Template talk:POV

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the POV template.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This template was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination: Do not merge, 1 May 2021, see discussion. Keep, 23 October 2020, see discussion.

Template:POV is indefinitely protected from editing as it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Template:POV has been listed at Templates for discussion (nomination), but it was protected, so it could not be tagged. Please add:

<noinclude>{{subst:tfm|help=off|1=POV lead}}</noinclude>

to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done jlwoodwa (talk) 02:44, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is protocol for how many hours or days must pass if no explanation or clear, linked, actionable feedback about WP:NPOV is given, before any user may unilaterally remove such a template? -- Very Polite Person (talk) 03:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of assuming good faith, I'd start a discussion at the article's Talk page prior to removing the tag. DonIago (talk) 06:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If there's no discussion at all (or even a hint about the nature of the problem in an edit summary) and you have no idea what the alleged problem is, then I'd say you are allowed (but not required) to remove it at any time. After all, it might have been a mistake.

If the problem appears to have been resolved, then you should remove the tag.

If there was a discussion in the past, but people stopped talking/trying to fix it more than a month ago and you think that any remaining problems are fairly small, then I think you are allowed (but not required) to remove the tag.

If you skim through the article and can see that there are still POV problems, then please don't remove the tag (unless you fix the problems first). WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:36, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the tag was recently added by a new editor, consider reminding them of the requirements for placing the tag, rather than immediately removing. If you remove a tag that has no rationale and an editor reinstates it, the duty of justifying can usually be assumed pass to that editor. As long as you proceed assuming good faith and don't edit war it shouldn't be a problem. William Avery (talk) 07:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Description of suggested change: Per MOS:ALT, the image should have a blank |alt= attribute added to ensure screen readers do not attempt to read it.

Diff:

{{Lemondoge|Talk|Contributions}} 15:21, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 15:41, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]