Wikipedia:Reform RfC
 | This is an information page. It is not a Wikipedia policy or guideline; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wikipedia's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect varying levels of consensus. |
A reform RfC (Request for Comment), a review RfC, or a proposal drive is an initiative in which proposals are collected to improve or fix a specific aspect of the project. They are launched when it is agreed that there is a systemic problem with a given area but there is no clear consensus on how to solve it. The purpose of a proposal drive is to consider all of the options and sort through them to find ones that have consensus. They are distinct from multi-part RfCs where a set of questions are crafted before site-wide input is sought.
Not every issue requires a proposal drive, and they often follow years of other discussions and attempted solutions. Some are planned in advance, while others arise spontaneously when separate ongoing proposals are grouped into a single page and turned into a drive.
Process
[edit]In a proposal drive, any Wikipedian is invited to submit one or more proposals to reform the subject of the drive. All of the proposals are listed in the same place, and each is individually voted on as its own request for comment. Perennial proposals are often revisited to see if consensus has changed, and novel ideas are often proposed as well. Proposals that suggest similar changes may be sorted together under headings or listed as sub-proposals. Proposal drives are sometimes organized in phases to separate fact-finding, proposal collection, and/or voting.
Consensus is determined on each proposal individually, and they are often closed in real time if consensus is clear. The goal is not necessarily to have the most possible proposals pass or to only propose surefire solutions, but to allow all options to be considered. Sometimes finding consensus against a proposal is just as valuable as finding consensus in favor of one.
Previous reform RfCs
[edit]| Name | Subject | Start Date | End Date | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Esperanza/Reform | Esperanza | 22 September 2005 | 1 October 2005 | 3 |
| Requests for adminship/Reform | Requests for adminship | 7 April 2007 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| RfA Review | Requests for adminship | 12 June 2008 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| RfA reform 2011 | Requests for adminship | 26 March 2011 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| Did you know/2011 reform proposals | Did you know | 16 July 2011 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| RfA reform 2012 | Requests for adminship | 20 June 2012 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| Requests for adminship/2013 RfC | Requests for adminship | 23 January 2013 | 5 April 2013 | 0 |
| New Proposals for GAN | Good articles | 1 February 2013 | 27 May 2013 | 5 |
| 2015 administrator election reform | Requests for adminship | 15 October 2015 | 21 January 2016 | 4 |
| Did you know/2017 reform proposals | Did you know | 17 February 2017 | Inconclusive | N/A |
| 2017 ANI reform RfC | Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents | 5 August 2017 | 12 August 2017 | Withdrawn |
| Requests for adminship/2021 review | Requests for adminship | 29 August 2021 | 30 November 2021 | 3 |
| Good Article proposal drive 2023 | Good articles | 30 December 2022 | 7 February 2023 | 22 |
| Requests for adminship/2024 review | Requests for adminship | 20 February 2024 | 9 April 2025 | 8 |
| Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC | Good articles | 28 July 2026 | Ongoing | TBD |
| ITN reform RFC workshop (final link TBD) | In the news | TBD | TBD | TBD |