These convention disputes have been resolved, or at least are no longer active. Please indicate what resolution was arrived at. Please list latest ones at top.
Wikipedia:Bible source text: should articles about a whole chapter of the bible also contain the text of the entire chapter. Result was that they should not, by a margin of 25 votes to 11, with 3 abstensions.
Wikipedia:Block on demand - Should admins grant users' requests for a temporary block? Discussion died out, no consensus reached.
Wikipedia:Content labeling proposal - this is currently pretty much deadlocked and in danger of degenerating into an "I'm right, your wrong" type shouting match. More opinions are required. Rejected or abandoned.
Wikipedia:Userspace policy proposal - there has been recent controversy about what is and is not permissible in user space. It is important to assert which policies (if any) do apply in userspace, and to what extent, and what should be done about transgression.
Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset : Challenge! Behavioural guidelines; smallest subset (compatible with wikipedia policy) which still keeps folks out of trouble (KISS principle) ; find it! RQ comments, assistance, simplification.
Wikipedia talk:User page: Whether to add the following --"It is bad form to edit pages in another's user space to change the national variety of English used." Answer: No.
Wikipedia:Divulging personal details - Discussion of when to include personal details of people who have chosen to remain anonymous. Discussion died out in late 2004.
Wikipedia talk:Protection policy - Should we implement a software change so that pages in the user namespace are only editable by that particular user? Apparently decided in late 2004.
Proposed new VfD rule: No repeat submission of articles that have already passed the VfD process (w/ consensus to keep) within the next three months. Apparently resolved in the fall of 2004.
Wikipedia_talk:Series_templates - This is a proposed policy on series boxes in the Template namespace. Please add comments about which format is suitable for these boxes, to gain some form of consensus, and make the policy enforceable. - Apparently resolved in the fall of 2004.
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)/archive8 — should metric conversions of acres use m², hectares or km²? (Resolved that km² preferred but when describing areas of agriculture, forests, parks, wilderness, etc., hectares are an acceptable (not mandatory) alternative)
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles — dispute over the inclusion of multiple romanizations in the opening paragraph of articles on Japanese subjects. (Consensus is that redirects from alternate romanizations are acceptable, inclusion in the opening paragraph is not.)
Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles — should the names of characters and things in manga which the official English version uses circumflexes be commonly mentioned in circumflexes? (Consensus is that macrons are used, except in article titles, where diacritics are omitted.)
Talk:Rail transport in the United Kingdom/Alternate naming schemes — another *discussion* - UK versus GB, Ireland versus NI ... (Consensus was that railways in the British Isles had evolved based on geographical divide (Great Britain / Ireland) rather than political division (England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland).)
