User talk:Cwobeel/Archives/2017/June

Please comment on Talk:Emmett Till
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Emmett Till. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sean Combs
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sean Combs. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hasan Salama
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hasan Salama. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Village pump (policy)

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:


 * 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:


 * 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:19, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Help with Congressional Institute article
Hello, Cwobeel! Hope it's ok for me to reach out. I came across your name at WikiProject Politics and saw you have an interest in American politics and conservatism, so wanted to see if you might help with a COI edit request in this topic area? The Congressional Institute article needs some attention; the existing content is overly detailed, promotional for the organization, has inline external links, and is not properly sourced. For the Institute, I'm seeking to update the page with a new draft that trims the whole article down and provides thorough sourcing. The edit request on the Talk page here provides more details on the changes proposed. As I have a COI (I'm working for the Institute as part of my work with Beutler Ink) I won't edit the article directly and instead am looking for an uninvolved editor to review the draft and make the edits if they're appropriate. Would you be able to take a look? Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 01:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Just as I reached out here, another editor was able to review and make the updates, so this is all done and you can disregard. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 02:32, 30 June 2017 (UTC)