Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: (refresh )
Biographies
[edit ]Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography
A: Can belonging to an Aboriginal Australian or Torres Strait Islander group be considered a form of nationality?
B: Should MOS:NATIONALITY be edited to include an example of someone belonging to an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander nation with that nationality named as a demonym in the first sentence of the lead, similarly to the example given for Native Americans and Indigenous Canadians? E.g. the first sentence of the Ashleigh Barty article reads:
Ashleigh Jacinta Barty AO (born 24 April 1996) is an Australian (Ngarigo [1] [2] ) former professional tennis player and cricketer.
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
There are four options:
- Reliable
- Situational
- Unreliable
- Deprecate
Current wording: Trump's comments on the 2017 Unite the Right rally, condemning "this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides" and stating that there were "very fine people on both sides", were criticized as implying a moral equivalence between the white supremacist demonstrators and the counter-protesters.
Proposed wording: Following the 2017 Unite the Right rally, Trump condemned "this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides." On another occasion, he said that there were "very fine people on both sides," though said in the same statement that "I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally." His comments were criticized as implying a moral equivalence between the white supremacist demonstrators and the counter-protesters. Riposte97 (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Aristides de Sousa Mendes
Should the sentence be changed to:As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas and passports to an undetermined number of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France, including Jews.
?As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas to thousands of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France.
"Trump and Elon Musk are attempting to dismantle most of USAID,[3] resulting in more than 15,000 excess HIV-related deaths through February according to HIV Modeling Consortium estimates."[4]
Yes or No. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Economy, trade, and companies
[edit ]Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Use of source: This source is mostly used on "List of <airline> destinations" articles to justify inclusion of a current or previous airline/airport route. e.g. List_of_Air_Caraïbes_destinations (3 citations), List_of_British_Airways_destinations (12 citations), and so on. The previous discussion found that it is used in over 807 articles.
Why is it relevant? There was consensus in a Village Pump RfC that any airline destinations included in Wikipedia must have a WP:RS citation.
RFC: What should RoutesOnline.com [1] be designated as?
- Option 1: Generally reliable
- Option 2: Additional considerations
- Option 3: Generally unreliable
- Option 4: Deprecate
History and geography
[edit ]Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
Talk:History of Libya under Muammar Gaddafi
- A) East Uttar Pradesh (UP) with no alternative pipe link: Modern academia(s) have moved on and shifted to the UP origin, so should our project.
- B) No change: Status quo.
- C) East UP with alternative pipe link: Per the suggestion of Furius ~ that slightly/indirectly including other minority theories wouldn't hurt.
- Catalan victory
- Almoravid victory
- Inconclusive
(削除) / (削除ここまで)(追記) or (追記ここまで) See aftermath (A new section would be created in the article) - Leave it blank
diff with, diff without 129.97.124.166 (talk) 02:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- A: Yes. Please add any conditions required.
- B: Yes, but only those prior to 2016 or other threshold[2] .
- C: Avoid government published maps (US or otherwise)
- D: Avoid any political maps
- E: No. Please state why and what sources are preferable
- F: Other, including derivative maps
Talk:Aristides de Sousa Mendes
Should the sentence be changed to:As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas and passports to an undetermined number of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France, including Jews.
?As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas to thousands of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France.
- Hamas retains the long-term objective of establishing one state in former Mandatory Palestine.
- Hamas accepted the 1967 borders in its 2017 charter, thus acknowledging the existence of an entity on the other side.
Options
- About the same
- 1 should have greater weight
- 2 should have greater weight
- Other - please explain. Alaexis ¿question? 09:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Language and linguistics
[edit ]Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States
- keep religion in InfoBox as it already is
- remove from InfoBox to focus on a section where we can provide more information on religion
- Keep religion in InfoBox, but add precise numbers to the InfoBox
- Move the sources information from the InfoBox to the section on religion
- Something completely different.
- "(a) English is the official language of the United States."
- "(b) Executive Order 13166 of August 11, 2000 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency), is hereby revoked; nothing in this order, however, requires or directs any change in the services provided by any agency. Agency heads should make decisions as they deem necessary to fulfill their respective agencies' mission and efficiently provide Government services to the American people. Agency heads are not required to amend, remove, or otherwise stop production of documents, products, or other services prepared or offered in languages other than English."
That being said, Executive Orders are not legislation and are limited to the Executive Branch's interpretation of existing law. They can also be overturned by the next president. This EO also seems to be largely symbolic and does not require any substantial changes to federal programs per the NYT, except that agencies are no longer required to support "programs for people with limited English proficiency" per NPR. Usually, from what I can tell as well, official languages of countries are designated either in a country's constitution or through the legislative process.
There have also been attempts to codify English as the official language through legislative means with more teeth, force of law, and would require official documents, laws, communications, and such, to be in English, as mentioned in the article English Language Unity Act and as seen by H.R. 997 from the 118th Congress, but those efforts have never been signed into law. However, there is an argument that the Executive Branch could set policy in this space, though it is unprecedented. There's also a middle ground, such as including a note stating that "English is the official language of the Executive Branch per EO [number], but is not stated in the constitution or in federal law", similar to the way that we currently do for states. There's also an argument to wait and see how folks react. As such here are the options I envisioned, though I am open to other options.
Should we include "English" as the official language of the United States?
- A: Yes, with no qualifications.
- B: No, keep prior status quo.
- C: Yes, with the qualifier that it is not mentioned in the Constitution or in applicable legislation.
- D: State that there is no de jure official language, but mention that an official language has been set by the Executive Branch.
- E: Wait.
Note that there is another RFC taking place at Talk:Languages of the United States § English as official language AG202 (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Languages of the United States
The order plainly states that it makes no legal change except for rescinding Executive Order 13166; agencies are no longer required to provide services or documents in languages other than English, but are not directed to necessarily make any changes.
The order does designate English as the United States' official language, even if no changes to the legal code have been made. — gabldotink [ talk | contribs | global account ] 01:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Template talk:IPA pulmonic consonants
Specifically, it is proposed that the nasal, trill and tap/flap rows be moved immediately before the fricatives (diff ). Kanguole 11:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Trump derangement syndrome
- The specific text is the following:
A 2021 research study found no evidence to support the existence of TDS among Trump detractors on the left, but instead found bias among his supporters
.
- The specific source is the following:
- Franks, Andrew S.; Hesami, Farhang (September 18, 2021). "Seeking Evidence of The MAGA Cult and Trump Derangement Syndrome: An Examination of (A)symmetric Political Bias". Societies. 11 (3): 113. doi:10.3390/soc11030113 .
Trump supporters consistently showed bias in favor of the interests and ostensible positions of Trump, whereas Trump's detractors did not show an opposing bias ... Results of the current study do not support the broad existence of so-called "Trump Derangement Syndrome" on the left, but they may lend credence to accusations that some Trump supporters have a cult-like loyalty to the 45th president.
- BootsED (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
Maths, science, and technology
[edit ]Talk:Euthanasia in the United States
This page is currently very misleading. Assisted suicide and euthanasia are two separate and different things. Euthanasia is ending the life of another person or animal that is either terminally ill or undergoing unacceptable suffering. Assisted suicide on the other hand one person aiding another in taking their own life. Note: I placed in italics what the key difference is. This distinction is further exemplified by the fact that there is a page called Assisted suicide in the United States. However, this page uses the term "assisted suicide" multiple times, seemingly conflating euthanasia with assisted suicide, despite the two being distinct and different; therefore, misleading the reader. The whole section for Maine for example only refers to assisted dying, not euthanasia, which this article is about, along with multiple other uses of the term assisted suicide throughout the page.
So where do we go from here? Do we take down the page and put it into draft status until these issues are fixed, or are there people that are willing to run through the page and correct the conflations between assisted suicide and euthanasia and eliminate any use of the former term from this article? I can't say it’s something I have the time to do personally. Helper201 (talk) 00:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
Talk:Coefficient of relationship
There is consensus among experts that the assumptions of the polyvagal theory are untenable.[5] Ian Oelsner (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Art, architecture, literature, and media
[edit ]Talk:List of highest-grossing live-action/animated films
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film
Politics, government, and law
[edit ]Talk:Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia
Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States
Of course, this RfC does not affect discussion of the terms themselves in the article. I suggest that editors reply with Illegal or Undocumented or other specific adjective. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Euthanasia in the United States
This page is currently very misleading. Assisted suicide and euthanasia are two separate and different things. Euthanasia is ending the life of another person or animal that is either terminally ill or undergoing unacceptable suffering. Assisted suicide on the other hand one person aiding another in taking their own life. Note: I placed in italics what the key difference is. This distinction is further exemplified by the fact that there is a page called Assisted suicide in the United States. However, this page uses the term "assisted suicide" multiple times, seemingly conflating euthanasia with assisted suicide, despite the two being distinct and different; therefore, misleading the reader. The whole section for Maine for example only refers to assisted dying, not euthanasia, which this article is about, along with multiple other uses of the term assisted suicide throughout the page.
So where do we go from here? Do we take down the page and put it into draft status until these issues are fixed, or are there people that are willing to run through the page and correct the conflations between assisted suicide and euthanasia and eliminate any use of the former term from this article? I can't say it’s something I have the time to do personally. Helper201 (talk) 00:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
- "Populism" or "Left-wing populism"
- "Green politics" or "Environmentalism"
- "Progressivism"
- Other ideologies (e.g. "Direct democracy")
Please indicate which ideology to include and in what order to list them. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
- Option 1: Generally reliable
- Option 2: Additional considerations
- Option 3: Generally unreliable
- Option 4: Deprecate
An RfCbefore can be found here. The source is used 89 times. FortunateSons (talk) 10:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States
- keep religion in InfoBox as it already is
- remove from InfoBox to focus on a section where we can provide more information on religion
- Keep religion in InfoBox, but add precise numbers to the InfoBox
- Move the sources information from the InfoBox to the section on religion
- Something completely different.
diff with, diff without 129.97.124.166 (talk) 02:57, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- A: Yes. Please add any conditions required.
- B: Yes, but only those prior to 2016 or other threshold[3] .
- C: Avoid government published maps (US or otherwise)
- D: Avoid any political maps
- E: No. Please state why and what sources are preferable
- F: Other, including derivative maps
Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election
Current wording: Trump's comments on the 2017 Unite the Right rally, condemning "this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides" and stating that there were "very fine people on both sides", were criticized as implying a moral equivalence between the white supremacist demonstrators and the counter-protesters.
Proposed wording: Following the 2017 Unite the Right rally, Trump condemned "this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides." On another occasion, he said that there were "very fine people on both sides," though said in the same statement that "I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally." His comments were criticized as implying a moral equivalence between the white supremacist demonstrators and the counter-protesters. Riposte97 (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
In my opinion, it doesnt make sense to label Russia, Belarus and North Korea as authoritarian/totalitarian dictatorships but exclude China despite overwhelming amount of sources calling it an authoritarian dictatorship. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
"Trump and Elon Musk are attempting to dismantle most of USAID,[6] resulting in more than 15,000 excess HIV-related deaths through February according to HIV Modeling Consortium estimates."[7]
Yes or No. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- Hamas retains the long-term objective of establishing one state in former Mandatory Palestine.
- Hamas accepted the 1967 borders in its 2017 charter, thus acknowledging the existence of an entity on the other side.
Options
- About the same
- 1 should have greater weight
- 2 should have greater weight
- Other - please explain. Alaexis ¿question? 09:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
- "(a) English is the official language of the United States."
- "(b) Executive Order 13166 of August 11, 2000 (Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency), is hereby revoked; nothing in this order, however, requires or directs any change in the services provided by any agency. Agency heads should make decisions as they deem necessary to fulfill their respective agencies' mission and efficiently provide Government services to the American people. Agency heads are not required to amend, remove, or otherwise stop production of documents, products, or other services prepared or offered in languages other than English."
That being said, Executive Orders are not legislation and are limited to the Executive Branch's interpretation of existing law. They can also be overturned by the next president. This EO also seems to be largely symbolic and does not require any substantial changes to federal programs per the NYT, except that agencies are no longer required to support "programs for people with limited English proficiency" per NPR. Usually, from what I can tell as well, official languages of countries are designated either in a country's constitution or through the legislative process.
There have also been attempts to codify English as the official language through legislative means with more teeth, force of law, and would require official documents, laws, communications, and such, to be in English, as mentioned in the article English Language Unity Act and as seen by H.R. 997 from the 118th Congress, but those efforts have never been signed into law. However, there is an argument that the Executive Branch could set policy in this space, though it is unprecedented. There's also a middle ground, such as including a note stating that "English is the official language of the Executive Branch per EO [number], but is not stated in the constitution or in federal law", similar to the way that we currently do for states. There's also an argument to wait and see how folks react. As such here are the options I envisioned, though I am open to other options.
Should we include "English" as the official language of the United States?
- A: Yes, with no qualifications.
- B: No, keep prior status quo.
- C: Yes, with the qualifier that it is not mentioned in the Constitution or in applicable legislation.
- D: State that there is no de jure official language, but mention that an official language has been set by the Executive Branch.
- E: Wait.
Note that there is another RFC taking place at Talk:Languages of the United States § English as official language AG202 (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:National Socialist Network
Talk:Languages of the United States
The order plainly states that it makes no legal change except for rescinding Executive Order 13166; agencies are no longer required to provide services or documents in languages other than English, but are not directed to necessarily make any changes.
The order does designate English as the United States' official language, even if no changes to the legal code have been made. — gabldotink [ talk | contribs | global account ] 01:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Trump derangement syndrome
- The specific text is the following:
A 2021 research study found no evidence to support the existence of TDS among Trump detractors on the left, but instead found bias among his supporters
.
- The specific source is the following:
- Franks, Andrew S.; Hesami, Farhang (September 18, 2021). "Seeking Evidence of The MAGA Cult and Trump Derangement Syndrome: An Examination of (A)symmetric Political Bias". Societies. 11 (3): 113. doi:10.3390/soc11030113 .
Trump supporters consistently showed bias in favor of the interests and ostensible positions of Trump, whereas Trump's detractors did not show an opposing bias ... Results of the current study do not support the broad existence of so-called "Trump Derangement Syndrome" on the left, but they may lend credence to accusations that some Trump supporters have a cult-like loyalty to the 45th president.
- BootsED (talk) 02:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
Religion and philosophy
[edit ]Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
For previous discussion leading up to this RfC, please see the linked talk page.[5]. Arkenstrone (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Society, sports, and culture
[edit ]Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States
Of course, this RfC does not affect discussion of the terms themselves in the article. I suggest that editors reply with Illegal or Undocumented or other specific adjective. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Talk:Euthanasia in the United States
This page is currently very misleading. Assisted suicide and euthanasia are two separate and different things. Euthanasia is ending the life of another person or animal that is either terminally ill or undergoing unacceptable suffering. Assisted suicide on the other hand one person aiding another in taking their own life. Note: I placed in italics what the key difference is. This distinction is further exemplified by the fact that there is a page called Assisted suicide in the United States. However, this page uses the term "assisted suicide" multiple times, seemingly conflating euthanasia with assisted suicide, despite the two being distinct and different; therefore, misleading the reader. The whole section for Maine for example only refers to assisted dying, not euthanasia, which this article is about, along with multiple other uses of the term assisted suicide throughout the page.
So where do we go from here? Do we take down the page and put it into draft status until these issues are fixed, or are there people that are willing to run through the page and correct the conflations between assisted suicide and euthanasia and eliminate any use of the former term from this article? I can't say it’s something I have the time to do personally. Helper201 (talk) 00:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Know Your Meme's research is handled by an independent professional editorial and research staff and community members.The site features different categories of entries, including those marked as "Confirmed," which according to KYM have been carefully researched and verified by the research staff.
Currently, KYM is listed among user-generated content sources considered generally unreliable per WP:UGC. This RFC seeks to determine whether "Confirmed" articles on KYM, which have undergone editorial review and fact-checking by staff, should be considered reliable sources for limited use in Wikipedia articles about internet memes and web culture.
Proposal
Little discussion has been had about KYM articles marked as "Confirmed" in the past. The last time this was discussed was 5 years ago, though this was when there was no information about KYM's editorial process or staff, and the result of the discussion was still unclear. Since then, KYM has developed a more robust editorial process with clear guidelines for verification and fact-checking, as outlined on their Editorial Rules page. The site now has an established team of professional editors with specific roles and responsibilities, and their "Confirmed" status has become a meaningful indicator of editorial review rather than merely user-generated content.
I propose that KYM articles clearly marked as "Confirmed" or written by staff (e.g. [6]) may be used as reliable sources for limited purposes in Wikipedia, specifically:
- For articles about internet memes and web culture
- When properly attributed (e.g., "According to Know Your Meme...")
- For factual information about the origin, spread, and evolution of memes
- Not for use in biographies of living persons
- Not to be used in Wikipedia's voice (WP:WIKIVOICE)
KYM's editorial process for "Confirmed" articles involves fact-checking and verification by professional staff. Their guidelines state that Know Your Meme staff review and fact-check content thoroughly
and that they are careful to cite only reliable sources and strive to provide an impartial and balanced variety of perspectives.
Their editorial guidelines clearly state the dos-and-dont's before a submission is properly researched and eventually confirmed
.
This RFC does not propose any changes to the status of KYM articles marked as "Submission" or "Deadpool", which would remain unreliable per WP:UGC. Abayomi2003 (talk) 18:57, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
There are four options:
- Reliable
- Situational
- Unreliable
- Deprecate
Talk:Aristides de Sousa Mendes
Should the sentence be changed to:As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas and passports to an undetermined number of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France, including Jews.
?As the Portuguese consul-general in the French city of Bordeaux, he defied the orders of António de Oliveira Salazar's Estado Novo regime, issuing visas to thousands of refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied France.
Wikipedia style and naming
[edit ]Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
- Part 4 of WP:DISASTER reads
- If there is no accepted name, the name should be formatted as follows: tornado, tornado outbreak, or tornado outbreak sequence, followed by Geographic location (only if necessary: City, State, Country, Continent, or any combination of these), followed by Year (or Month/year, or day/month/year if need be). Example: Tornado outbreak of April 14–16, 2011
- Narrow date range
- Tornado outbreak of January 2–3, 1234 when January 2–3 covers ~60% of sources
- Broad date range
- Tornado outbreak of January 1–4, 1234 when January 1–4 covers ~90% of sources
- Part of month
- Tornado outbreak of Early January, 1234, Tornado outbreak of mid-January, 1234, Tornado outbreak of Late January, 1234
- Each part is 10 days, moved forward or back 3 days for flexibility and discretion
- Month
- Tornado outbreak of January 1234
The next preferred option is used to disambiguate two events in the same (part of the) month. Year ranges can be used for December–January events. This RfC does not change the WP:COMMONNAME name/location parts 1–3 of WP:DISASTER. 216.58.25.209 (talk) 14:33, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
Realistically, Bangalore is far more commonly used name both worldwide and in India. Regardless, that is an essentially anecdotal, subjective statement and there exists a WP standard for this reason. The Bengaluru moves adheres to the standard.
This article adhered to the standard when it changed to 'Denali' in 2015. It currently does not. It is factually true that the AP as well as Britannica are following the federal name change. This is not to mention that every map of the world in every textbook and atlas used in US schools from 1896 to 2015 used Mt. McKinley. I don't believe it is unreasonable to assume this to be proof of a status quo. The Obama name change was an obvious deviation from this well established status quo of more than a century – Wikipedia followed it still, as it was in accordance with COMMONNAME standards.
I would like to understand why that same standard is not being applied presently. We are either to say the COMMONNAME rules are in need of relitigation, or the article title must be changed to 'Mt. McKinley'. Jibolba (talk) 22:35, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography
A: Can belonging to an Aboriginal Australian or Torres Strait Islander group be considered a form of nationality?
B: Should MOS:NATIONALITY be edited to include an example of someone belonging to an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander nation with that nationality named as a demonym in the first sentence of the lead, similarly to the example given for Native Americans and Indigenous Canadians? E.g. the first sentence of the Ashleigh Barty article reads:
Ashleigh Jacinta Barty AO (born 24 April 1996) is an Australian (Ngarigo [8] [9] ) former professional tennis player and cricketer.
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film
Wikipedia policies and guidelines
[edit ]Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Newspapers/Notability
Wikipedia:WikiProject Newspapers/Notability→ Wikipedia:Notability (newspapers)
Having a guideline for notability of newspapers addresses the challenge of supporting recent increased interest in developing Wikipedia's relationship with fact-checking, journalism, reliable media, and newspapers in particular.
One existing closely related guideline is for books. Here is that, and several comparable essays for media.
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
WikiProjects and collaborations
[edit ]
Wikipedia technical issues and templates
[edit ]Template talk:Redirect for discussion
Should "do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed" be added to {{Redirect for discussion }}, similar to {{Article for deletion }}? --Jax 0677 (talk) 07:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia proposals
[edit ]
Unsorted
[edit ]
User names
[edit ]
This page is for bringing attention to usernames which may be in violation of Wikipedia's username policy. Before listing a username here, consider if it should be more appropriately reported elsewhere, or if it needs to be reported at all:
- Report blatantly inappropriate usernames, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory, to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention.
- For other cases involving vandalism, personal attacks or other urgent issues, try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents; blatant vandalism can also be reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, which is sometimes a better option.
Do NOT post here if:
- the user in question has made no recent edits.
- you wish to have the block of a user reviewed. Instead, discuss the block with the blocking administrator (see also Wikipedia:Blocking policy § Unblocking).
Before adding a name here you MUST ensure that the user in question:
- has been warned about their username (with e.g. {{subst:uw-username}}) and has been allowed time to address the concern on their user talk page.
- has disagreed with the concern, refused to change their username and/or continued to edit without replying to the warning.
- is not already blocked.
If, after having followed all the steps above, you still believe the username violates Wikipedia's username policy, you may list it here with an explanation of which part of the username policy you think has been violated. After posting, please alert the user of the discussion (with e.g. {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}). You may also invite others who have expressed concern about the username to comment on the discussion by use of this template.
Add new requests below, using the syntax {{subst:rfcn1|username|2=reason ~~~~}}.
Tools: Special:ListUsers, Special:BlockList
Reports
[edit ]Please remember that this is not a vote, rather, it is a place where editors can come when they are unsure what to do with a username, and to get outside opinions (hence it's named "requests for comment"). There are no set time limits to the period of discussion.
- Place your report below this line. Please put new reports on the top of the list.
Tales of Arcadia
[edit ]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the username below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User names). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result was: user has requested a rename, no strong consensus formed here but they have agreed to change their name in light of some of the opposition camp's arguments. Primefac (talk) 20:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Tales of Arcadia (talk · contribs)
Their username is that of an animated television show franchise, Tales of Arcadia, which they freely admit on their user page. This user mainly edits the German Wikipedia, which has a different username policy that is more accepting of what we would call promotional names. For that reason I attempted to discuss it with them instead of blocking them for what seems a clear violation to me, but they do not wish to voluntarily change their username(likely because it is a valid username on the German Wikipedia). They declined my offer of alternatives(creating a new account for their use here, adding "fan" to their username). I dislike bringing this up, but I feel it's a clear violation. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- First of all, I would like to make a clear statement at the beginning: I'm willing to any discussion about my username, because I really like to contribute to the Wikipedia project and don't want to leave it (and especially not in this way). But I don't agree with the position of 331dot, so I have proposed that we can start a discussion here if needed.
- As I have understand the policy usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, organization, website, product, musical group or band, team, club, creative group, or organized event are not allowed. And 331dot has the opinion that Tales of Arcadia which is also the name of a TV franchise is considered as product.
- But the word Arcadia itself has a very long history and refers to a "vision of pastoralism and harmony with nature" as well as to different places, movies, games and a lot of more as you can see here. The phrase Tales of on the other hand is used for movies and books very commonly. So in my opinion the term Tales of Arcadia is just a sequence of a commonly title suffix (Tales of) and a mystical place (Arcadia). DreamWorks (the creator of the franchise) wouldn't be able to protect this name as brand or product because it could refer to any of the stories who are telled about the place of Arcadia. They have just chosen this title to awake a mystical tension.
- And because of that I don't see where the user policy would forbid this name. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 19:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note that you were editing articles related to the franchise, and you say on your userpage that your name is based on the franchise, so it's not a coincidence or related to a broader concept. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I have never declined that I have edited articles in the past who are related to the franchise. But as everyone can see all contributions were minor changes and none of them were promotional. And I also have edited articles who are not related to the franchise. But my main focus is the German Wikipedia. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 20:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- To 331dot, Bishonen, Drmies, 1AmNobody24, Salvidrim! and all other readers. I would like to add some further explanation to my first statement:
- When I created my account in the end of 2023 I have choosen my username with a explicit reference to the TV franchise. I've always communicated this clearly as all of you can see on my user page. The justification that my user name consists of the terms Tales of and the place Arcadia shouldn't mean that I'm denying my reference to the franchise rather I only wanted to explain that in my own opinion the name Tales of Arcadia wouldn't be protectable as a product name or brand by DreamWorks or any other company because it consists of a common phrase and a mystical place. Again: I'm not denying that my user name was choosen with reference to the franchise. But I also never have promoted the franchise here or on any other project.
- So I think the question we now need to clarify is, how names with reference to fictional content should be handled. Are names who are equal to the title of franchises, movies, series or books allowed or not? What about other fictional content like characters or places? If such names are generally not allowed here, then I fully agree with you and my name needs to be changed? But aren't there also a lot of other users who would needed to be renamed then?
- To be honest, what was really shocking for me, is the fact that I have contributed to the Wikipedia a lots of time before now (more than 1 year later) this username warning has reached me. I've become very comfortable with the name and thus I don't wanted to give up my name without a discussion in the community. And this is exactly what we are here for. I don't want to waste the time of anyone here, but please also keep in mind, how frustrating this whole process is for me.
- So please let us come back to the root question how we should handle names with a fictional reference. Maybe one of the already voted users may change their mind and hopefully some other users will contribute to this discussion as well.
- Finally, a friendly request to all administrators who still think my name is against the policy: Please do not just block my account, without giving my the chance to react once the discussion here is completed. I always was patient with all of you and was respecting every opinion. Sincerely Tales of Arcadia (talk) 21:57, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Since it seems that sadly no further comments are posted here I'm willing to change my username because of most of you have voted to disallow the name. Please give me time till tomorrow evening (German time) to think of a new name. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Currently I have a few names in my mind. I'll need to think of a bit which one to choose and probably request a rename tomorrow. Keep you updated here. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Since it seems that sadly no further comments are posted here I'm willing to change my username because of most of you have voted to disallow the name. Please give me time till tomorrow evening (German time) to think of a new name. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note that you were editing articles related to the franchise, and you say on your userpage that your name is based on the franchise, so it's not a coincidence or related to a broader concept. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Allow Technically it is the name of a product, but it's a creative work. People regularly name themselves after their favourite characters, books, songs, and so on, and I can't see how that causes disruption. They aren't selling something, and it's not promotional in the typical sense we think of on Wikipedia. And it would be a shame to block an active deWiki contributor from resources such as TWL for an issue as trivial as this. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:40, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I suggested that they simply add the word "fan" to their current username to resolve this. That's a policy compliant way for them to still indicate their personal interest in this franchise. 331dot (talk) 23:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I can't see how "fan of named creative work" (a username which explicitly promotes a product) is in anyway less problematic than a username which is "named create work". And @Bishonen, you haven't seen this because it's on their deWiki page, but the argument they've adopted directly a result of a member of the deWiki Arbcom telling them this would work. If you think they should be blocked for it, you may do so, I suppose, but it has no bearing on their username. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Because it indicates an individual. Their current name suggests to those that see it an association with the topic or that they represent the topic. If my name was New England Patriots or Boston Red Sox, the same would apply. It's not disallowed to indicate an interest in a topic. "RedSoxFan" would be completely acceptable. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Both the examples you've highlighted would be WP:ORGNAME violations, not because they take their names from products, because they take the names of a coorporations, and in a way that could easily imply shared use. I understand what you're trying to illustrate with them, however, I really do, but I'd like to get back to the user at hand. In this particular case, while the user has taken their name from a product, they have taken their name from a particular subset of products: the subset of creative works. I so understand where you're coming from on this issue - and the name does, fairly obviously, make a reference to a product, I cannot disagree with you there. But there's a reason I'm focusing on the fact that it's a creative work. These are strange, because unlike other products, people may often name themselves after movies, tv shows, poems, songs, characters, without any intent to advertise the product in question. (Yes, characters are products.) Could these be blocked instantly? By the letter of the policy, yes, you could have likely blocked instantly without any need for the RFCUN. Admins do, semi-regularly. You chose not to, so you already accept that there is some difference between this username and other product usernames. (I've been assuming that it's because it's a creative work: is there some other reason?) However, given that they are an active contributor on deWiki, given that they have not engaged in promotional or disruptive editing on any Wiki, and given that there has been no real argument that their username has caused disruption, mislead other editors as to their identity, and given that their editor clearly discloses where their username came from, their lack of personal connection to the movies, and given that this past week of discussion with a goal of trying to force them to make their disclosure in their name has prevented both of you from improving the encyclopedia, would it not be better to WP:IAR and say "it's against the letter of the law, but not the spirit?". And I'm saying this as a stickler for making people follow the exact terms of the Creative Commons licenses and plagiarism policies. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 00:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I chose not to block only due to the differing username policies between here and the German Wikipedia. When I've done this with other editors in this situation, they're usually willing to either rename or create an account just to use here. This is the first one I've had decline. And their response here was to claim that this was a coincidence, wiklawyering it. ("I'm from Boston and I wear red socks, so "Boston Red Sox" is okay as my name") 331dot (talk) 00:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, I think there's been a bit of a translation issue here. I don't believe Arcadia is claiming their username is a coincidence, they're more arguing that it is more likely to be perceived as a coincidence than it is to be perceived as promotion. This is most likely due to the fact that our policy places such a focus on "unambiguous". They believe that if they can show their username is not unambiguously that of a product, they can keep it. They like their username, so they're doing that. They've also taken this argument from their mentor at de:Benutzer Diskussion:Tales of Arcadia#Antwort auf deine Anfrage. I still understand that this has produced a somewhat wiki-lawyer-like approach, and I get why that's frustrating to deal with. However, I'd urge you to look past that, if for no other reason that it has no effect on their username. And apologies if I'm coming across as dismissive of your concerns or arguments. I understand where you're coming from - it's just that I was blocked on svWiki last year for a username violation. I was unblocked rather quickly, thankfully, once another administrator pointed out that I wasn't a creep, just a lesbian and productive enWiki editor. But if I hadn't been unblocked, then it would have actively hampered my ability to edit enWiki articles. Everytime somebody looked at my global contributions they would have seen I was blocked on other Wikis, I would have lost access to the Wiki library, and it would have prevented me from making my occasional minor edits on svWiki. Username blocks are needed, to prevent obviously disruptive usernames that make other editor uncomfortable, to enforce local policies surrounding the use of shared accounts, or as a quick way of getting rid of spammers/accounts which are obviously not here in good faith. This editor is here in good faith, and nobody has made any claim otherwise. Yes, you're right on a technicality. But what good does forcing them to make their name explicitly promotional actually do? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I chose not to block only due to the differing username policies between here and the German Wikipedia. When I've done this with other editors in this situation, they're usually willing to either rename or create an account just to use here. This is the first one I've had decline. And their response here was to claim that this was a coincidence, wiklawyering it. ("I'm from Boston and I wear red socks, so "Boston Red Sox" is okay as my name") 331dot (talk) 00:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Both the examples you've highlighted would be WP:ORGNAME violations, not because they take their names from products, because they take the names of a coorporations, and in a way that could easily imply shared use. I understand what you're trying to illustrate with them, however, I really do, but I'd like to get back to the user at hand. In this particular case, while the user has taken their name from a product, they have taken their name from a particular subset of products: the subset of creative works. I so understand where you're coming from on this issue - and the name does, fairly obviously, make a reference to a product, I cannot disagree with you there. But there's a reason I'm focusing on the fact that it's a creative work. These are strange, because unlike other products, people may often name themselves after movies, tv shows, poems, songs, characters, without any intent to advertise the product in question. (Yes, characters are products.) Could these be blocked instantly? By the letter of the policy, yes, you could have likely blocked instantly without any need for the RFCUN. Admins do, semi-regularly. You chose not to, so you already accept that there is some difference between this username and other product usernames. (I've been assuming that it's because it's a creative work: is there some other reason?) However, given that they are an active contributor on deWiki, given that they have not engaged in promotional or disruptive editing on any Wiki, and given that there has been no real argument that their username has caused disruption, mislead other editors as to their identity, and given that their editor clearly discloses where their username came from, their lack of personal connection to the movies, and given that this past week of discussion with a goal of trying to force them to make their disclosure in their name has prevented both of you from improving the encyclopedia, would it not be better to WP:IAR and say "it's against the letter of the law, but not the spirit?". And I'm saying this as a stickler for making people follow the exact terms of the Creative Commons licenses and plagiarism policies. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 00:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Because it indicates an individual. Their current name suggests to those that see it an association with the topic or that they represent the topic. If my name was New England Patriots or Boston Red Sox, the same would apply. It's not disallowed to indicate an interest in a topic. "RedSoxFan" would be completely acceptable. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I can't see how "fan of named creative work" (a username which explicitly promotes a product) is in anyway less problematic than a username which is "named create work". And @Bishonen, you haven't seen this because it's on their deWiki page, but the argument they've adopted directly a result of a member of the deWiki Arbcom telling them this would work. If you think they should be blocked for it, you may do so, I suppose, but it has no bearing on their username. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I suggested that they simply add the word "fan" to their current username to resolve this. That's a policy compliant way for them to still indicate their personal interest in this franchise. 331dot (talk) 23:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Don't allow. Tales of Arcadia, are you aware of the concept of wikilawyering? That's what your argument about "just a sequence of a commonly title suffix (Tales of) and a mystical place (Arcadia) is. 331dot has been extremely patient with you on your own page. Unless you promptly take their good advice (which contains several alternatives for you) without any more messing around, I would recommend them to block you for egregious timewasting. Bishonen | tålk 23:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC).
- I think you have misunderstand me. (Maybe because I‘m not a native English speaker.) I have never declined the reference to the TV series. Everyone can read this on my user page. I only wanted to say that the name (in my opinion) is not really a protected product namr which can be considered as product. And again: I was and I‘am always open to a discussion. And I‘ve never posted anything which was promotional. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 12:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Don't allow. If 331dot is technically, right, then they're right, no? 331dot made what seems like a perfectly good suggestion, and they were nice enough not to block for what three administrators now think is a violation of our user name policy. The word "Arcadia" is used frequently, but "tales of Arcadia" as a phrase, independent of that show/franchise/whatever, is not, as a Google Books search confirms, delivering nothing but hits for the show. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Allow. There are many users with the suffix "Tales of..." in their usernames here, indicating that it is commonly used. Some of the names may refer to culture or to places. As an editor of articles on classical antiquity I did not know about the animated series. I thought of the various tales of Arcadia, narrated during the centuries and of the famous paintings, depicting the stories. It may be my fault, but I cannot see an unique name and the promotion of a single product in this name. --Regiomontanus (talk) 03:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just noting (from a pedantic/administrative point of view) that there are five users with names starting with "Tales of" (which, again pedantically, is a prefix, not a suffix). Primefac (talk) 13:35, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Disallow Not sure if this is a bit far-fetched, but if they're editing Tales of Arcadia, I'd count the name as a violation of WP:MISLEADNAME #3:
Usernames that imply that the account has explicit ownership of certain articles, content, or topic areas
. Nobody (talk) 06:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)- @1AmNobody24 That's an interesting idea; I'd like to hear more. How would you generalise that to usernames in general that make reference to a particular article subject? For example, we have a lot of accounts whose usernames are directly taken from superhero movies/franchises. (Just search User:Superman and see how many you get). Do you believe those are misleading and at risk of scaring off other editors? Thinking more broadly, how about usernames that just, in general, overlap with the article title? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The honest answer is 'It depends'. Would I find Superman editing Superman a misleadname? No. Would I find USA Gov editing Federal government of the United States a misleadname? Yes. There are others were I'm also unsure how I'd handle them, for example: If Swoop edited Philadelphia Eagles would you see the connection with Swoop (Philadelphia Eagles) a misleadname? Nobody (talk) 07:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- 'It depends' is a perfectly acceptable answer. Interestingly, I'd probably be okay with Swoop (but as an Eagles fan, that could be pure bias =P ), USA Gov directly implies both a real-world, legal, authority over the article content and, as the name of an organization, fails on several fronts. I'm with you on Superman though. Just to take this a bit further, what implications would you get from a user who took their name from a specific movie? Or maybe a specific song? For the sake of argument on the song one, say the editor explicitly named themselves after the song, then edited the article extensively. Would that be misleading to you? If not, then why? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Given that my own user name is partially inspired by a movie, I'd say it depends on the movie title and how they edited the article. This applies for any creative work. Nobody (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- I hadn't put that together. Bob Odenkirk was great in that. The argument this user has used, that their name is not immediately obvious as the name of a creative work, actually does apply in your case. To answer GLL query about a song, a song is also arguably a product, but it isn't a franchise. There is no implied authority in naming one self after a single song.
- I have to say I don't think I've seen this specific situation before. If someone was named User:LordoftheRings and started editing about Gandalf I'm not so sure we would block them. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 21:37, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- I agree that just editing a article that seems related wouldn't probably lead to a block, they'd be asked if theres a COI and move on. I'm more interested in what you'd think if they're edits were clearly promotional. Would you simply think it's a fan or would it cross your mind that it could be a paid editor trying to improve the presentation of their product? Nobody (talk) 07:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Given that my own user name is partially inspired by a movie, I'd say it depends on the movie title and how they edited the article. This applies for any creative work. Nobody (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- 'It depends' is a perfectly acceptable answer. Interestingly, I'd probably be okay with Swoop (but as an Eagles fan, that could be pure bias =P ), USA Gov directly implies both a real-world, legal, authority over the article content and, as the name of an organization, fails on several fronts. I'm with you on Superman though. Just to take this a bit further, what implications would you get from a user who took their name from a specific movie? Or maybe a specific song? For the sake of argument on the song one, say the editor explicitly named themselves after the song, then edited the article extensively. Would that be misleading to you? If not, then why? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The honest answer is 'It depends'. Would I find Superman editing Superman a misleadname? No. Would I find USA Gov editing Federal government of the United States a misleadname? Yes. There are others were I'm also unsure how I'd handle them, for example: If Swoop edited Philadelphia Eagles would you see the connection with Swoop (Philadelphia Eagles) a misleadname? Nobody (talk) 07:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- But doesn‘t it count how these edits were made? All are minor changes, like fixing links or other small things. I‘ve never promoted anything. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 13:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @1AmNobody24 That's an interesting idea; I'd like to hear more. How would you generalise that to usernames in general that make reference to a particular article subject? For example, we have a lot of accounts whose usernames are directly taken from superhero movies/franchises. (Just search User:Superman and see how many you get). Do you believe those are misleading and at risk of scaring off other editors? Thinking more broadly, how about usernames that just, in general, overlap with the article title? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Questioning - Would we allow User:IncredibleHulk to edit Marvel articles? Would we allow User:BladeRunner to edit articles about the franchise? I don't find absolute clarity in the rules about whether usernames that are titles or fictional elements of creative works are allowed or disallowed, and I don't find that this is unambiguously covered under the "product" category. I raise this question with disregard to the pseudoarguments put forward that this is just common "Tales of" prefix with some general "Arcadia" concept, I'm assuming the username is directly named after the series, and still questioning applicable policy. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 06:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I have chosen my name after the franchise. Everyone can read this on my user page. But because it‘s fictional, I haven‘t considered it as product. And no one of my edits were promotional. Tales of Arcadia (talk) 06:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Speaking as someone who is themselves named after a fictional character, I can edit Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy articles all day long if I want to. So yes, we would allow the Incredible Hulk name to edit Marvel articles. I think Blade Runner is arguable as well, as that is the name of the franchise, but also a role,as Deckard was a "blade runner" before he retired. The difference here is that they are clearly not named after a character, they are named after the franchise. The body of work is a product not a character. I don't think there is any ill intent here, but technically the name seems to run afoul of ORGNAME which explicitly mentions product names as usernames. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 21:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- That being said, I'm not sure a block would really serve to prevent harm to the encyclopedia. If it was "Tales of Arcadia Official" that would imply special authority. I'm not entirely convinced that this does. Beeblebrox Beebletalks 22:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Allow per Beeblebrox's explanation that this username isn't disruptive enough to the project and revise WP:ORGNAME to accommodate good-faith usernames named after pop culture works/characters/etc. Indeed, we should not enforce policies to our letter, but rather revise them to their spirit. ミラP@Miraclepine 05:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- My main concern here is that the name of the franchise doesn't denote an individual- I already told the user that adding "fan" to their username would be completely satisfactory. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the entries talk page). No further edits should be made to this page.
- ^ Evans, Richard (10 July 2021). "Grounded and meticulous Ash Barty writing tennis history of her own". The Guardian.
Barty, a Ngarigo woman and deeply proud of her Indigenous heritage
- ^ Spits, Scott (18 January 2023). "Open hearts: Indigenous kids bring joy for Barty, Goolagong Cawley". The Age.
Ngarigo woman Barty admitted it felt "a bit strange" to be back in Melbourne with a relaxed frame of mind
- ^ Knickmeyer, Ellen; Amiri, Farnoush; Gomez Licon, Adriana (February 3, 2025). "Trump and Musk move to dismantle USAID, igniting battle with Democratic lawmakers". AP News . Retrieved February 5, 2025.
- ^ Lubin, Rhian (March 4, 2025). "Nearly 15,000 will have died already because of Trump and Musk's cuts to USAID, advocacy program claims". The Independent . and "PEPFAR Impact Tracker". Impact Counter. March 4, 2025.
- ^ Grossman, Paul (2023). "Fundamental challenges and likely refutations of the five basic premises of the polyvagal theory". Biological Psychology. 180. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2023.108589 . PMID 37230290.
- ^ Knickmeyer, Ellen; Amiri, Farnoush; Gomez Licon, Adriana (February 3, 2025). "Trump and Musk move to dismantle USAID, igniting battle with Democratic lawmakers". AP News . Retrieved February 5, 2025.
- ^ Lubin, Rhian (March 4, 2025). "Nearly 15,000 will have died already because of Trump and Musk's cuts to USAID, advocacy program claims". The Independent . and "PEPFAR Impact Tracker". Impact Counter. March 4, 2025.
- ^ Evans, Richard (10 July 2021). "Grounded and meticulous Ash Barty writing tennis history of her own". The Guardian.
Barty, a Ngarigo woman and deeply proud of her Indigenous heritage
- ^ Spits, Scott (18 January 2023). "Open hearts: Indigenous kids bring joy for Barty, Goolagong Cawley". The Age.
Ngarigo woman Barty admitted it felt "a bit strange" to be back in Melbourne with a relaxed frame of mind