronoun preferences for a biographical article. The request was approved and added to the spam whitelist.	0.0	2 4/30–5/1	2	13.4	1		SOURCES
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Abbas Sajwani / AHS Properties (0.7k) A report of possible undisclosed paid editing on articles about a real estate company and its founder. The concern centers on an editor's focused editing pattern and removal of COI-related tags.	0.0	1 5/19	1	13.4	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:No legal threats (wt: 5) ☞ I miss it... (0.4k) A user posts a nostalgic image of a courthouse with no substantive discussion of policy. Another user asks for clarification.	0.0	2 3/18–5/9	2	14.1	0
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ External links may not comply with Wikipedia guidelines (1.7k) A user reports that the Sanctioned Suicide article contains external links to a suicide methods website, asking for compliance review. A respondent explains Tor link guidelines and points to a prior RfC that established consensus for the link.	0.0	2 4/19–4/20	2	13.4	2
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ can't edit talk pages (0.5k) A user reports a technical issue with publishing edits to talk pages. Another editor asks for more details, noting the issue appears intermittent.	0.0	2 5/5	2	13.4	0
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ SAMALA YADAGIRI PRTU (1.7k) A report alleges undisclosed conflict of interest by an editor promoting a draft biography across two accounts, with no response to warnings. The discussion concerns enforcement of COI policy on an individual case.	0.0	1 5/27	1	14.1	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
No original research/Noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Southeast Asian BLP articles have lots and lots of unsourced 'model' claims (0.7k) An editor seeks help removing unsourced claims that Southeast Asian celebrities are 'models' based merely on product endorsements. This is a content cleanup request rather than a policy discussion.	0.0	1 5/24	1	12.5	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Deon L. Butler (0.7k) A user mistakenly posted a draft review request on the Talk page guidelines talk page. Another editor redirected them to the correct location for draft submissions.	0.0	5 4/28	2	13.7	0
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Suggested addition under “Temples” or regional Shiva worship traditions: (0.7k) A user posted a suggested content addition for an article about Shiva temples on the wrong talk page. Another editor redirected them to the appropriate article talk page.	0.0	2 5/13	2	13.7	0
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Anyone can edit Wikipedia, even without an account. (0.3k) Discussion was moved to Village pump (miscellaneous) before substantive content was posted. No WPID-relevant material present in this stub.	0.0	1 5/26	1	13.6	0
Wikipedia talk:Notability (wt: 7) ☞ RfC on MOS:VA sections (0.3k) A notice directing editors to an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Visual arts concerning various sections of MOS:VA. No substantive discussion of notability policy occurs in this section.	0.0	1 4/18	1	13.6	2		NEUTRALITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ wwwkelvinross.com (0.8k) A request to blacklist wwwkelvinross.com due to persistent spamming by multiple accounts and IPs. An admin responded by implementing rangeblocks and adding the domain to the Blocked External Domains list.	0.0	2 5/16	2	14.6	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Protection policy (wt: 5) ☞ ':Extended Confirmed Protected' listed at Redirects for discussion (0.8k) A redirect titled 'Extended Confirmed Protected' has been listed at Redirects for discussion to determine if it meets redirect guidelines. This is a routine redirect housekeeping matter rather than a substantive policy change.	0.0	1 5/13	1	12.6	2	RfC	GOVERNANCE
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Banning policy (wt: 5) ☞ Ban vs block (0.7k) A user asks for clarification on the difference between blocks and bans. Another editor provides a link to the existing policy explanation, with no changes proposed.	0.0	4 4/9–4/10	2	14.5	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Why is CorporateHistory.net blacklisted? (0.7k) A user requests removal of corporatehistory.net from the spam blacklist after adding third-party sources. An editor explains the site was blacklisted due to heavy promotional spam by company-associated accounts.	0.0	2 5/23	1	12.6	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Content assessment (wt: 3) ☞ Add more images (0.7k) A user requests adding B-class and C-class icons to the content assessment table. Another editor explains that only FA, GA, and A-Class articles display icons, so lower classes have no icons to include.	0.0	2 5/27	2	12.7	0
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ athensu.com (0.7k) Routine spam blacklist proposal for athensu.com due to persistent spamming by two accounts. Both accounts were blocked; admin indicates domain will be blacklisted if spamming continues.	0.0	2 5/18	2	14.5	1		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution (wt: 5) ☞ Order issue (0.9k) An editor suggests reordering subsections in the dispute resolution guide, proposing that RFC should appear last as it is often considered a final step. This is a minor organizational suggestion with no policy change proposed.	0.0	1 3/8	1	12.7	2		GOVERNANCE
Wikipedia talk:Assume good faith (wt: 4) ☞ Proper and correct spellings of Bantu languages. (2.1k) An editor posted a request about updating spellings of Bantu languages on the Assume Good Faith talk page, which is unrelated to the AGF guideline itself. The post does not propose any policy changes.	0.0	3 4/3–5/24	2	14.4	0
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ panoramalenstrip.com (0.5k) A spam domain (panoramalenstrip.com) was proposed for blacklisting due to persistent spamming. The request was completed and associated accounts were blocked.	0.0	2 3/27–5/8	2	14.4	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Notability (events) (wt: 4) ☞ Inclusion criteria and Lasting effects dilemma (1.4k) An editor asks whether the notability guideline for events (particularly 'lasting effects') applies only to article creation or also to content within articles. A respondent clarifies that notability determines standalone article existence, not content inclusion.	0.0	2 5/4–5/8	2	14.1	2		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Request for admin help - repeated deletions in spite of notifications and warnings (0.2k) A request for admin help regarding repeated deletions was moved to ANI. No substantive discussion remains at this location.	0.0	1 5/24	1	14.3	0
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ RPP is backlogged (1.5k) A user noted that the Requests for Page Protection queue appeared backlogged. Another editor responded that short backlogs are normal and cyclical.	0.0	4 5/27	2	17.8	0
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Dispute resolution noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Federal subjects of Russia (6.7k) Dispute over whether to include diacritical stress marks on a map of Russian federal subjects to aid pronunciation. One editor argues marks are confusing without explanation; the other argues they are necessary for readers to pronounce names correctly.	0.0	6 5/25–5/27	5	19.6	1
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ User:Senorghost00 competency and/or WP:IDHT concerns based on renewal of unsourced content additions (3.5k) An editor was indefinitely blocked for repeatedly adding unsourced content despite prior warnings and a previous block. The thread discusses whether this constitutes a competency issue or failure to hear consensus.	0.0	6 5/19–5/23	3	19.8	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Idea for series of World leader templates (12.4k) A proposal to create centralized templates for displaying current world leaders to reduce maintenance burden when leaders change. Discussion focuses on technical implementation using Lua modules.	0.0	21 5/15–5/16	3	19.8	0
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ User:Davidstewartharvey changing content on multiple pages based on unsupported theory. (5.1k) A content dispute about the definition of 'pastry' across multiple food-related articles was brought to AN but closed as a content dispute rather than a conduct issue. The matter is being addressed through standard dispute resolution channels.	0.0	5 5/24	3	20.1	1
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ From NPR: We Tracked Down A Fake-News Creator In The Suburbs. Here's What We Learned (1.1k) An editor shares an NPR article from 2016 about tracking down a fake news creator, offering tips for investigating similar sites. The discussion is informational with no proposal to change source policy.	0.0	4 5/24–5/26	4	20.1	2		SOURCES
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Report non‑constructive edits (1.7k) A report of repeated non-constructive edits and reference removals by a temporary account, with documentation of similar behavior across multiple previous accounts. Standard content dispute and vandalism report.	0.0	4 5/26	3	20.2	1
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Behaviour of User:Usenoner on Ladin Wikipedia (1.5k) A user requested help regarding a block on Ladin Wikipedia. The thread was closed as misdirected since English Wikipedia administrators have no jurisdiction over other language Wikipedias.	0.0	5 5/22	4	20.3	0
Wikipedia talk:Content assessment (wt: 3) ☞ Demote grade A (14.9k) A user proposes demoting A-class to below GA-class in the content assessment hierarchy, arguing the current placement is inconsistent with difficulty and recognition. Other editors explain A-class serves different purposes via WikiProject-specific review processes and is not strictly comparable to GA.	0.0	39 1/4–5/17	8	20.3	2
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Kp0414 (2.3k) A user was indefinitely blocked as a vandalism-only account for persistently adding unsourced genre information to music infoboxes despite warnings. The block was uncontroversial and the discussion is now closed.	0.0	5 5/26–5/27	3	20.4	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Why only Wikipedia as an app? (1.7k) A user asks why sister projects like Wiktionary lack mobile apps comparable to Wikipedia's. The discussion concludes with clarification that some apps already exist and the user was unaware.	0.0	7 5/22–5/26	5	20.4	0
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Anyone can edit Wikipedia, even without an account. (3.0k) A new editor raised concerns about anonymous editing enabling bot spam and vandalism. Experienced editors explained existing protections (rate limits, anti-vandal tools, page protection) and defended open editing as Wikipedia's core feature.	0.0	11 5/26–5/27	9	20.6	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Bureaucrats' noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ WereSpielChequers bureaucrat resignation (2.2k) WereSpielChequers has voluntarily resigned as a bureaucrat, citing a desire to reduce screen time. Multiple editors express gratitude for their service.	0.0	8 5/22–5/27	8	20.8	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Jan olieslagers - doubling down on personal attacks (4.7k) A user reports uncivil comments from another editor and requests a reminder about WP:CIVIL policy rather than sanctions. Another editor has issued a warning, and the situation is being monitored for further incidents.	0.0	8 5/25–5/26	3	20.9	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Law watcher12 (1.3k) A new user was indefinitely blocked for personal attacks and lack of encyclopedic intent after creating non-encyclopedic content and responding to warnings with hostility. The block was a routine admin action under WP:NOTHERE.	0.0	5 5/25	4	21.1	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Incoherent IP Threat in Hungarian (1.6k) A report about an IP editor posting threatening content in Hungarian on a talk page. The IP was blocked and the content was revision-deleted.	0.0	5 5/25	4	21.2	0
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Requests for comment (4.4k) This is a queue of requests for formal closures of stalled RfCs on various article talk pages. Topics include disputed article content (Shebakia origins, US Semiquincentennial controversies, 2026 Iran war infobox, Zionism, source assessment, Jesus article).	0.0	16 3/6–5/27	8	21.2	2	RfC	GOVERNANCE
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Administrative discussions (4.8k) Routine closure requests for stalled administrative discussions at ANI and Administrative Action Review. Topics include editor conduct issues, potential POINT editing, and rollback review, all awaiting formal closure.	0.0	16 4/8–5/19	8	21.3	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY GOVERNANCE
Village pump (WMF) (wt: 7) ☞ Hopelessly locked out, need help. (2.1k) A user reports being locked out of their account due to delayed confirmation emails. The issue was tracked to a Phabricator ticket and resolved.	0.0	6 5/17–5/22	6	21.3	1
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Requested moves (2.1k) Routine requests for formal closure of article title move discussions. One has been closed, another relisted for additional discussion.	0.0	7 5/7–5/27	4	17.8	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ 椿 (汉坦病毒感染了所有反破坏者) TPA revoke (0.5k) A user's talk page access was revoked after they removed a speedy deletion template. The request was completed by an administrator.	0.0	3 5/25	2	17.9	1
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Uninvolved closer needed. (1.0k) A request for an uninvolved editor to close and collapse a discussion at Talk:Conspiracy theory. The request is procedural and does not propose policy changes or address substantive content disputes.	0.0	3 5/25–5/26	3	18.0	2		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:JDtoBee reported by User:Aesurias (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks) (3.7k) A user was partially blocked for 2 weeks for edit warring on an article about a California tax initiative. The reporter alleges the blocked user was reverting against consensus and using AI-generated responses on the talk page.	0.0	26 5/26–5/27	3	18.0	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Appeal full article ECP of Adam Hamawy (1.3k) An editor appeals full-article extended confirmed protection on a BLP, arguing only one section warranted protection. Admins explain section-only protection is not technically possible.	0.0	5 5/27	3	18.2	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:Hippo43 reported by User:~2026-31589-49 (Result: Warned user(s)) (5.6k) An edit warring report was filed against User:Hippo43 over disputed nationality wording in a biography article. An admin warned the user but noted one revert was exempt under BLP policies; the dispute continues on the talk page.	0.0	10 5/27–5/28	3	18.3	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Wikipedia talk:Deprecated sources (wt: 6) ☞ Non-deprecated source on the list (1.1k) Editors identified and corrected accidental inclusion of non-deprecated sources (The Free Press, WP:IMC) on the deprecated sources list due to a transclusion error. No policy change was proposed or discussed.	0.0	6 5/14–3/24	4	18.3	2		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Protection policy (wt: 5) ☞ Can protected pages in a given user's user-space be edited by that user? (4.7k) A user asks whether page protection in userspace can be overridden by the page owner. The discussion confirms that standard protection levels apply regardless of namespace ownership, with no policy change proposed.	0.0	8 5/17–5/18	4	18.4	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Temp account making breaking changes to Template:Systems of government, rollback required due to multiple edits (1.2k) A temporary account made disruptive edits to a template causing errors. An administrator reverted the changes and suggested using the talk page for future discussions.	0.0	3 5/26	2	18.6	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Mynameisfakeisthatok (1.4k) Report of a user repeatedly adding unsourced content to a school article despite reverts. A partial block was applied.	0.0	3 5/27	2	18.6	1
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Participation in move requests (5.8k) A user requested removal of a conditional unblock restriction preventing participation in move requests. An administrator declined, issuing a final warning instead after the user admitted to forgetting the restriction and violating it twice.	0.0	9 5/24	2	18.7	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Edit request (2.5k) A minor copyedit request to replace 'save for' with more accessible phrasing on the LLM writing guideline. Discussion focused purely on wording clarity, not policy substance.	0.0	11 4/24	4	18.9	1
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Request for deleting userpage :User:DingTheFoxBoi (1.2k) A request to delete a userpage under WP:G6 (housekeeping) criteria because it contained biography-style content. The page was deleted.	0.0	4 5/26	3	19.0	0
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Temporary account exclusively breaking templates (2.3k) A temporary account making disruptive edits to reference URLs and templates in women's basketball articles was reported and blocked pending explanation of their editing pattern.	0.0	2 5/27–5/28	2	19.0	1
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ 2023 bill se sambandhit jankari (1.1k) A user posted a non-English query about a 2023 bill, which editors identified as likely Hindi. The thread involves redirecting the user to appropriate resources rather than any policy discussion.	0.0	5 4/19–4/20	3	19.0	0
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Second Opinion on closed WP:SPI Investigation (1.4k) An editor seeks a second opinion on a closed sockpuppet investigation they believe was incorrectly resolved. The thread was quickly closed as cross-posting/forum shopping.	0.0	3 5/26	3	19.1	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Disruptive editing / adding unsourced material by User:Daniel.9 (1.5k) Editors report User:Daniel.9 for repeatedly adding unsourced material and misusing minor edit flags despite warnings. Discussion focuses on individual content policy violations rather than systemic policy concerns.	0.0	3 5/24–5/26	3	19.2	1
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Draft:Brett M. Rosen (4.2k) Editors discussed removing and revision-deleting names of non-notable individuals from a draft biography, citing WP:BLPCRIME. The issue was resolved with revdel and AFC decline.	0.0	13 5/18–5/19	4	19.2	2		NEUTRALITY
Dispute resolution noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ Imran Khan (5.1k) Editors dispute whether to include a well-sourced 1996 libel case in the Imran Khan biography, citing article length constraints and disagreement over encyclopedic value and proper sourcing alignment.	0.0	5 5/23–5/27	5	19.4	2		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:LLYG Mista reported by User:MrActiniuM (Result: User already indeffed as sock) (3.6k) A user was reported for edit warring on the Pennsylvania article and was subsequently indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet. The matter is resolved.	0.0	17 5/24–5/25	7	21.4	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Long term disprutive edits by User:RojasDawson (6.1k) ANI report regarding a user persistently adding unsourced content to Pokémon articles despite warnings. The user was blocked from article space for failing to engage with the concerns raised.	0.0	10 5/20–5/27	5	23.1	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Bureaucrats' noticeboard (wt: 5) ☞ May 2026 administrator elections results (9.2k) Routine bureaucrat request to sysop seven editors who passed the May 2026 administrator elections. Minor procedural discussion about timing expectations and whether pinging bureaucrats was necessary.	0.0	20 5/20–5/23	11	23.2	2		GOVERNANCE
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Disruptive editor in contentious spaces (7.7k) An editor was indefinitely blocked for persistent policy violations including unsourced content, edit warring, MOS violations, and disruptive behavior in South Asian topics despite numerous warnings. The block was supported by multiple editors citing competence or intentional disruption concerns.	0.0	8 5/25	5	23.3	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Looking for a lift to my 'All Things Michael Jacksonian' topic ban to participate in arbitration case (4.5k) A topic-banned editor requests a lift to participate in an ArbCom case. Discussion advises the editor to ask ArbCom directly rather than ANI/AN for such exemptions.	0.0	11 5/22–5/24	7	23.4	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Manasludamase (18.1k) An enforcement request under South Asia contentious topics sanctions alleges personal attacks by Manasludamase against InfernoHues during a content dispute about Bahun origins. Administrators discussed options including warnings, topic bans, or blocks, ultimately issuing a warning for personal attacks.	0.0	22 4/24–5/25	7	23.5	2	RfC	ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Continued disruptive editing and refusal to comunicate (11.5k) An editor reports Newcumer80 for repeated infobox typos and failure to engage. A counterargument invokes WP:BITE, suggesting the warnings were overly harsh toward a newcomer, and requests a boomerang sanction against the filer.	0.0	11 5/21–5/25	5	23.5	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Ongoing disruption by IP - urgent assistance required - User:~2026-19157-12 Persistent genre editing (4.1k) A user reports an IP editor making repeated unsourced genre edits to film articles despite multiple warnings. The IP was blocked for one week for disruptive editing.	0.0	7 5/14–5/27	6	23.6	1
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Unblock request from Angelgreat (7.0k) An indefinitely blocked editor requests unblock via UTRS, citing remorse for copyright violations, personal attacks on admins, and disruptive editing. Multiple administrators oppose the request, citing persistent past issues including block evasion and lack of constructive contributions.	0.0	9 5/21–5/22	7	23.7	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User I dont like cricket I love it (6.5k) A user reported another editor for allegedly adding incorrect information and using hostile edit summaries in a content dispute about stadium naming. The dispute was resolved through third-party opinion, and participants recommend closing without action.	0.0	8 5/23–5/26	6	23.9	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Disruptive behavior by User:ShiraziPersPolis and associated IPs (7.2k) A user was reported for incivility, edit warring, and violating Armenia-Azerbaijan contentious topic restrictions. The user was blocked and subsequently confirmed as a sock of a previously banned editor.	0.0	13 5/21–5/25	6	24.0	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ 'Do Not Notify' list of users for Twinkle (16.7k) Discussion proposes a Twinkle feature allowing users to opt out of automated deletion-related notifications, with use cases including deceased users, those who explicitly request exclusion, and LTA accounts. Debate centers on whether opting out undermines editorial responsibility versus respecting user preferences.	0.0	18 5/19–5/24	7	24.3	2
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Personal attacks by newly created IP (4.7k) Report of personal attacks by a new IP account suspected of sockpuppetry. Discussion focuses on blocking, CheckUser limitations, and article protection in a contentious topic area.	0.0	15 5/25–5/26	8	24.9	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Blue Square Thing (11.4k) A content dispute between two editors over cricket history articles escalated to ANI, with accusations of hounding, WP:BITE violations, and incompetence. The thread was closed after the complainant left the site; respondents noted potential boomerang concerns and suggested an interaction ban if both editors return.	0.0	15 5/22–5/26	8	25.5	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ IP removals without discussion (20.9k) Content dispute over IPA transcription additions to Italian song articles escalated into edit warring. One editor received a 24-hour block; discussion redirected to WikiProject Songs talk page.	0.0	31 5/24–5/27	8	25.9	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Explain the alteration of protection at the Arbitration enforcement on Wikipedia (8.5k) A user asks an unclear question about protection policy at Arbitration Enforcement. Discussion devolves into identifying the user as a possible LTA sock and debating whether disclosing geolocation data from TAIV tools violates privacy guidelines.	0.0	27 5/23–5/25	12	26.2	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Proposal: Eliminate anything that locks in an obsolete version. (15.9k) Proposal to remove or delink outdated spoken Wikipedia audio files that may contain stale BLP violations or copyright issues. Discussion focuses on practical maintenance concerns and accessibility, not viewpoint diversity or editorial fairness.	0.0	30 5/23–5/28	15	27.7	2
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Make archival links to websites mandatory (15.5k) A proposal to make archival links mandatory for website citations to prevent link rot. Respondents generally oppose, citing existing bot automation, page size concerns, and practical limitations with archiving certain sites.	0.0	34 5/20–5/26	19	28.8	2		SOURCES
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ User:Tjcw01 is WP:NOTHERE, implies they may conduct meatpuppetry in the future (25.0k) A new editor was indefinitely blocked for promotional editing, meatpuppetry concerns, and alleged LLM use after repeatedly promoting personal software in an AfD discussion. The block was uncontested, with discussion noting the editor's failure to understand Wikipedia's non-promotional purpose.	0.0	55 5/20–5/28	17	29.3	2		EDITOR_RETENTION ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Vzno000 (5.4k) A user requested creation of an LTA (Long-term abuse) page for a sockpuppeting vandal. The discussion was closed per WP:DENY, with administrators explaining that LTA pages are not created for obvious vandals to avoid providing them recognition.	0.0	14 5/26	10	30.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Persistent removal of a draft rejection and CSD tag (2.1k) A user persistently removed draft rejection and CSD tags, was blocked for suspected block evasion. A subsequent note mentions a crosswiki LTA investigation.	0.0	4 5/27	4	21.4	1
Reliable sources/Noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Using a YouTube video as a source (2.4k) An editor asks whether YouTube video reviews can be used as sources for a video game article. Respondents cite WP:SOCIALMEDIA policy and clarify that reliability depends on the uploader, not the platform; the question was resolved with an alternative newspaper source.	0.0	8 5/25	5	21.5	2		SOURCES
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ AI suggestion helper when creating new articles (8.7k) Discussion proposes AI-assisted suggestions to help new article creators fix technical issues like formatting and missing references. Participants express cautious support for technical checks while opposing AI-generated content suggestions due to concerns about model biases.	0.0	8 5/16–5/20	5	21.5	2		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ An attempt to appeal an AfC decision (9.7k) An editor with a declared COI appeals repeated AfC rejections for a draft about their own film, alleging inconsistent application of notability guidelines. The thread was closed as forum shopping after the account was indefinitely blocked.	0.0	6 5/24–5/27	4	21.6	2		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Saving Abel is now two competing bands. Permanent ECP requested for page (3.1k) A request for extended confirmed protection on the Saving Abel article due to edit-warring between competing band factions. An admin applied 1-year ECP and noted concerns about article quality and sourcing.	0.0	7 5/27	4	21.7	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Gillesroi seems to be a single-purpose account (3.6k) A single-purpose account (Gillesroi) was indefinitely blocked for persistent promotional editing and spam attempts on the Lipogram article across multiple wikis. The case involves standard spam enforcement with no policy dispute.	0.0	5 5/26–5/27	4	21.8	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Sockshirt - serious CIR issues relating to sourcing (3.9k) An editor was indefinitely blocked for competence issues related to sourcing after multiple warnings and a prior temporary block. The blocking admin cited WP:NOTHERE and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT as justification.	0.0	6 5/25	4	21.9	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Disruptive editing by temp account (4.5k) A temporary account user was blocked from mainspace for repeatedly adding ribbon images to infoboxes without engaging in discussion despite multiple warnings. The block is intended to prompt communication rather than as a punitive measure.	0.0	7 5/25–5/27	4	22.0	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Personal Lists for our saved pages (4.4k) A new user requests a feature to organize saved pages into custom named lists. Responses point to existing workarounds (user subpages, mobile app features) and direct the user to the Wikimedia Foundation's Reader Experience team for feature requests.	0.0	10 5/18–5/20	5	22.0	0
Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement (wt: 7) ☞ Selbstporträt (7.7k) An enforcement request at AE concerning alleged BRD and contentious topics violations was closed without action after administrators determined no enforced BRD was active and the filer withdrew the request when the other editor opened a talk page discussion.	0.0	15 5/24–5/25	6	22.2	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (proposals) (wt: 8) ☞ Did You Know… (2.2k) An IP editor criticizes the Did You Know section on the Main Page as 'politically charged' and 'editorialized.' Respondents defend DYK's format or joke about alternatives, with no concrete proposal for change.	0.0	7 5/21–5/23	6	22.2	2		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Myuoh kaka roi (2.0k) An invalid ANI report accused a user of edit warring without providing diffs or evidence. The report was closed as baseless after other editors noted the lack of substantiation.	0.0	5 5/25	5	22.3	0
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Problematic behavior of Al-Hilali Z (6.7k) A conduct dispute at ANI regarding alleged source misuse and bad-faith editing on the article Daghaghra. The complaint concerns POV-pushing and improper sourcing practices, with administrators advising the reporter to use dispute resolution processes first.	0.0	10 5/26–5/27	5	22.3	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Closure requests (wt: 5) ☞ Deletion discussions (5.7k) A routine page listing pending closure requests for various deletion discussions (AfDs, CfDs, TfDs, MfDs). Most items are procedural requests for stalled discussions to be formally closed.	0.0	24 2/28–5/27	10	22.4	2	RfC	NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Slow edit war at makossa, an African music genre (2.7k) Report of a slow edit war involving alleged WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH violations, possible LLM use, and copyright violations at the makossa article. The editor was blocked for 24 hours, evaded the block, and the block was extended to one week.	0.0	5 5/26–5/27	5	22.5	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ An idea for Link Circle visualizations in Wikipedia (5.2k) A user proposes adding optional 'Link Circle' visualizations to the 'What links here' tool to display article connections in a color-coded circular diagram. Discussion focuses on technical feasibility and usability concerns, with no policy implications.	0.0	12 5/25–5/27	7	22.6	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Quintus tullius cicero 46 (3.4k) An editor was blocked for one week for personal attacks and edit warring on Turkish military history content. The blocking admin noted that further issues could result in an indefinite block.	0.0	6 5/27	5	22.7	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ WikiProjects in Main Page (7.6k) Proposal to add a link to WikiProjects on the Main Page. Discussion focuses on practical concerns about maintaining an accurate directory of active WikiProjects, with generally positive reception to the concept.	0.0	16 5/21–5/28	7	22.9	2		PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Editor once blocked from a page still edit-warring (5.5k) A dispute over edit-warring on the Retro (film) article led to an indefinite block of an IP editor for personal attacks. No policy changes are proposed; this is a routine conduct matter.	0.0	12 5/27	6	22.9	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view (wt: 9) ☞ Pakistani films (0.3k) A user is soliciting participation in a discussion on their talk page about verifiability of sources used for Pakistani film articles. The notice provides no details about specific policy concerns or proposals.	0.0	1 4/11	1	15.7	2		SOURCES NEUTRALITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist (wt: 4) ☞ munley.com (1.9k) A user requests whitelisting of a law firm's official website for use on Wikidata and Wikipedia articles. The request was declined procedurally and redirected to the correct process for globally blacklisted domains.	0.0	3 4/13–5/2	3	15.8	1		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Reply tool (1.9k) A user asked whether the Talk page guidelines should mention the Reply tool for contributing. Another editor clarified that such guidance belongs on the Help:Talk pages page instead, and a brief technical discussion about Reply tool bugs followed.	0.0	7 5/13–5/17	3	15.8	1
Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy (wt: 6) ☞ Audio files (1.2k) An editor asks whether administrators are expected to check audio files embedded in articles to ensure they do not contain revision-deleted material. Another editor suggests comparing file dates to revdel dates as a practical workaround.	0.0	3 5/27–5/28	2	15.8	2
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Why is translation allowed to English but not from English? (1.1k) A user asks why the LLM guideline permits machine translation into English Wikipedia but not from English to other wikis. Another editor clarifies that enwiki guidelines cannot bind other language Wikipedias.	0.0	2 3/27	2	15.8	2
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Request for feedback and possible approval of AfC biography draft (1.3k) A user requested feedback on a pending AfC biography draft. The discussion was archived after the draft was deleted due to the submitter blanking it during a departure, with references to COI, paid editing, copyright, and sockpuppetry concerns.	0.0	2 5/19–5/24	2	15.9	2
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (wt: 6) ☞ What to do if a non-extended confirmed editor nominates themselves? (1.4k) An editor asks how to handle an RfA self-nomination by a user who does not meet the extended confirmed requirement. Responses suggest userfying the page per existing practice.	0.0	3 4/30	2	15.9	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Education noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Edits for a 'university religion class wiki editing assignment' (1.7k) Editors identified student editing from a university religion class not coordinated through Wiki Ed. The edits were reverted for original research and circular sourcing, and outreach to the instructor is being pursued.	0.0	4 4/27	4	15.9	2
Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines (wt: 4) ☞ Question March 22 2026 (2.4k) A user asked whether bot-generated 'External links modified' notices can be deleted from article talk pages rather than archived. Another editor confirmed that such deletions are permitted per prior RfC.	0.0	6 3/23	3	15.9	1
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ Subject is not longer at the same position (1.8k) An editor requests updating a living person's professional title in a biography article from 'Dean' to current positions, citing verifiable sources. This is a routine factual correction request with no policy implications.	0.0	1 5/26	1	15.9	1
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Paul du Quenoy (1.3k) An IP editor is reported for potential undisclosed conflict of interest related to the Paul du Quenoy article, including use of 'we' and failure to respond to COI questions. The IP has responded and discussions are ongoing.	0.0	3 5/23–5/24	2	15.9	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Request for review of unfairly deleted Wikipedia Article of Ex Miss El Salvador Public Personality (1.6k) A self-identified PR team requests review of a 2017 AfD redirect, claiming the article was unfairly targeted. Respondents note team accounts are prohibited and direct them to proper draft submission channels.	0.0	3 5/25	2	16.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion (wt: 5) ☞ Applying G4 to different formats of the same file (0.8k) A user asks whether G4 (recreation of deleted content) applies when a file is re-uploaded in a different format after FFD deletion. Respondents indicate G4 applies unless the format change addresses the deletion rationale.	0.0	3 4/30	3	16.0	2		NEUTRALITY
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Mohammed Tayem (1.6k) A report alleges that an article about a marketing executive is promotional and possibly a paid or self-promotional edit. The accused editor claims they only translated content and did not make substantive edits.	0.0	4 5/19–5/20	2	16.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Fringe theories/Noticeboard (wt: 7) ☞ Baalbek (0.4k) A brief notice about a Talk:Baalbek discussion regarding Helipolitan Triad references, with an observation that agreed-upon changes have not yet been implemented. No policy proposal or substantive fringe dispute is presented in this section.	0.0	2 5/20–5/21	2	16.0	2		NEUTRALITY
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:Hhl95 reported by User:Danners430 (Result: Partially blocked 1 month) (1.9k) A user was reported and partially blocked for 1 month for edit warring on the Amsterdam Airport Schiphol article regarding flag icons, despite talk page consensus against their preferred version.	0.0	2 5/26–5/27	2	16.1	1
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ Scottish Daily Mail (0.5k) An editor asks whether the Scottish Daily Mail shares the deprecation status of the Daily Mail. Another editor confirms they are treated as the same source.	0.0	3 5/7	2	16.1	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ droneasaservice.com (1.5k) Routine spam-blacklist discussion about blocking a domain (droneasaservice.com) due to repeated spam and sockpuppet activity. An administrator is investigating and considering adding the domain to the blacklist.	0.0	5 4/23–4/24	2	15.1	1		SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not (wt: 7) ☞ Am I too rigid or what, especially on reality TV winners? (2.1k) An editor reflects on their repeated AfD nominations against reality TV winner articles and wonders if their notability standards are too rigid. No policy change is proposed; the post is self-reflective about past deletion efforts.	0.0	1 3/28	1	15.1	2		NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Footnote (0.6k) Brief exchange about retaining an explanatory footnote defining LLMs, resolved without dispute. No policy change proposed or debated.	0.0	2 3/21	2	15.3	1
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ British Institute at Ankara (3.6k) Editors discuss whether specific external links for the British Institute at Ankara article should remain in the article body or be moved to the External links section, applying WP:ELBODY and WP:ELOFFICIAL guidelines.	0.0	8 4/22–4/23	3	15.3	1
Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Changes to the functionaries team, April 2026 (2) (0.6k) ArbCom announces the voluntary removal of checkuser permissions for Versageek at their own request. No discussion or concerns are raised.	0.0	2 4/22	2	15.3	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Review request: Draft:LNET (0.7k) A user declares a conflict of interest as a professional collaborator of LNET and requests independent review of their draft article. A reviewer notes the draft needs to be written in English first.	0.0	2 5/19	2	15.4	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Request to remove Manning.com from the global spam blacklist (2.3k) An editor requested removal of Manning.com from the spam blacklist to enable citing their software development books. The request was declined, with the administrator noting books can be cited via ISBN instead of publisher website links.	0.0	4 5/7	2	15.4	2		SOURCES
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 March 2026 (0.8k) An empty edit request was submitted to the LLM article-writing guideline page and promptly declined by an editor for lacking any specified changes.	0.0	2 3/24	2	15.5	1
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ COI edit request at Talk:Accesso—no response after 4 weeks (0.9k) A disclosed paid editor requests review of a stalled edit request at Talk:Accesso. The discussion was hatted noting a general backlog exists, with no policy implications raised.	0.0	2 5/20	2	15.6	2
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Maynor Jacobo Cuyún Salguero (0.9k) A user reports that unverifiable information is being repeatedly added to a BLP article. Another editor has requested page protection to prevent further violations.	0.0	2 5/22	2	15.6	1
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Edit request for Jay M. Bernhardt (0.9k) A COI editor requested help with updating or removing unsourced content from a BLP article. The request was closed as forum shopping, with the closer noting BLPN is not a shortcut for edit requests.	0.0	2 5/23–5/27	2	15.6	2
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Factual errors on Michael Barber, Baron Barber of Chittlehampton (1.0k) A user with a declared conflict of interest requests help correcting factual errors in a BLP article about Michael Barber, citing sourced information and a backlogged COI queue. Another editor responded on the talk page.	0.0	2 5/19	2	15.7	2
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Jad Adams (1.0k) A biographical subject (Jad Adams) asks how to add factual information to their own Wikipedia article after an edit was removed as promotional. They were directed to the edit request process.	0.0	2 5/25	2	15.7	2		NEUTRALITY
External links/Noticeboard (wt: 3) ☞ Honkai Star Rail Wiki (Fandom) (14.3k) Discussion about whether external links to a Fandom wiki for a video game should be included in Wikipedia articles, focusing on copyright and fair use concerns regarding background images on the external site. Editors debate whether the external site's use of copyrighted images is properly licensed.	0.0	30 4/18–4/20	3	16.3	2		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ leni.co and timetailor.com (3.3k) Request to blacklist leni.co and timetailor.com due to coordinated spam ring activity using LLM-assisted reference spam. Domains were added to global blacklist and cleanup completed.	0.0	6 5/8–5/10	3	17.1	1		SOURCES
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ brew.tv (3.4k) A request to blacklist brew.tv due to coordinated spam by sockpuppet accounts was approved and added to the spam-blacklist. CheckUser confirmed most accounts as related.	0.0	6 5/18–5/20	3	17.1	2		SOURCES
Administrative action review (wt: 7) ☞ Nomination for Deletion urgent matter regarding Elected official (2.5k) A user requests administrator intervention regarding an article nominated for deletion about an elected official, citing concerns about the subject's reputation. The request was closed as out of scope since no administrator tools were involved.	0.0	2 4/16	2	17.2	1
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ Dark theme for the header (4.2k) Discussion concerns technical CSS/dark theme styling fixes for spam-blacklist header templates and moving indicator pages to template space. No policy, governance, or content neutrality issues are raised.	0.0	8 4/29–4/30	3	17.2	0
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ WP:Files for discussion backlogged (0.8k) An editor notes that Files for Discussion has a significant backlog of unclosed discussions, some dating back months. Discussion suggests recruiting more admins to address backlogs.	0.0	3 5/27	2	17.3	2		GOVERNANCE
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Synchronisation problems between wiki pages (3.5k) A user asks how to fix interwiki synchronization issues between Wikipedia language editions for synonymous plant names. Editors discuss resolving this through Wikidata merges.	0.0	8 5/24–5/25	4	17.3	0
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ 'Former', without explicit statement? (0.7k) A user asks whether describing a living person as a 'former' actor without explicit sourcing constitutes original research under BLP policy. One response suggests it is a minor concern.	0.0	2 5/7	2	17.3	2		NEUTRALITY
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Regarding Problem on List of equipment of the Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces (1.3k) A user reports another editor for failing to engage in consensus-building on a military equipment list article. Respondents note this appears to be a content dispute and edit war rather than a conflict of interest issue.	0.0	3 5/24–5/26	3	17.3	1
Wikipedia talk:Civility (wt: 6) ☞ Edit request 6 April 2026 (1.4k) A user requested a minor edit to change the section heading from 'Being right is not enough' to 'Being right isn't enough' and update the shortcut accordingly. The request was declined as unnecessary.	0.0	3 4/6–4/7	3	17.3	1	Policy
Wikipedia talk:Consensus (wt: 8) ☞ how-to steps (0.8k) A user asks for clearer how-to instructions in the Consensus policy about what steps follow after consensus is determined. A response clarifies that achieved consensus should simply be implemented.	0.0	2 4/12	2	17.3	2		GOVERNANCE
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Charles Tremayne (1.2k) Editors flagged the Charles Tremayne BLP article for poor sourcing. The article was stubbed and taken to AfD after speedy deletion was declined, with discussion of source reliability and notability criteria.	0.0	5 5/22–5/27	3	17.3	2		NEUTRALITY SOURCES
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources (wt: 8) ☞ Ayesha Singh (0.7k) A user requests help cleaning up unreliable sources on the Ayesha Singh article. Another editor encourages them to make the improvements themselves.	0.0	5 4/17–4/18	2	17.3	1
Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ M. Tamilkudimagan (1.6k) A user with a disclosed family relationship to a politician has been reported for COI editing despite warnings. The editor has acknowledged the issue and agreed to use talk pages for future changes.	0.0	3 5/14–5/18	3	17.4	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee (wt: 6) ☞ add shortcut? (1.6k) A user requests adding a shortcut link (WP:WORDL) to an ArbCom restriction page for convenience. The request was completed without substantive discussion.	0.0	6 5/16	3	17.4	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Moves reverted, but associated protection settings not fixed (1.1k) A user requests administrator help to restore protection settings after reverting page moves that broke a bot. Another user notes that page moves don't normally change protection settings.	0.0	2 5/21	2	17.6	0
Wikipedia talk:Harassment (wt: 5) ☞ Edit history to dox somebody? (1.8k) An editor asks whether encoding doxxing information through edit history patterns violates harassment policy. Responses advise referring such cases to Oversight privately rather than discussing publicly.	0.0	4 5/24	4	17.7	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ AIV (1.4k) An editor requests admin assistance with a backlog at the Administrator intervention against vandalism page. Discussion focuses on operational workflow and report quality, not policy changes.	0.0	3 5/23–5/24	2	17.7	1
Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring (wt: 6) ☞ User:Adakiko edit warring (Result: Both warned) (2.2k) Edit warring report regarding disputed sourcing and content about quality of life claims in the article on post-apartheid South Africa inequality. Both editors warned; no policy change proposed.	0.0	5 5/26	3	17.7	2		SOURCES
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Article about Laura Luu for self-promotion (2.3k) An IP editor requested removal of a BLP article alleging self-promotion and defamation. A non-admin closed the thread, suspecting the complaint itself was a bad-faith attempt to defame the subject.	0.0	3 5/25	2	16.3	1
Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (wt: 6) ☞ Draft:Satomi Arakane (2.7k) A BLP noticeboard discussion about an AFC draft containing personal information about a non-notable subject. The draft was declined, sources were removed, and the discussion was closed with revdel applied.	0.0	5 5/23–5/26	2	16.4	2		NEUTRALITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ agefinder.org (1.5k) A request to blacklist agefinder.org for persistent spam was completed. A subsequent removal request was denied due to continued spam attempts.	0.0	5 3/27–5/8	3	16.5	2		SOURCES
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ Possible LLM use found (0.3k) A discussion about possible LLM use was moved from Village Pump (miscellaneous) to the AI noticeboard. No substantive discussion or policy proposal is present in this section.	0.0	2 5/27	1	16.5	1		EDITOR_RETENTION
Village pump (miscellaneous) (wt: 4) ☞ Consultation on one user and/or IP (for relatively bad behaviour) (5.9k) Editors seek advice on handling a user who blanked their talk page and may be continuing disruptive image-replacement edits via an IP address. Discussion focuses on content dispute resolution and whether to request page protection.	0.0	9 5/25–5/27	3	16.6	1
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Village pump (idea lab) (wt: 7) ☞ Bot for automatic source rescue (1.1k) A user proposes creating a bot to automatically archive links from websites prone to link rot, such as Yahoo! News Japan. Discussion clarifies existing tools like InternetArchiveBot.	0.0	3 5/17	2	16.7	1
Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources (wt: 7) ☞ En dash for prefix (1.2k) A minor formatting discussion about whether to use an en dash or hyphen in the prefix 'pre–October 2020' per MOS:PREFIXDASH. Purely a typographical correction with no substantive policy implications.	0.0	2 5/22	2	16.7	0
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (wt: 9) ☞ Myraid of issues by editor (1.7k) Report alleging sockpuppetry and repeated creation of a non-notable article by related accounts. Request for blocking and potential sockpuppet investigation.	0.0	1 5/27	1	16.8	1
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Lower case redirect (0.6k) A user requested a lowercase redirect (WP:newllm) to the LLM writing guideline page, which was subsequently created. A follow-up question asks whether WP:LLMWRITE should also redirect there.	0.0	3 3/21–3/22	3	16.8	1
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Restore the deleted page into my namespace (0.4k) A user requests restoration of deleted template pages to their userspace. They are redirected to the appropriate venue (WP:REFUND).	0.0	2 5/25	2	16.8	0
Village pump (policy) (wt: 10) ☞ :Kiwi Farms has an RfC (0.6k) An RfC is announced regarding whether to include the Kiwi Farms website URL in the article's infobox. This is a content-level editorial decision about a specific article rather than a policy discussion.	0.0	1 5/20	1	16.9	2	RfC	NEUTRALITY
Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons (wt: 8) ☞ Incorrect info (0.4k) A user requests correction of information about a person named Daniel Seidl, but no such article exists on English Wikipedia. This is a misdirected content request unrelated to BLP policy discussion.	0.0	2 4/6	2	16.9	0
Wikipedia talk:Writing articles with large language models (wt: 6) ☞ Grok (0.7k) A user asks why Grok is included as an example LLM in the guideline. Respondents explain it is one of the most popular LLMs, making it a natural example.	0.0	3 4/13–4/14	3	16.9	2		EDITOR_RETENTION
Administrators' noticeboard (wt: 8) ☞ Revoke TPA (0.4k) A request to revoke talk page access for user BurundiWives2 was made and completed. No policy discussion or broader accountability concerns raised.	0.0	2 5/23	2	16.9	1		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (wt: 5) ☞ ee88athen.com and lc88nano.com (3.2k) Routine spam-blacklist request to block gambling-related domains and associated temporary accounts engaged in promotional link spam. No policy discussion or contested editorial judgment involved.	0.0	10 5/10–5/17	3	17.0	1		SOURCES
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice
Wikipedia talk:Oversight (wt: 4) ☞ Possible contradiction in Nomenclature section (2.4k) Editors discuss a potential contradiction in the Oversight policy page regarding whether old Oversight actions could be reversed. The exchange clarifies historical technical details about the transition from old Oversight to RevisionDelete in 2009-2014.	0.0	4 5/11–5/14	4	17.0	2		ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY
Wikipedia talk:Content assessment (wt: 3) ☞ FA and GA idea: (2.5k) An editor floats the idea of automatic time-based demotion of GA/FA articles unless reassessed. Respondents note existing review processes (GAR, FAR) already address this and predict lack of consensus.	0.0	8 5/14–5/18	5	17.1	2
Section and Summary	Priority	Cmts	Usrs	Cnsq	Rel	Process	Categories and Advice

Classified by anthropic/claude-opus-4.5 (WP:LLM).

Column key

Section and Summary

Links to the source page and the specific discussion section, followed by the LLM-written summary. Page weight (wt) and section length shown in parentheses.

Priority

Composite score: consequentiality × recency × relevance. Higher = more important for WPID to monitor.

Cmts

Number of comments, with date range of discussion.

Usrs

Number of distinct editors who commented.

Cnsq

Script-side consequentiality (0–40). Based on objective characteristics only.

Rel

Topical relevance to WPID concerns (0–10). 0 = no connection; 3 = mentions relevant area; 5 = raises concern; 7 = active proposal; 10 = major policy rewrite. LLM estimate.

Process

Green-underlined indicators shown only when applicable—Policy (targets a policy/guideline page), RfC (formal process with defined outcome), Vote (contains a vote on policy or guideline; deadline shown if stated). Empty when none apply. LLM estimate. When a Vote has a known deadline, the cell background indicates urgency: green = 14+ days, yellow = 3–13 days, red = 0–2 days, grey = ended.

Grey rows indicate stale discussions with no comments in the past three weeks. Discussions older than three months are omitted entirely.

Categories and Advice

GOVERNANCE, SOURCES, NEUTRALITY, ADMIN_ACCOUNTABILITY, EDITOR_RETENTION, PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT. LLM determined. In private mode, includes recommended WPID response.

How priority is calculated

Every discussion in the table gets a single priority score that determines its rank. The score answers one question: how urgently does WPID need to look at this?

Priority combines three judgments: how consequential the discussion is (will it actually change something?), how recent it is (is it still live?), and how relevant it is to WPID's concerns (does it touch our issues?).

Hover over any Priority cell to see a tooltip like this one, from the "RfC: Include LLM usage as a reason to block" discussion:

Here is what each part means.

Consequentiality: will this discussion actually change something?

The first question is whether a discussion is likely to produce real change on Wikipedia, regardless of whether the topic is relevant to WPID. A heated RfC with 126 participants on the blocking policy is consequential even before we ask whether it matters to us. A two-person side conversation on an obscure talk page is not.

Consequentiality is scored on a 0–100 scale, split between signals the script can measure directly (40 points) and judgments only the LLM can make (60 points).

What the script measures (40 points)

The first line of the tooltip shows four signals extracted from the raw wikitext, no LLM involved:

chars 7/7—How much has been written?

Longer discussions tend to be more substantive. Very short sections are usually procedural or trivial. This score follows a log curve capped at about 20K characters—beyond that, more text does not mean more importance. This RfC is 221K characters, well past the cap, so it gets the full 7 points.

commenters 15/15—How many people are involved?

The single strongest signal of consequentiality. A discussion that has drawn dozens of editors has community-wide attention. This also follows a log curve, capped at 20 participants and worth up to 15 points—deliberately the largest script-side signal. With 126 editors, this is maxed out.

authority 4/9—Are powerful editors paying attention?

The tool maintains a list of editors in elevated roles: bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, ArbCom members, interface administrators, and stewards. When these people show up in a discussion, it signals that the discussion has attracted serious institutional attention. The first authority figure scores 4 points, the second 3, the third and fourth 1 each (max 9). One authority participated here → 4 points.

page_wt 5.4/9—How important is this venue?

Not all pages are equal. The Village Pump (policy) and AN/I carry more weight than a low-traffic guideline talk page. Each page has an assigned weight (1–10) in the configuration. Blocking policy has weight 6 → 5.4 points.

The sum of these four signals is the Cnsq column value (31.4 here). This is computed before the LLM is called, and it determines the order in which sections are sent to the LLM—the most consequential first.

What the LLM judges (60 points)

The second line shows three yes/no questions that require reading the discussion:

formal 35/35—Is this a structured process?

RfCs, ArbCom cases, CfDs, move requests, and policy votes have defined outcomes—they end with a decision that changes something. This is the highest-weighted signal in the entire system (35 points) because a formal process is the strongest predictor that a discussion will produce a concrete result. This section is an RfC with a vote → 35 points.

bold 0/10—Did someone try to change a policy directly?

Bold edits to policy or guideline text—where someone just makes the change and sees if it sticks—are a different kind of consequentiality. They often trigger revert wars and policy discussions. Not applicable here → 0 points.

targets 15/15—Is a policy or guideline at stake?

Discussions that would actually edit a policy or guideline page, or that turn crucially on the interpretation of one, matter more than general conversation. This discussion directly targets the blocking policy → 15 points.

Total consequentiality: 31.4 + 50.0 = 81.4 out of 100.

Recency: is this still live?

Stale discussions should not dominate the table. The recency multiplier decays the score based on how long ago the most recent comment was posted—but it also knows about deadlines.

If a discussion has a future deadline (a vote closing date, an RfC end date), the multiplier is held at 1.0 regardless of when the last comment was. An open vote with a week of silence before close is still fully consequential.

Once a deadline passes, decay kicks in immediately—no grace period. A decided vote fades faster than an ordinary discussion. Without a deadline, the normal rules apply:

Fresh (0–3 days since last comment): no penalty (1.0×)

Aging (3–30 days): linear decay from 1.0× down to 0.2×

Stale (30+ days): floors at 0.2×—still visible, but pushed well down the table

This RfC has a deadline of April 26, which is still in the future → 1.0 (no decay at all).

Relevance: does this matter to WPID?

A discussion can be highly consequential and perfectly fresh but have nothing to do with WPID's concerns. The LLM scores topical relevance on a 0–10 scale, which the tool converts to a multiplier:

0–2: excluded entirely (multiplier 0.0—does not appear in the table)

3: multiplier 0.6

4–10: linear from 0.6 up to 1.0

Relevance acts as a gate, not a strong scaler. A relevant discussion (score 5) and a highly relevant discussion (score 9) differ by only about 20% in the multiplier. But an irrelevant discussion (score 2) is removed completely.

This RfC scored relevance 8 → 0.89.

Putting it together

81.4 × 1.0 × 0.89 = 72.1

(The displayed 0.89 is rounded; the actual multiplier is 0.8857, which produces 72.1.)

This section ranks near the top of the table: a formal policy vote on a high-weight page, with massive participation, that has an open deadline and is directly relevant to WPID's concerns about editor retention and blocking policy.