User:Polygnotus/Rants/BADRFC
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Often RfCs fail to meet WP:RFCBEFORE and/or WP:RFCNEUTRAL. In such cases, editors can choose to try to fix the problem, or close the RfC. |
RfCs use a considerable amount of volunteer time, the most precious resource we have.
RfCs are often started by people who do not understand the topic or the preceding discussions, are unable to write a brief and neutral question due to their own POV, or simply fail to ask the right question in the right way.
RfC questions are often leading or ambiguous, lack sufficient (or any!) prior discussion, waste volunteer time, and point toward a pre-determined outcome.
A lot of people are simply unable to write a good and neutral RfC question, even if they have that intention. People have a blind spot for their own biases and don't think critically about framing.
In that case, it may be a good idea to:
- Edit the RfC question
- Close the RfC and have a discussion before potentially re-opening the same or a new RfC
If the question is salvageable, editors may also choose to edit it for clarity and neutrality rather than closing the RfC. A flawed question is not always grounds for closure if the core dispute is sound and it is possible to improve the framing.
Note that the RfC starter has no special status over other editors, though they may withdraw the RfC they started.
See also
[edit]- WP:GOODRFC, an essay arguing the opposite point