• A: "[[Mandatory Palestine|Palestine]].", stable
• B: "[[Mandatory Palestine]].", [1] by @Day Creature after edit request by @Roahgo
• C: "the [[Levant]], specifically [[Mandatory Palestine]].", [2] by User:Jondr21 (now blocked) after edit request by @Mussyyyy
• D: "[[Palestine (region)|Palestine]]." Proposed by temp account
• E: "the region of [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]], specifically in [[Mandatory Palestine]]", [3] by me
• Remove the text completely

Feeglgeef (talk) 22:18, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

• Option A: "group" (linked in the lead to Musical ensemble#Vocal group)
• Option B: "vocal group" (linked in the lead to Musical ensemble#Vocal group)

— 🎉🎆 Paper9oll 🎆🎉 (🔔 • 📝) 09:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

• Option A: Include brief mention of that use, like this revision
• Option B: Include mention along with other alternative uses, like in this revision
• Option C: Include detailed section, like in this revision
• Option D: Do not mention, like in this revision

Linking the previous RfC and discussion. FloblinTheGoblin (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Discussion before the RfC: Talk:Kursk campaign#It's over and has been over for a while and Talk:Kursk campaign#Date parameter and Talk:Kursk campaign#Result parameter. TurboSuperA+_[talk] 10:20, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

• A) Country in the Baltic region of Europe
• B) Country in Northern Europe
• C) Baltic country in Europe
• D) Other descriptions

GoodDay (talk) 02:04, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

(This is my first RFC. I hope I did this right. I had to edit it because I didn't initially even see that we had a separate History of Detroit page!) Bill Heller (talk) 05:34, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

1. Does the first paragraph constitute WP:SYNTH?
2. Does the second paragraph constitute WP:SYNTH?
3. Does the article's wording of the UN Commission findings overstate it's findings?
4. Does the ABC News Paragraph consist of a duplication of previous cited material, resulting in WP:UNDUE? EaglesFan37 (talk) 21:14, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

reworded on 26 December 2025 17:00 to comply with WP:RFCNEUTRAL.

_⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 17:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

1. The Kabyles Hadra or Kabyles el Hadra are the group of Arabic-speaking mountain dwellers of North Constantine who speak a sedentary Arabic dialect.^[1] The region of the Kabyles Hadara corresponds to eastern Kabylia or the land of the Kutama Berbers who have become Arabized.^[2] They are therefore found throughout the Jijel province, the north of the Mila province, and the west of the Skikda province (Collo).^[1]
2. The Kabyles Hadra or Kabyles el Hadra are terms that were invented by the French in the 19th century to refer to the group of Arabic-speaking mountain dwellers of North Constantine who speak a sedentary Arabic dialect.^[1] Their region corresponded the land of the Kutama Berbers who have become Arabized.^[3] They were found throughout the Jijel province, the north of the Mila province, and the west of the Skikda province (Collo).^[1]

See the talk page above. Provide your answers as Option 1 or 2, explanatory statements in Survey. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 09:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Should left or right pointer alignment be applied here (which is C/C++ code)? Should casts for malloc() be used?

Pinging previously involved parties: @Vincent Lefèvre @Taylor Riastradh Campbell ~2025-36699-87 (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Should left or right pointer alignment be applied here? Should the example for a "birthday" be capitalised (i.e. struct Birthday or struct birthday)?

This is NOT an RfC about "standardising style across Wikipedia".

Pinging previously involved parties: @Vincent Lefèvre @Taylor Riastradh Campbell ~2025-36699-87 (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

I am requesting broader community input on whether state-level education maps (showing locations of colleges and universities by state) should be included in List of colleges and universities in ____ articles or related pages. Not allowing these maps will basically ban me from making any maps in the future. I also put a lot of work into the Tables, which could be a good resource for college hunting for students.

Concerns have been raised about legibility and color contrast (which has been resolved).

Should these maps be included? Wikideas1 (talk) 18:05, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

• A: "[[Mandatory Palestine|Palestine]].", stable
• B: "[[Mandatory Palestine]].", [5] by @Day Creature after edit request by @Roahgo
• C: "the [[Levant]], specifically [[Mandatory Palestine]].", [6] by User:Jondr21 (now blocked) after edit request by @Mussyyyy
• D: "[[Palestine (region)|Palestine]]." Proposed by temp account
• E: "the region of [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]], specifically in [[Mandatory Palestine]]", [7] by me
• Remove the text completely

Feeglgeef (talk) 22:18, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

reworded on 26 December 2025 17:00 to comply with WP:RFCNEUTRAL.

_⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 17:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

The man who fell from the ladder was a prominent former football hooligan who had written two books on his involvement in football hooliganism.

Should his involvement in football hooliganism be mentioned in the article, by adding a sentence after the one quoted above? — 22:49, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposed wording: "In 2025, a youth leader at Antioch affiliate River Church Banff was convicted of "repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy" and placed on the sex offenders register. According to The Times, the conduct involved inappropriately stroking the boy beginning in 2022. The Press and Journal and The Times report that the church's senior leadership, lead pastor Rob McArthur and founding elder Joe Ewen, were aware of the behavior for several months before the family and police were notified. Parents of the victim spoke of how their son was "betrayed" by their church, saying the leadership repeatedly "downplayed" concerns about grooming and prioritized protecting the public image of the church. After the victim’s family approached Antioch Waco in 2023, McArthur and Ewen issued a joint apology. Media coverage also noted River Church Banff's formal link to Antioch Waco, including receipt of staff salaries and hosting missionaries from the United States. Following reporting, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator opened an inquiry into the church's trustees."

Arguments for inclusion:

• The material is supported by multiple independent, reliable sources.
• It summarizes a notable incident linked to Antioch’s affiliate structure and senior leadership.
• It maintains proportionality and attribution without editorializing.
• It gives context about the wider organization and regulatory outcomes without excessive narrative detail.

Arguments for removal or trimming:

• The formal legal charge is “sexual activity with an older child” and any other phrasing (e.g., “repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy”) is “inaccurate” or paraphrasing, per WP:BLP.
• Terms such as “grooming” are not directly in the sources’ voice and should not be used.
• Media coverage did not “highlight” Antioch Waco’s involvement, so such phrasing is inappropriate.

Questions for comment: 1. Does this proposed wording accurately reflect the sources, remain neutral, and maintain due weight in the article? 2. Should the senior leadership names be included, considering sourcing, notability, and accountability under WP:BLP? 3. Does the proposed summary appropriately reflect the incident’s coverage and significance, while remaining proportional in length?

HonestHarbor (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Question: Does the inclusion of this material comply with WP:DUE and WP:NPOV, or should it be further trimmed or removed?

Disputed Material (Life groups and discipleship practices section): > In a 2019 BuzzFeed News article, several former members of Antioch Waco stated that it had a structure that resembled multi-level marketing, including "social pressure and spiritual incentives" that influenced members to spend more time and money on Antioch, and to recruit new Antioch members to "disciple." One former member told Buzzfeed News that she had both positive and negative experiences at Antioch Waco, but had come to see it as a "harmful place, with cultic tendencies" that does not have the interest of individual attendees as its highest priority. The article also reported that a Waco psychologist was seeing a group of former members that called themselves "Antioch survivors." Other former members reported being "made to feel unwelcome" by Antioch due to personal decisions, such as opting out of missions, or identity-related issues like admitting homosexuality. Seibert responded that Antioch is "committed to investing in people" and "encouraging each person to invest in others’ lives." He also responded that it is not their practice to teach its members to "cut off contact with those who leave the church", adding that it would be "rare that we would formally ask anyone to leave."

Arguments for Inclusion:

• This direct wording accurately reflects significant stories and descriptions reported in a reliable secondary source (BuzzFeed News).
• The material is attributed to former members and balanced with Antioch’s responses, maintaining WP:NPOV.
• Corroborative inclusion helps provide a fuller picture of how former members and professionals (psychologists) perceive the church, which is notable coverage from a reliable publication. The "cultic tendencies" quote provides a perspective that supports the sociological analysis regarding the church's "cult-like intensity."

Arguments for Removal:

• The material relies heavily on unnamed sources, which an editor argues gives undue weight to "criticisms."
• Critics may view the "cultic tendencies" language as WP:UNDUE since it is one person’s characterization, even if framed within a broader set of criticisms and from a reliable source.
• There is concern that including detailed "allegations" could overemphasize negative claims relative to the rest of the article.

Background: This issue has been discussed extensively in previous sections. For full context on the arguments see: Buzzfeed 2019 (Archived) #anonymous former members

HonestHarbor (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposed wording: "In 2025, a youth leader at Antioch affiliate River Church Banff was convicted of "repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy" and placed on the sex offenders register. According to The Times, the conduct involved inappropriately stroking the boy beginning in 2022. The Press and Journal and The Times report that the church's senior leadership, lead pastor Rob McArthur and founding elder Joe Ewen, were aware of the behavior for several months before the family and police were notified. Parents of the victim spoke of how their son was "betrayed" by their church, saying the leadership repeatedly "downplayed" concerns about grooming and prioritized protecting the public image of the church. After the victim’s family approached Antioch Waco in 2023, McArthur and Ewen issued a joint apology. Media coverage also noted River Church Banff's formal link to Antioch Waco, including receipt of staff salaries and hosting missionaries from the United States. Following reporting, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator opened an inquiry into the church's trustees."

Arguments for inclusion:

• The material is supported by multiple independent, reliable sources.
• It summarizes a notable incident linked to Antioch’s affiliate structure and senior leadership.
• It maintains proportionality and attribution without editorializing.
• It gives context about the wider organization and regulatory outcomes without excessive narrative detail.

Arguments for removal or trimming:

• The formal legal charge is “sexual activity with an older child” and any other phrasing (e.g., “repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy”) is “inaccurate” or paraphrasing, per WP:BLP.
• Terms such as “grooming” are not directly in the sources’ voice and should not be used.
• Media coverage did not “highlight” Antioch Waco’s involvement, so such phrasing is inappropriate.

Questions for comment: 1. Does this proposed wording accurately reflect the sources, remain neutral, and maintain due weight in the article? 2. Should the senior leadership names be included, considering sourcing, notability, and accountability under WP:BLP? 3. Does the proposed summary appropriately reflect the incident’s coverage and significance, while remaining proportional in length?

HonestHarbor (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• Option A: Include brief mention of that use, like this revision
• Option B: Include mention along with other alternative uses, like in this revision
• Option C: Include detailed section, like in this revision
• Option D: Do not mention, like in this revision

Linking the previous RfC and discussion. FloblinTheGoblin (talk) 20:18, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

1. The Kabyles Hadra or Kabyles el Hadra are the group of Arabic-speaking mountain dwellers of North Constantine who speak a sedentary Arabic dialect.^[1] The region of the Kabyles Hadara corresponds to eastern Kabylia or the land of the Kutama Berbers who have become Arabized.^[4] They are therefore found throughout the Jijel province, the north of the Mila province, and the west of the Skikda province (Collo).^[1]
2. The Kabyles Hadra or Kabyles el Hadra are terms that were invented by the French in the 19th century to refer to the group of Arabic-speaking mountain dwellers of North Constantine who speak a sedentary Arabic dialect.^[1] Their region corresponded the land of the Kutama Berbers who have become Arabized.^[5] They were found throughout the Jijel province, the north of the Mila province, and the west of the Skikda province (Collo).^[1]

See the talk page above. Provide your answers as Option 1 or 2, explanatory statements in Survey. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 09:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

The man who fell from the ladder was a prominent former football hooligan who had written two books on his involvement in football hooliganism.

Should his involvement in football hooliganism be mentioned in the article, by adding a sentence after the one quoted above? — 22:49, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Question: Does the inclusion of this material comply with WP:DUE and WP:NPOV, or should it be further trimmed or removed?

Disputed Material (Life groups and discipleship practices section): > In a 2019 BuzzFeed News article, several former members of Antioch Waco stated that it had a structure that resembled multi-level marketing, including "social pressure and spiritual incentives" that influenced members to spend more time and money on Antioch, and to recruit new Antioch members to "disciple." One former member told Buzzfeed News that she had both positive and negative experiences at Antioch Waco, but had come to see it as a "harmful place, with cultic tendencies" that does not have the interest of individual attendees as its highest priority. The article also reported that a Waco psychologist was seeing a group of former members that called themselves "Antioch survivors." Other former members reported being "made to feel unwelcome" by Antioch due to personal decisions, such as opting out of missions, or identity-related issues like admitting homosexuality. Seibert responded that Antioch is "committed to investing in people" and "encouraging each person to invest in others’ lives." He also responded that it is not their practice to teach its members to "cut off contact with those who leave the church", adding that it would be "rare that we would formally ask anyone to leave."

Arguments for Inclusion:

• This direct wording accurately reflects significant stories and descriptions reported in a reliable secondary source (BuzzFeed News).
• The material is attributed to former members and balanced with Antioch’s responses, maintaining WP:NPOV.
• Corroborative inclusion helps provide a fuller picture of how former members and professionals (psychologists) perceive the church, which is notable coverage from a reliable publication. The "cultic tendencies" quote provides a perspective that supports the sociological analysis regarding the church's "cult-like intensity."

Arguments for Removal:

• The material relies heavily on unnamed sources, which an editor argues gives undue weight to "criticisms."
• Critics may view the "cultic tendencies" language as WP:UNDUE since it is one person’s characterization, even if framed within a broader set of criticisms and from a reliable source.
• There is concern that including detailed "allegations" could overemphasize negative claims relative to the rest of the article.

Background: This issue has been discussed extensively in previous sections. For full context on the arguments see: Buzzfeed 2019 (Archived) #anonymous former members

HonestHarbor (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposed wording: "In 2025, a youth leader at Antioch affiliate River Church Banff was convicted of "repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy" and placed on the sex offenders register. According to The Times, the conduct involved inappropriately stroking the boy beginning in 2022. The Press and Journal and The Times report that the church's senior leadership, lead pastor Rob McArthur and founding elder Joe Ewen, were aware of the behavior for several months before the family and police were notified. Parents of the victim spoke of how their son was "betrayed" by their church, saying the leadership repeatedly "downplayed" concerns about grooming and prioritized protecting the public image of the church. After the victim’s family approached Antioch Waco in 2023, McArthur and Ewen issued a joint apology. Media coverage also noted River Church Banff's formal link to Antioch Waco, including receipt of staff salaries and hosting missionaries from the United States. Following reporting, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator opened an inquiry into the church's trustees."

Arguments for inclusion:

• The material is supported by multiple independent, reliable sources.
• It summarizes a notable incident linked to Antioch’s affiliate structure and senior leadership.
• It maintains proportionality and attribution without editorializing.
• It gives context about the wider organization and regulatory outcomes without excessive narrative detail.

Arguments for removal or trimming:

• The formal legal charge is “sexual activity with an older child” and any other phrasing (e.g., “repeatedly sexually touching a 14-year-old boy”) is “inaccurate” or paraphrasing, per WP:BLP.
• Terms such as “grooming” are not directly in the sources’ voice and should not be used.
• Media coverage did not “highlight” Antioch Waco’s involvement, so such phrasing is inappropriate.

Questions for comment: 1. Does this proposed wording accurately reflect the sources, remain neutral, and maintain due weight in the article? 2. Should the senior leadership names be included, considering sourcing, notability, and accountability under WP:BLP? 3. Does the proposed summary appropriately reflect the incident’s coverage and significance, while remaining proportional in length?

HonestHarbor (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• A) Country in the Baltic region of Europe
• B) Country in Northern Europe
• C) Baltic country in Europe
• D) Other descriptions

GoodDay (talk) 02:04, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Question: Does the inclusion of this material comply with WP:DUE and WP:NPOV, or should it be further trimmed or removed?

Disputed Material (Life groups and discipleship practices section): > In a 2019 BuzzFeed News article, several former members of Antioch Waco stated that it had a structure that resembled multi-level marketing, including "social pressure and spiritual incentives" that influenced members to spend more time and money on Antioch, and to recruit new Antioch members to "disciple." One former member told Buzzfeed News that she had both positive and negative experiences at Antioch Waco, but had come to see it as a "harmful place, with cultic tendencies" that does not have the interest of individual attendees as its highest priority. The article also reported that a Waco psychologist was seeing a group of former members that called themselves "Antioch survivors." Other former members reported being "made to feel unwelcome" by Antioch due to personal decisions, such as opting out of missions, or identity-related issues like admitting homosexuality. Seibert responded that Antioch is "committed to investing in people" and "encouraging each person to invest in others’ lives." He also responded that it is not their practice to teach its members to "cut off contact with those who leave the church", adding that it would be "rare that we would formally ask anyone to leave."

Arguments for Inclusion:

• This direct wording accurately reflects significant stories and descriptions reported in a reliable secondary source (BuzzFeed News).
• The material is attributed to former members and balanced with Antioch’s responses, maintaining WP:NPOV.
• Corroborative inclusion helps provide a fuller picture of how former members and professionals (psychologists) perceive the church, which is notable coverage from a reliable publication. The "cultic tendencies" quote provides a perspective that supports the sociological analysis regarding the church's "cult-like intensity."

Arguments for Removal:

• The material relies heavily on unnamed sources, which an editor argues gives undue weight to "criticisms."
• Critics may view the "cultic tendencies" language as WP:UNDUE since it is one person’s characterization, even if framed within a broader set of criticisms and from a reliable source.
• There is concern that including detailed "allegations" could overemphasize negative claims relative to the rest of the article.

Background: This issue has been discussed extensively in previous sections. For full context on the arguments see: Buzzfeed 2019 (Archived) #anonymous former members

HonestHarbor (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• Option A: Do not adopt as a guideline
• Option B: Adopt as a guideline
• Option C: Adopt as a guideline, and additionally require a new user right

Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:39, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Question 2: How long should administrator recall petitions be left open before being automatically closed as unsuccessful?

Currently the threshold is 25 signatures over 30 days. For the sake of the closer, please pick only natural numbers.

"Successful" is the language used at WP:RECALL to signify that the admin the petition is about will need to request their tools back from the community at RFA or the admin elections. "Unsuccessful" is hereby defined, for the purpose of this RfC, as "admin retains tools". GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 08:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Or put more succinctly: should we move to using "Violent Typhoons" in the infobox using JMA data as opposed to "Super Typhoons" and JTWC data in the infoboxes as the JTWC data is unofficial and has been for decades. AutisticYapper (talk) 05:19, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Question 2: How long should administrator recall petitions be left open before being automatically closed as unsuccessful?

Currently the threshold is 25 signatures over 30 days. For the sake of the closer, please pick only natural numbers.

"Successful" is the language used at WP:RECALL to signify that the admin the petition is about will need to request their tools back from the community at RFA or the admin elections. "Unsuccessful" is hereby defined, for the purpose of this RfC, as "admin retains tools". GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 08:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)