Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia style and naming

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:

If an RfC finds consensus to exclude (or no consensus to include) a person's name from an article (e.g. a criminal suspect's name), which of the following statement(s) should be followed?

(A) Sources that contain the name in their titles or headlines should not be used.
(B) Sources that contain the name in their URLs should not be used.
(C) Editors should not mention the name anywhere on Wikipedia, including talk pages and Wikipedia namespace.
(D) None of the above.

03:35, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Portal talk:Pacific Northwest

I'm curious if "Cascadia" can accurately be considered an alternate name for the Pacific Northwest, as in the infobox. Sources I can find do not use them interchangeably. Cascadia sources often refer back to Pacific Northwest, but there is very little usage the other way around.

Key Question: Is Cascadia a commonly used alternate name for Pacific Northwest?

Don.steinbarge (talk) 10:21, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Inah Canabarro Lucas

Should the infobox for Inah Canabarro Lucas include things like "oldest living nun", "oldest living person in South America", and "oldest living person in Latin America", or should those be moved to the article body?

These claims are accurate, but they don’t seem to get much attention in reliable sources. The subject is mainly known for being the oldest living person in the world. Per WP:DUE and WP:RS, should the infobox focus only on what’s most notable and widely covered? For example, Lucile Randon was the oldest nun ever, but even her infobox didn’t list “nun” as something she was known for. Should we treat these extra titles the same way and keep them out of the infobox? Avengingbandit02:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

Is there support to upgrade Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts to a guideline? 04:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

I would like to formally understand what the community would think of a date-fixing bot. Such a bot would fix dates in articles to conform either {{Use dmy dates}} or {{Use mdy dates}}. To be clear, this bot would not revert any good faith changes that add content and dates of the wrong format; instead, it will just change the date format. In my opinion, there are a few different ways such a bot could be implemented (or not):

Option 1: no bot, everything stays as is
Option 2a: a supervised bot (so every edit is manually reviewed before publication) that would have to pass BRFA to be implemented. I think this would alleviate any concerns of the bot creating errors based on context (such as changing date formats in quotes, links, references, etc.)
Option 2b: an automatic bot that does something similar in proposal 2a, but wouldn't actually have its edits be checked before implementation
Option 3: some other solution; no guarantee that this is actually feasible

Thanks for your consideration – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk)02:35, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

RfC to determine how reflinks are linked or not in the |work= field as done by bot. -- GreenC 20:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Citing sources

Is consistently using the capitalization used by sources (except for all-caps titles) considered an acceptable reference formatting style? 17:27, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

v t e Requests for comment(All)
Articles (All)	Biographies (bio) Economy, trade, and companies (econ) History and geography (hist) Language and linguistics (lang) Maths, science, and technology (sci) Media, the arts, and architecture (media) Politics, government, and law (pol) Religion and philosophy (reli) Society, sports, and culture (soc)
Non-articles (All)	Wikipedia style and naming (style) Wikipedia policies and guidelines (policy) WikiProjects and collaborations (proj) Wikipedia technical issues and templates (tech) Wikipedia proposals (prop) Unsorted
Instructions	To add a discussion to this list: Add the tag `{{rfc\|xxx}}` at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, `{{rfc\|xxx\|yyy}}`, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category.
For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot.