The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Talk:War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine
To what extent should allegations that Ukraine violated the International humanitarian law (IHL) by utilizing civilian infrastructure for military operations be discussed in this article? I specifically focus on two separate matters.
(1) The inclusion of the allegation that Ukraine may have violated IHL in the specific case of a nursing home in Stara Krasnianka, Luhansk, brought to light in this June 2022 OHCHR report. It is claimed that in March 2022 Ukrainian soldiers utilized this nursing home, populated by elderly persons and disabled people, for military purposes contrary to IHL. (2) The inclusion of a controversial report by Amnesty International published in August 2022 that there is a "pattern" of Ukraine utilizing civilian infrastructure, including residential areas, for military activity, which they indicate may be a violation of IHL.
The matter has been debated extensively immediately above, and in fact for a few years now in older discussions. Thank you for contributing. JDiala (talk) 21:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC) |
Talk:Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia
This cagegorization [1] - characterizing the event as "Massacres committed by Ukraine" - is challenged. Nowhere in the article it says it "was committed by Ukraine", and no sources are saying so. I disagree with the thesis above Talk:Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia#Wrong cat that at some level of abstraction, it was committed by Ukraine but I'm the only one opposing. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC) |
Talk:Socialist Alliance (Australia)
Is Marxism at times considered an ideology and if so, does it fall within Socialist Alliance's ideology? FropFrop (talk) 02:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC) |
Should Gaza genocide be included in this list? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC) |
Talk:2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election
Should we include a pairwise-comparisons table similar to the one at 2009 Burlington mayoral election and Draft:Center squeeze#Examples? Such a table would show, for each pair of candidates, how many voters preferred (ranked higher) one candidate or the other. Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
How should we format the infobox's "residence" parameter?
|
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Naming of German municipal subdivisions
While browsing through articles on subdivisions of Cologne with the intention of adding translations from German Wikipedia, I noticed that the terms used to translate different levels of subdivision are inconsistent across these pages. The overview article Districts of Cologne translates Stadtbezirk as "(city) district", and Stadtteil very literally as "city part". Articles about individual Stadtbezirke on the other hand, like Lindenthal and Rodenkirchen instead render Stadtbezirk as "borough" and Stadtteil as either "(city) quarter" "city part".
By way of comparison, articles on Berlin, which calls its top-level subdivisions Bezirk and its second-level subdivisions Ortsteil (which meanings do not differ substantially from Stadtbezirk and Stadtteil), uses "borough" for the former and "locality" for the latter. This is confusing in several different ways:
I would like to propose the following consistent approach for the subdivisions of German cities:
Subjectively, as a binative of English and German, this is what seems most intuitively comprehensible/evocative, but there are also objective reasons speaking for it:
However, I didn't want to charge ahead and make these changes without first inviting comment to see if there might be any good reasons this isn't already what's used across the board. So...what do other editors think? --Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 12:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
Should this article contain examples or not? 02:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard
When data provided by Gaza Health Ministry is mentioned in prose should Gaza Health Ministryhave a qualifier such as Hamas-runor Hamas-controlled? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC) |
Dispute over whether this article is promoting fringe theories. The information being covered is contentious, and hardly available in the English language. Most historians being cited are South Korean. One user alleges the South Korean historians have reason to be biased (and per tag, promoting fringe theories), and that more Western historians are needed. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC) |
Abraham Wyner, a professor of statistics, wrote in The Tablet that the Gaza Health Ministry casualty figures were "faked". There has been a number of discussions disagreeing about what can be included. Four academics who have entries on Wikipedia including two of statistics have dismissed the article but only one has written an analysis and that of only the first argument. Should comments which don't include analysis be included? The latest discussions are at WP:NPOVN#Gaza Health Ministry, Talk:Gaza Health Ministry#Revisiting Wyner, Talk:Gaza Health Ministry#One of the worst abuses of statistics I've ever seen, Talk:Gaza Health Ministry#Wyner, Talk:Gaza Health Ministry#Wyner summary, Talk:Gaza Health Ministry#Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 May 2024, WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 431#Tablet (magazine) and article by Wharton statistician. NadVolum (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
National Post is a Canadian newspaper that serves as the flagship publication of Postmedia Network. Which of the following best describes the reliability of National Post for its news reporting?
|
Talk:2024 United Kingdom general election
There is a clear consensus that Labour, the Conservatives, and the Lib Dems should be included in the infobox. Should more parties be included in the infobox, and if so, which?
The main viable options (examples linked) are:
Other suggestions also welcome. CipherRephic (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC) |
Should the political position of La France Insoumise be described as:
|
I believe the previous discussion here was not all that productive (it didn't involve all that much analysis of sources, and there was only I believe 4 or so active editors in the discussion (which is why I've added the RFC template to this discussion)), and that the main argument to remove it was incredibly weak; that argument being, "A majority (or a lot) of sources do not describe the party as neo-fascist." That. does. not. matter. Said sources often describe the party as national conservative and or right-wing populist. These are not mutually exclusive with fascism, infact, right-wing populism is one of the core tenets of fascism. (13, here which links to right-wing populism.) Nor is national conservatism mutually exclusive with fascism, and in fact italian neo-fascist parties (most notably MSI) are listed as also being national conservative here here. Please do not repeat this argument. Sources merely not labelling the party as neo-fascist do not matter, what does matter, however is the sources which outright reject the neo-fascist label. There are plenty of sources that don't describe birds as being dinosaurs, but that doesn't mean they aren't. Additionally, sources highlighting the parties roots in fascism are not neccesarily rejecting that they curron ently are, instead it's merely highlighting the historical aspect.A Socialist Trans Girl 07:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
Should the first sentence continue to read "Thomas Niedermayer [...] was kidnapped by the Provisional IRA" or be reverted back to "Thomas Niedermayer [...] was kidnapped and killed by the Provisional IRA"? 78.147.140.112 (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
Which of the following images should serve as the infobox picture for Hermann Göring?
|
Talk:Trump v. United States (2024)
Should the lede be rewritten to clarify that "former President" does not include presidents convicted in an impeachment? |
Should the section currently titled "Wikipedia determination of unreliability on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict" ...
|
Talk:Niki (Greek political party)
There are five questions:
|
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums
This RfC is a continuation of the discussion regarding the 2015 UK general election and the question on which parties to include in that page's infobox. For some context, there has been a longstanding debate on whether UKIP - which received a seat and was the third most voted for party - should be listed. Currently, the consensus from the most recent RfC on the topic is to not include UKIP, but the inherent controversial nature of this decision has meant that debates and occasional edit-wars have sprouted up in the years since, with no full resolution in sight.
This RfC is hopefully an attempt to solve this controversy and to provide more clarity to the longstanding 5% rule guideline surrounding election infoboxes. The main questions to be discussed are:
|
Should the introduction of this article mention or address Zionism? إيان (talk) 07:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC) |
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search