466:, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, and those that show no understanding of the matter of issue. If the discussion shows that some people think one policy is controlling, and some another, the closer is expected to close by judging which view has the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians supporting it, not personally select which is the better policy. The closer is not expected to decide the issue, just to judge the result of the debate, and is expected to know policy sufficiently to know what arguments are to be excluded as irrelevant. If the consensus of reasonable arguments is opposite to the closer's view, they are expected to decide according to the consensus. The closer is not to be a judge of the issue, but rather of the argument.
364:: Some processes, especially deletion-oriented pages, have a specified minimum length, typically of 7 full days. Other processes, especially Requests for Comments (RfCs), have typical lengths but no mandatory minimum. It is unusual for anyone to request a formal closure by an uninvolved editor unless the discussion has been open for at least one week. Similarly, if the discussion stopped, and editors have already assessed the consensus and moved on with their work, then there may be no need to formally close the discussion unless the process (e.g.,
380:: If additional comments, even weeks or months later, might be helpful, then don't close the conversation. Most conversations do not need to be closed. On the other hand, when further responses are likely to result in little more than wasting everyone's time by repeating the same widely held view, then it should be closed sooner rather than later. In between, wait to see whether enough information and analysis has been presented to make the outcome (including an outcome that editors do not agree) clear.
158:
then everyone who reads the page has an opportunity to either leave the page as it is or change it. Editors begin discussions to resolve disagreements that cannot be easily resolved through the normal wiki-editing process. Many community discussions and decisions happen on project pages that are specifically designed for that purpose. If discussions involve several individuals, the discourse can become lengthy and the results hard to determine. After a while, it is time to
198:
discussion on the talk page. An uninvolved party might come up with a creative solution that addresses the concerns raised in the discussion. If it is a good solution, nothing needs to happen. There will be nothing more that is said, and everyone moves on. When this is the case, it often helps to leave a comment that the issue was resolved and perhaps link the edit that resolved the issue. On some pages, such as
81:
43:
1139:}} to start a review (refer to instructions in that template). In your reasoning, you should give a concrete description of how you believe the close was an inappropriate or unreasonable distillation of the discussion. You are more likely to succeed in your AN request if you focus on 1. an "underlying policy/guideline" and 2. "strength of argument". (See
818:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum
755:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum
659:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum
515:, are not negotiable, and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus. A closer must determine whether any article violates policy, and where it is very unlikely that an article on the topic can exist without breaching policy, it must be respected above individual opinions.
197:
Many informal discussions do not need closing. Often, consensus is reached in the discussion and the outcome is obvious. Disagreements in articles are often solved by further edits. For example, two or more individuals may disagree about how a section of text in an article is written and start a
165:
This page offers guidance on how and when discussions should be closed. There are no policies that directly dictate how to close a discussion. These information documents the customary practices that have evolved at
Knowledge (XXG) in the years since it was started. These customs are grounded in
324:
is when the discussion is moved into an archive area. This is usually done automatically by a bot, when no new comments have been added for a defined length of time. Most discussions go into Talk page archives with no need for a summary. However, sometimes an active issue will be archived while
157:
is
Knowledge (XXG)'s fundamental model for editorial decision-making. Policies and guidelines document communal consensus rather than creating it. Consensus is typically reached as a natural and inherent product of the wiki-editing process; generally someone makes a change to a page content, and
772:
This format is designed specifically for closes involving written analysis or conclusions of the discussion. Either this format or the former is acceptable for closes involving analysis (which chosen is at the closers discretion), but this format should not be used for closes involving no
310:, decides that the discussion is irrelevant or disruptive. This practice is used quite often on pages that attract heated dispute, although there are no rules in place governing its use, and there are times when closing a discussion can create even more strife than had existed before.
483:
If you write only "There was no consensus", then editors may be confused about whether you meant that no general agreement was reached or if you were trying to find a gentle way to indicate that an idea was rejected. They may also disagree later about what, exactly, wasn't agreed to.
581:
Closing a discussion means putting a box around it for the purpose of discouraging further contributions to that discussion. Please do not close a discussion if you believe that further contributions (rather than starting a fresh discussion on the same subject) would be appropriate.
533:
editor may close most of them – not just admins. Generally, if you want to request closure by an uninvolved administrator, it's expected that the discussion will have already been open at least a week, and that the subject is particularly contentious or the outcome is unclear.
853:
All discussion closures are subject to review. Usually, reviews are initiated because someone disputes the outcome stated by the closing editor (e.g., a summary statement that some editors find confusing or incorrect), rather than the decision to discourage further discussion.
459:
Consensus is not determined by counting heads or counting votes, nor is it determined by the closer's own views about what action or outcome is most appropriate. The closer is there to judge the consensus of the community, after discarding irrelevant arguments: those that
1291:
In uncontentious circumstances, even an involved editor may close a discussion. For example, if you propose something, and it's obvious to you that nobody agrees with you, then you can close the discussion, even though you're obviously an "involved"
951:
required to consult the closer of a deletion discussion (or the deleting admin for a speedy deletion) before starting a deletion review. However doing so is good practice, and can often save time and effort for all concerned. Notifying the closer is
329:
is to copy-paste the discussion back onto the original page and delete the discussion from the Talk archive. The discussion may then be summarized as normal. This enures that the summary of the discussion's outcome will be visible to the editors
429:. Closers are also required to exercise their judgment to ensure that any decision complies with the spirit of Knowledge (XXG) policy and with the project's goals. A good closer will transparently explain how the decision was reached.
212:
template is used to note that an issue has been resolved. The template is added to the beginning of the section, with notes that indicate what action was taken. This helps shorten the reading needed to scan the page. Similarly, the
713:
Sometimes, it is helpful for an editor to provide a summary statement of the outcome, if any, when closing the discussion. This optional statement may include both points of consensus and points that are not yet resolved.
1317:
discussed how to appeal closures and whether an administrator can summarily overturn a non-administrator's closure. The consensus was that closures should not be reverted solely because the closer was not an
374:: The more contentious the subject, the longer this may take. Two signs of achieving this state are the same editors repeating themselves, and the rate of other editors joining the conversation is slowing.
1170:
1084:
if an early closure is followed by multiple editors asking that it be reopened for further discussion, or a single editor has brought forth a compelling new perspective to the already closed discussion.
1066:, contact the editor who performed the closure and try to resolve the issue through discussion. If you are unable to resolve the issue through discussion with the closer, you may request review at the
1070:. Before requesting review, understand that review should not be used as an opportunity to re-argue the underlying dispute, and is only intended for use when there is a problem with the close itself.
469:
If you believe that it is necessary to make an explicit statement about whether consensus was reached, it may be helpful to consider three broad categories for summarizing the result of a discussion:
542:
If consensus remains unclear, if the issue is a contentious one, or if there are wiki-wide implications, a request for a neutral and uninvolved editor to formally close a discussion may be made at
234:(CfD) and the other XfDs. Observe however that intervening to close a discussion where this mode of resolution is not customary may prove to be incendiary instead of clarifying. Here, adding the
1302:
944:
1240:
857:
Depending on the type of discussion, a review will take place at one of several review boards, and distinct criteria are used for each board. In general, deletions are discussed at
266:
discourages people from continuing to post comments, while leaving the discussion on the page, so that editors can read it. This may be accomplished by placing templates such as
316:
documents the outcome of the discussion (e.g. "The result was to keep the page"). Outside of the various deletion processes, most discussions are neither closed nor summarized.
1280:
422:
1314:
610:
226:
When a discussion involves many people and the outcome is not clear, it may be necessary to formally close the discussion. This is always the case in discussions at
876:
Remember that most contentious discussions benefit from a formal closing statement, and that closers undertake to assess consensus to the best of their abilities.
717:{{Archive top |status = withdrawn |result = I've decided my idea needs some work. Thanks to everyone for the advice. ~~~~ }} {{lorem ipsum}} {{Archive bottom}}
223:
template may be used to indicate that a dispute about an important issue has not found its solution, inviting more people to weigh in their ideas and opinions.
1149:
In closing, they applied policy X. I believe that policy Y should have been taken more into account / policy X never intended to apply to issues such as this.
418:. The closing editor or administrator will determine if consensus exists, and if so, what it is. To do this, the closer must read the arguments presented.
1004:. In general you don't need anyone's permission to recreate a deleted page, if your new version does not qualify for deletion then it will not be deleted.
104:; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Knowledge (XXG)'s norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of
390:
306:
around a discussion. In addition to formal closes that analyze the consensus of a discussion, discussions may also be closed where someone, usually an
186:
912:
908:
1334:
394:
199:
819:
dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
756:
dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
660:
dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
937:
873:. Specific instructions about each case are described in the subsections below. Any editor may participate in a discussion reviewing a close.
546:. Please ensure that any request there seeking a close is neutrally worded, and do not use that board to continue the discussion in question.
231:
1042:
if the closer was not made aware of significant additional information not discussed in the RM, and the RM should be reopened and relisted.
1112:
994:
984:
971:
776:{{Discussion top|I've decided my idea needs some work. Thanks to everyone for the advice. ~~~~ }} {{lorem ipsum}} {{Discussion bottom}}
101:
606:
365:
227:
993:
for uncontroversial undeletions, such as undeleting a very old article where substantial new sources have subsequently arisen. Use
252:
97:
1339:
956:
245:
28:
685:
492:
Many closures are also based upon
Knowledge (XXG) policy. As noted above, arguments that contradict policy are discounted.
1266:
1192:
1182:
963:
936:
because of a disagreement with the deletion discussion's outcome that does not involve the closer's judgment (a page may be
171:
89:
750:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
654:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
826:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
763:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
667:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
1010:
897:
543:
524:
326:
32:
1202:
901:
885:
858:
1136:
675:
1140:
59:
1078:
if significant additional information or context was left out of the discussion and the closer was not aware of it.
997:
instead. (If any editor objects to the undeletion, then it is considered controversial and this forum may be used.)
300:
918:
if significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page;
1187:
966:
process, or to have the history of a deleted page restored behind a new, improved version of the page, called a
575:
1024:
862:
990:
to attack other editors, cast aspersions, or make accusations of bias (such requests may be speedily closed);
599:
290:
280:
1176:
1158:
1063:
1053:
405:
175:
167:
154:
109:
105:
50:
1096:
836:
557:
435:
343:
179:
119:
959:
that have or have not been deleted (as each page is different and stands or falls on its own merits);
589:
270:
1197:
1059:
319:
55:
1111:
was close or even favored an outcome opposite the closure, if the closure was made on the basis of
671:
The closed discussion can also be collapsed to save space. This is achieved by using the templates
238:
217:
1207:
1088:
Closures will rarely be changed by the closing editor, but can be challenged in a closure review:
1081:
if the discussion was undertaken under modified procedural rules that the closer was not aware of.
1234:
1119:, or an overwhelming consensus otherwise, and can only be changed by amending the policy itself.
1108:
605:
templates (although some particular types of discussion, such as those which concern whether to
512:
307:
804:
734:
206:
17:
1036:
1001:
1000:
to ask for permission to write a new version of a page which was deleted, unless it has been
504:
244:
template may be a better option or informing all parties about the possibility of requesting
325:
waiting for an uninvolved editor to write a summary statement. The recommended procedure at
1123:
1116:
866:
500:
411:
924:
if there were substantial procedural errors in the deletion discussion or speedy deletion.
1154:
1132:
1067:
870:
980:
to argue technicalities (such as a deletion discussion being closed ten minutes early);
331:
943:(This point formerly required first consulting the deleting admin if possible. As per
508:
496:
1328:
808:
738:
1131:
After discussing the matter with the closing editor, you may request review at the
921:
if a page has been wrongly deleted with no way to tell what exactly was deleted; or
800:
730:
695:
1103:
Closures will rarely be changed by either the closing editor or a closure review:
983:
to request that previously deleted content be used on other pages (please go to
1074:
Closures will often be changed by the closing editor without a closure review:
495:
Knowledge (XXG) core policies, which requires that articles and information be
799:
I've decided my idea needs some work. Thanks to everyone for the advice.
426:
1092:
if you believe the closure was not a reasonable summation of the discussion
729:
I've decided my idea needs some work. Thanks to everyone for the advice.
1035:
if an editor believes the closer did not follow the spirit and intent of
1281:
Knowledge (XXG):Deletion guidelines for administrators § Rough consensus
1058:
For other procedures, whether formal RfCs or less formal ones such as
1153:
Users who try to subvert consensus by appealing to other venues than
1143:) For example, continue your AN request opening with something like:
1115:. Policies and guidelines are usually followed in the absence of a
189:
for guidance on actually determining consensus and writing closes.
1171:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Closure review archive
529:
Most discussions don't need closure at all, but when they do, any
1173:– a self-reported index of past AN reviews of closed discussion
1135:. For reviews of requests for comment closures, you may use {{
691:. Because of the short name of the first of those templates –
574:"WP:HATTING" redirects here. For collapsing talk content, see
75:
37:
613:
a page, have their own specialized templates). For example:
977:
to repeat arguments already made in the deletion discussion;
1210:– pages on the role of voting in and out of Knowledge (XXG)
1230:
The discussion was withdrawn by the person who started it.
1023:
For reviewing a closure of a page move discussions, the
1250:
844:
565:
450:
443:
351:
141:
134:
127:
51:
Knowledge (XXG):Consensus#No consensus after discussion
27:"WP:CLOSE" redirects here. For close paraphrasing, see
884:
For reviewing a closure of a deletion discussion, the
507:, as well as legal policies that require articles not
378:
When further contributions are unlikely to be helpful
792:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
1095:if the closing editor may have become inextricably
1099:through previous experience in the conflict area.
642:The closed discussion will then look like this:
1227:Some common causes for rapid closure include:
1179:, for ongoing discussions and current requests
701:– performing such a closure is referred to as
1247:Stopping disruptive or misguided discussions
795:A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
391:Knowledge (XXG):Advice on closing discussions
187:Knowledge (XXG):Advice on closing discussions
8:
1009:Copyright violating, libelous, or otherwise
368:) requires formal closure for other reasons.
1267:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to deletion § Closure
962:to challenge an article's deletion via the
414:. Consensus can be most easily defined as
255:; see that page for criteria to consider.
395:Knowledge (XXG):Discussions for discussion
200:Knowledge (XXG):Administrators noticeboard
232:Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion
938:renominated after a reasonable timeframe
102:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
1276:
1274:
1220:
995:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for undeletion
985:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for undeletion
972:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for undeletion
476:No consensus for or against (something)
1148:
1145:The issue the closer was to decide was
1144:
366:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
228:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
896:if someone believes the closer of a
786:The following discussion is closed.
746:The following discussion is closed.
650:The following discussion is closed.
463:flatly contradict established policy
193:Which discussions need to be closed
162:so that the community can move on.
29:Knowledge (XXG):Close paraphrasing
25:
1335:Knowledge (XXG) information pages
1237:or otherwise in the wrong place.
1193:Knowledge (XXG):Non-admin closure
1183:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to deletion
473:Consensus in favor of (something)
865:, and other closures (including
822:The discussion above is closed.
759:The discussion above is closed.
663:The discussion above is closed.
544:Knowledge (XXG):Closure requests
525:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion process
79:
73:Knowledge (XXG) information page
41:
33:Knowledge (XXG):Closure requests
31:. For requesting a closure, see
1203:Knowledge (XXG):Snowball clause
1039:in closing this requested move.
585:To close a discussion, use the
251:It may be useful to close some
1233:Stopping discussions that are
18:Knowledge (XXG):Closure review
1:
1122:if the complaint is that the
892:Deletion review may be used:
479:Consensus against (something)
410:Many closures are based upon
372:When the discussion is stable
1235:happening in multiple places
1188:Knowledge (XXG):Just drop it
385:How to determine the outcome
1133:Administrators' noticeboard
1117:compelling reason otherwise
1068:Administrators' Noticeboard
809:17:24, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
779:which will look like this:
739:17:24, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
720:which will look like this:
550:Marking a closed discussion
65:Proposed since August 2024.
48:It has been suggested that
1356:
1340:Knowledge (XXG) discussion
1051:
1048:Challenging other closures
1002:protected against creation
834:
573:
555:
522:
433:
403:
388:
341:
117:
26:
1177:Knowledge (XXG):Dashboard
1031:Move review may be used:
915:or is otherwise disputed;
861:, moves are discussed at
768:Additional summary format
406:Knowledge (XXG):Consensus
338:When to close discussions
185:Closers may wish to read
168:Knowledge (XXG) etiquette
1137:subst:RfC closure review
911:was done outside of the
824:Please do not modify it.
789:Please do not modify it.
761:Please do not modify it.
748:Please do not modify it.
665:Please do not modify it.
652:Please do not modify it.
615:
503:, and be written from a
421:The desired standard is
362:Not too soon or too late
1198:Knowledge (XXG):Not now
968:history-only undeletion
928:Deletion review should
166:the core principles of
1208:Knowledge (XXG):Voting
1124:closer is not an admin
880:Challenging a deletion
618:==Discussion heading==
1013:will not be restored.
831:Challenging a closure
686:hidden archive bottom
505:neutral point of view
253:Requests for comments
987:for these requests);
867:requests for comment
259:Closing vs archiving
180:maintaining civility
160:close the discussion
98:encyclopedic article
1315:request for comment
1157:should be aware of
898:deletion discussion
869:) are discussed at
629:Discussion text...
327:WP:PREMATUREARCHIVE
172:assuming good faith
1147:(describe issue).
1019:Challenging a move
1011:prohibited content
859:WP:Deletion review
749:
676:hidden archive top
653:
645:Discussion heading
538:Requesting a close
176:creating consensus
1254:
1244:
1141:WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS
1027:process is used.
964:proposed deletion
888:process is used.
845:WP:CLOSECHALLENGE
747:
709:Writing a summary
651:
519:Closure procedure
509:violate copyright
501:original research
301:Closed rfc bottom
152:
151:
71:
70:
67:
58:into this page. (
16:(Redirected from
1347:
1319:
1311:
1305:
1299:
1293:
1289:
1283:
1278:
1269:
1264:
1258:
1248:
1238:
1225:
900:interpreted the
847:
791:
700:
694:
690:
684:
680:
674:
638:
635:
632:
628:
625:
622:
619:
604:
598:
594:
588:
568:
465:
464:
453:
446:
354:
305:
299:
295:
289:
285:
279:
275:
269:
243:
237:
222:
216:
211:
205:
144:
137:
130:
90:information page
83:
82:
76:
63:
45:
44:
38:
21:
1355:
1354:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1312:
1308:
1303:this discussion
1300:
1296:
1290:
1286:
1279:
1272:
1265:
1261:
1226:
1222:
1217:
1167:
1129:
1056:
1050:
1045:
1021:
1016:
945:this discussion
909:speedy deletion
886:Deletion review
882:
851:
850:
843:
839:
833:
828:
827:
816:
787:
777:
773:summarization.
770:
765:
764:
752:
743:
742:
741:
726:
718:
711:
698:
692:
688:
682:
678:
672:
669:
668:
656:
646:
640:
639:
636:
633:
630:
626:
623:
620:
617:
602:
596:
592:
586:
579:
576:WP:TALKOFFTOPIC
572:
571:
564:
560:
552:
540:
527:
521:
490:
462:
461:
457:
456:
449:
442:
438:
423:rough consensus
408:
402:
397:
387:
358:
357:
350:
346:
340:
303:
297:
293:
287:
283:
277:
273:
267:
261:
241:
235:
220:
214:
209:
203:
195:
148:
147:
140:
133:
126:
122:
114:
113:
80:
74:
42:
36:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1353:
1351:
1343:
1342:
1337:
1327:
1326:
1321:
1320:
1318:administrator.
1306:
1294:
1284:
1270:
1259:
1257:
1256:
1245:
1231:
1219:
1218:
1216:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1205:
1200:
1195:
1190:
1185:
1180:
1174:
1166:
1163:
1128:
1127:
1120:
1101:
1100:
1093:
1086:
1085:
1082:
1079:
1072:
1049:
1046:
1044:
1043:
1040:
1029:
1020:
1017:
1006:
1005:
998:
991:
988:
981:
978:
975:
970:(please go to
960:
953:
941:
926:
925:
922:
919:
916:
905:
890:
881:
878:
863:WP:Move review
849:
848:
840:
835:
832:
829:
821:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
782:
781:
775:
769:
766:
758:
753:
744:
728:
727:
724:
723:
722:
716:
710:
707:
662:
657:
648:
647:
644:
634:archive bottom
616:
600:archive bottom
570:
569:
561:
556:
551:
548:
539:
536:
520:
517:
499:, avoid being
489:
486:
481:
480:
477:
474:
455:
454:
447:
439:
434:
425:, not perfect
401:
398:
386:
383:
382:
381:
375:
369:
356:
355:
347:
342:
339:
336:
291:Closed rfc top
281:Archive bottom
260:
257:
194:
191:
150:
149:
146:
145:
138:
131:
123:
118:
115:
95:
94:
86:
84:
72:
69:
68:
46:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1352:
1341:
1338:
1336:
1333:
1332:
1330:
1316:
1310:
1307:
1304:
1298:
1295:
1288:
1285:
1282:
1277:
1275:
1271:
1268:
1263:
1260:
1252:
1246:
1242:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1228:
1224:
1221:
1214:
1209:
1206:
1204:
1201:
1199:
1196:
1194:
1191:
1189:
1186:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1175:
1172:
1169:
1168:
1164:
1162:
1160:
1156:
1151:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1125:
1121:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1098:
1094:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1083:
1080:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1071:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1055:
1047:
1041:
1038:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1028:
1026:
1018:
1015:
1014:
1012:
1003:
999:
996:
992:
989:
986:
982:
979:
976:
973:
969:
965:
961:
958:
955:to point out
954:
950:
947:an editor is
946:
942:
939:
935:
934:
933:
931:
923:
920:
917:
914:
910:
906:
903:
899:
895:
894:
893:
889:
887:
879:
877:
874:
872:
868:
864:
860:
855:
846:
842:
841:
838:
830:
825:
820:
810:
806:
802:
798:
797:
796:
793:
790:
784:
783:
780:
774:
767:
762:
757:
751:
740:
736:
732:
721:
715:
708:
706:
704:
697:
687:
677:
666:
661:
655:
643:
614:
612:
608:
601:
591:
583:
577:
567:
563:
562:
559:
554:
549:
547:
545:
537:
535:
532:
526:
518:
516:
514:
510:
506:
502:
498:
493:
487:
485:
478:
475:
472:
471:
470:
467:
452:
448:
445:
441:
440:
437:
432:
430:
428:
424:
419:
417:
413:
407:
399:
396:
392:
384:
379:
376:
373:
370:
367:
363:
360:
359:
353:
349:
348:
345:
337:
335:
333:
328:
323:
322:
317:
315:
311:
309:
308:administrator
302:
292:
282:
272:
265:
258:
256:
254:
249:
247:
240:
233:
229:
224:
219:
208:
201:
192:
190:
188:
183:
181:
177:
173:
169:
163:
161:
156:
143:
139:
136:
132:
129:
125:
124:
121:
116:
111:
107:
103:
100:, nor one of
99:
96:It is not an
93:
91:
85:
78:
77:
66:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
39:
34:
30:
19:
1309:
1297:
1287:
1262:
1223:
1159:WP:FORUMSHOP
1152:
1130:
1102:
1087:
1073:
1057:
1054:WP:FORUMSHOP
1030:
1022:
1008:
1007:
967:
948:
929:
927:
904:incorrectly;
891:
883:
875:
856:
852:
823:
817:
801:User:Example
794:
788:
785:
778:
771:
760:
754:
745:
731:User:Example
719:
712:
702:
670:
664:
658:
649:
641:
584:
580:
553:
541:
530:
528:
494:
491:
482:
468:
458:
431:
420:
415:
409:
389:Main pages:
377:
371:
361:
352:WP:WHENCLOSE
320:
318:
313:
312:
263:
262:
250:
225:
196:
184:
164:
159:
153:
87:
64:
49:
1025:Move review
974:for these);
957:other pages
624:archive top
590:archive top
334:that page.
314:Summarizing
271:Archive top
88:This is an
1329:Categories
1215:References
1052:See also:
952:required.)
566:WP:HATTING
531:uninvolved
523:See also:
513:defamatory
497:verifiable
451:WP:DISCARD
404:See also:
239:unresolved
218:unresolved
1064:splitting
932:be used:
902:consensus
725:WITHDRAWN
436:Shortcuts
427:consensus
416:agreement
412:consensus
400:Consensus
321:Archiving
246:mediation
155:Consensus
120:Shortcuts
106:consensus
1165:See also
1097:involved
913:criteria
837:Shortcut
558:Shortcut
344:Shortcut
332:watching
207:resolved
170:such as
128:WP:CLOSE
1292:editor.
1251:example
1241:example
1107:if the
1060:merging
1037:WP:RMCI
703:hatting
264:Closing
230:(AfD),
110:vetting
60:Discuss
1113:policy
611:rename
607:delete
511:or be
488:Policy
444:WP:NHC
202:, the
178:, and
142:WP:DCL
135:WP:CLD
56:merged
1155:WP:AN
907:if a
871:WP:AN
1301:See
1109:poll
805:talk
735:talk
681:and
595:and
393:and
296:and
276:and
108:and
1062:or
949:not
930:not
807:)
737:)
696:hat
609:or
286:or
54:be
1331::
1313:A
1273:^
1243:).
1161:.
940:);
705:.
699:}}
693:{{
689:}}
683:{{
679:}}
673:{{
637:}}
631:{{
627:}}
621:{{
603:}}
597:{{
593:}}
587:{{
304:}}
298:{{
294:}}
288:{{
284:}}
278:{{
274:}}
268:{{
248:.
242:}}
236:{{
221:}}
215:{{
210:}}
204:{{
182:.
174:,
1255:.
1253:)
1249:(
1239:(
1126:.
803:(
733:(
578:.
112:.
92:.
62:)
35:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.