Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals

The previous discussion has reached a stalemate unfortunately. I did update the VG/S page in good faith, but was reverted by @NegativeMP1. I've got no issue with this. What I do feel needs to happen however, is for there to be an agreeable compromise for Valnet. I can speak for myself here, but I feel that other VG editors will agree, the Valnet topic is tiresome.

Some of you may be aware that I help keep Cite Unseen updated on GitLab. A recent discussion on Discord with @SuperGrey established that specific sources can be marked as reliable per writer. So a source can be marginally reliable generally, but if a cited article is written by a whitelisted writer, it will be marked as reliable in that instance. I think we established in the previous discussion that TheGamer (and other Valnet sites) do have some very experienced writers.

If these writers, for all Valnet sites, could be compiled. A page could be created such as WP:VALNETWRITERS that lists writers the community agrees are reliable (with specific writers proposed here). These writers can then be added to Unseen's whitelist. This would mean all Valnet sites become marginal generally (or another classification), but those writers would be the exception.

I've set this up as a formal RfC so that it can at least be made official in some capacity. We've all got opinions on this, so for this, I am basically prohibiting myself from being able to support a specific option. Here are the options for RfC purposes:

• Option 1: Reassess all Valnet sources as marginal, with a reliable whitelist for agreed Valnet writers.
• Option 2: Keep the status quo. Valnet sites are assessed per site, with no whitelist for specific writers.
• Option 3: Keep the status quo with a whitelist.
• Option 4: Reassess all Valnet sources as reliable, with no whitelist required for specific writers.
• Option 5: Reassess all Valnet sources as unreliable, with the same provision for agreed writers as Option 1.

I'm not going to ping anyone from the previous discussions, as this will no doubt be seen. I really hope this can help resolve some of the issues we've faced with Valnet sites, and that keeping the topic specific can prevent tangents. 11WB (talk) 10:15, 1 April 2026 (UTC)