Jump to content

User talk:Robert McClenon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Orlysi (talk | contribs) at 14:07, 30 May 2021 (→Draft:Joseph Chetrit (linguist): new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.




Other archives
Problem Archive
Famekeeper Archive
FuelWagon Archive
Jack User Archive
John Carter Archive
PhiladelphiaInjustice Archive
78 Archive
DIRECTIVEA113 Archive

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for observation, I have however sent a barnstorm to MrsSnoozyturtle for her contribution Tundealuko (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Conflict of interest
Hi Robert Mcclendon, the image submitted to wikimedia commons in reference to Titi Akinsanmi has been questioned to be conflict of interest, image was submitted as part of the initial article entry, i do hope you can share with me suggestions to make it better, thank you. Tundealuko (talk) 07:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Malassezia on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shelley Moore (disambiguation) has been accepted

Shelley Moore (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

I wanted to post here because I didn't think I was supposed to be posting anything at DRN. Thank you very much for reviewing my case when you didn't have to. It was a great thing that you did though, because it resulted in good relations between me and Ahunt, which is an important thing I think. Also, I think you were just about as fair as you could be considering all the circumstances, so well done. However, I'm not sure it was right to template Ahunt since he had already agreed that he would not remove the restored comment, but then again sometimes even well seasoned editors need a stark reminder from time to time so I guess that was your call and you made it. Anyway, thanks for putting out another fire! Huggums537 (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

The problem was the editor who talks but does not listen. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

You closed my dispute resolution request, but I did notify the people who were part of the discussion. Please reopen it. Reply on my talk page please. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 19:54, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:64.121.103.144

No. You did not notify n2e or CycloneYoris or E.Wright1852 or Tizeonite or Deepfriedokra. You don't get to choose a subset of editors to list and notify. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:David.Tomanek/sandbox

Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DRN Bot

Our bot is broken :-( I wish I knew how to fix such things. McDaniels is gone right? So.... any ideas of who could fix the bot? For the like 4 of us who use it? Nightenbelle (talk) 13:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information on Bot

User:Nightenbelle - Yes. I noticed about 36 hours ago that it wasn't updating the table. It isn't doing that task. It is doing at least one of its tasks, which is disposing of stale vandalism reports. So I inquired at Village Pump Technical as to what to do. This turned out to be the right place to ask that question. I was advised to send an email to User:Mdaniels5757, and see if they answered, and was further told what to do if they didn't answer, or said that I would need to get someone else to help out. The Python code for the bot is published, so that it can be transplanted to someone else's bot. In particular, User:Firefly offered to add that task and that code to their bot if I don't get a response from Mdaniels. So I will wait and see whether I get an answer from Mdaniels. If not, then Firefly will make the request to add the task to their bot. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So thank you for noticing. I had also noticed. It appears that Village Pump Technical is the right place to ask such questions. Also, I provided a brief statement to this effect at the Dispute Resolution talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome.... and now I know what to do next time other than come whine at you! Thank you :-) Nightenbelle (talk) 15:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed

Hi Robert MClenon, if I understood right, this proposal made by you is at the origin of the creation of the "extended confirmed" user group. Would you be able to tell what exactly the "extended" refers to in the name "extended confirmed"? Much appreciated. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 00:24, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rui Gabriel Correia - Well, I didn't propose the idea, but closed the RFC by assessing the consensus; but I will answer the question. A user is autoconfirmed when they have been editing for 4 days and have made 10 edits. They are extended-confirmed when they have been editing for 30 days and have made 500 edits. Extended simply means confirmed with more experience editing. Is that clear, or do you have any further questions? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your time; much appreciated. And my apologies if I mixed up proponent and closer. Someone has proposed doing something at pt-wiki and they really got the wrong end of the stick in including "extended" in the nomenclature. But now it is clear. Thanks. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 02:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Rui Gabriel Correia - The capability is present in the Wikimedia software to implement extended-confirmed on any Wikipedia. As I understand, each self-governing Wikipedia community can decide whether and how to use it. I am sure that there are a few Portuguese-literate administrators who can explain it in Portuguese. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert. My concern was the translation. But before I could approach the drafters of the proposal I needed to understand it clearly, which I now have, after finding a clue on one of the many discussions — I found this piece, which sheds some light —— "Extending it even further like Pocketthis says ("You could make it 90/1000, and I'd be fine with it")", here. So, the "extension"/ "extended" refers to the extended criteria (longer [extended] period/ more [extended number of] edits) to be met to be allowed to edit. So I am good now. Thanks for the valuable input. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 04:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haruna Sentongo

Hello Robert McClenon, i have made edits on Haruna Sentongo with great hope of remedying the article deletion, i am kindly requesting for your Expert Review and proposal of essential extra edits required. Thank you.Ibitukirire (talk) 02:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The School for Good and Evil (film)

Hi! You recently declined my submission of Draft:The School for Good and Evil (film) at AfC due to notability concerns. I believe the film meets WP:NFF as its filming has received significant coverage from BBC, BelfastLive and The News Letter. The draft has previously been accepted by reviewer ReaderofthePack; however, I moved the article back to draftspace due to a dispute on whether filming has started. Do you still believe the film fails notability guidelines? Thanks. Pamzeis (talk) 06:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Nothing worth seeing here.

You rejected Draft:Starship SN15

Draft:Starship SN15 has ben rejected by you. I want this to have all the road closures and launch attempts. I've worked very hard on this. Please undo this. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. As to the road closures, see Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please undo it. I have worked very hard on it. Can I continue to edit it? Please reply on my talk page.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ham Enterprises

Hello Robert McClenon I have finished working on Ham Enterprises,I am Kindly requesting for your Review. Thank you very much. Ibitukirire (talk) 17:15, 9 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Idle complaints

You are ruining my work

You are ruining a lot of my work. You are declining, rejecting, and nominating articles for deletion. Please stop! 64.121.103.144 (talk) 17:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I will make sure to keep loggen in from now on. Guliver Gugi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gugi guliver (talk • contribs) 18:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About my Draft

I have decided to delete Draft:Starship SN11. Can you delete it? I have added Db-g7 to it. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thanks for the advice. I will keep logged in from now on. Cheers. Gugi guliver (talk) 15:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mailing list

Hello, while looking through the MFD nominations I've just noticed that the IP behind the Starship SN15 and Starship SN11 drafts has added you to the wikiproject spaceflight mailing list: Diff. Did you want to be added to this mailing list? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:43, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added you to the mailing list because I thought you might like it. If you don't want it, you can remove yourself.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

about my draft

Hi, I have made some edits in the article "Department of Law, University of Rajshahi". Many people askes me often why do they not find any information regarding this department in Wkipedia. So I thought it would be good to create a separate page. I am not regular in Wikipedia and this is my first article here. Besides, most of the referenes that I presented are of official websites and national newspapers or online news organizations of national level. So, hope you suggest me with some more suggestions to improve and publish this article. Isfaretehami (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Declined AfCs have appeared as articles

FYI I think the user has gone around AfCs that you declined and created same-named articles. I've listed all their creations above for your review. - Bri.public (talk) 21:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bri - That is slightly different. They had created those drafts and the articles at the same time. Sometimes someone does that in order to try to game the system, because it prevents a reviewer from moving the article to draft space. Then I declined the drafts, noting that they already were also in article space. If it is obvious that an article shouldn't have been created, I send it to AFD. In this case, I don't have a strong opinion on whether the articles should exist. Do you know if there is a conflict of interest? I am guessing that there is, but I cannot be sure, and have to assume good faith. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Draft:August zu Eulenburg

Hello, I did a search and it appears that the draft I created is the only one; there doesn't seem to be any duplicate draft that you mentioned. If there is one, could you direct me to it please?

Sorry for the trouble and thanks. --HzgiUU149377 (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:HzgiUU149377 - The duplication appears to have been an accidental effect of the way that the article was moved into draft space, and seems no longer to be there. On reviewing the article, I see that he served as a major-general and lieutenant-general in the Prussian army, and generals are considered notable by virtue of their office. I have accepted the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in DS Consultation

Hi Robert McClenon. I'm not sure if you're aware of the current community consultation around Discretionary Sanctions but as someone who has participated in DS related activities recently I'd like to invite you to participate. You have the opportunity to participate at whatever level you wish; there are questions that are higher level (theoreticaly) in scope as well as opportunities to give feedback about specific areas of DS. The consultation will run through April 25th and I hope you'll participate. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reminder, User:Barkeep49. McClenon mobile (talk) 15:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rumel Khan

Hi sir I have add two new references in the article of Rumel Khan. Can you check it? And the article I used is independent sources. The news of article is popular newspapers of Bangladesh. Please sir review it kindly? Thank you. Tanvir Kabir Saikat (talk) 06:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me.

I have created a page on different ride sharing theories. Why it is not getting approved? Ifat Sami (talk) 11:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ifat Sami - What I saw was not about ride sharing theories but an advertisement. However, I suggest that you ask at the Teahouse. They might give you advice to write about ride sharing theories rather than about advertising. Or they might tell you that your ride sharing theories are original research. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Apoorva Mehta

Thank you for reviewing Draft:Apoorva Mehta so quickly. I added more info that I had originally left out but decided it might be helpful to include after reviewing your comments. I think he is the “youngest Indian-origin billionaire” but only saw that in one source, so I left that claim out. Could be added back in for notability purposes if you think one source is enough.

I reviewed WP:NBIO and from my interpretation of the Basic Criteria, it looks like the article probably meets it this with these sources:

I think these satisfy the “multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject,” but interested to hear your interpretation if you disagree. Do you think these are sufficient? Thank you. BuickaSoka (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:BuickaSoka - If you have added independent sources that, in your opinion, establish biographical notability, you can resubmit the draft. I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. You can ask for the opinions of other experienced editors at the Teahouse; they may take another look at your draft, or tell you to wait for another review. You don't need to reference-bomb your draft with a large number of references. The usual wisdom of experienced editors is to ask a submitter to provide their best three sources; and providing too many references may actually slow down the review process. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Very helpful, thank you. Appreciate the explanation. BuickaSoka (talk) 22:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Justin Bieber on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Award

64.121.103.144 (talk) has invited you to smoke a peace pipe together! Smoking peace pipes promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by offering someone else a peace pipe, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend who just likes to smoke.

Spread the peace by adding {{subst:Peace pipe}} to someone's talk page! You can use a parameter to insert the name of the recipient and add your own text to the message with a second. Smoking this wiki-peace pipe does not affect your health.

Invite

You are a great administrator!

Cookies!

64.121.103.144 has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

You are a wonderful administrator who helps a lot on the English Wikipedia. Continue you great work.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

The Mediation Award The Mediation Award
You work a lot in dispute resolution and you help a lot in solving disputes. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 22:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Requesting deletion of Draft:Brilliancy (chess)

Dear Robert McClenon,

Do you remember why my draft (Draft:Brilliancy (chess)) was declined? I got frustrated about the declining of this draft again. It was already declined in November by a user named TheCatalyst31, and now I feel that Wikipedia is the the worst and doesn't seem great anymore. I feel like I don't want to add this article, and I was trying to delete it last night, but my father didn't find a way to get the draft deleted. I would appreciate it a bit if you could delete the article for me, or could send me how to delete this article.

Sincerely, Zikrsaloncom. Zikrsaloncom (talk) 17:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

draft:timeabout, article title

Hi, thank you very much for your feedback on draft:timeabout,. I was hoping to get your advice on including the trailing comma in the article title. I had it included as it appears in streaming service listings for the EP (Apple Music, Spotify, Melon). After looking through guidelines for article titles I couldn't find anything against including commas. Do you recommended that I remove it? Thanks. Dacapa.o (talk) 14:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jagadish Debbarma

Jagadish Debbarma is a notable prominent politician from Tripura. Go read about the state of Tripura before making unnecessary edit and misusing the adminship. Brendonmotom (talk) 03:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Brendonmotom - You may discuss and are welcome to discuss the biographical notability of Jagadish Debbarma at the Articles for Deletion page. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jagadish Debbarma is one of the veteran leader of Tripura. As for the notability, it's fine if his page is kept as page of a politician. There is no intention for making a biography of it or why are you so interested in questioning the notability? I would recommend you to read about Tripura then measure it's importance. Brendonmotom (talk) 03:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reliablity of this source

Hello Robert. Please have a look at this discussion on my talk page[1]. Here a user has showed me a photograph of paper cutting from one of the reputed newspapers that time. It is talking about the school and I think its sufficient to establish GNG. But can we consider this as a reliable one. I dont know whether photos like this are considered as a reliable source. Please tell your opinion. Regards Kichu🐘 Need any help? 07:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jalaledin Moayerian

Hi Robert,

I would like to publish my first article about a well known Iranian movie makeup artist "Jalaledin Moayerian". I just provided a short bio of him, list of some movies and series and his awards in the article. My submission is declined due to an issue as secondary reliable sources and I have been advised to ask your help per my request from wikipedia team.

For your information, I have provided some sources / references in my article and 3 of them are listed below which are governed by 3 different official organizations and are independent of the subject but I have been asked for secondary sources as per last reviewer comment.

The sources mentioned above are: https://www.artmag.ir/en/jalaleddinmoayerian http://www.sourehcinema.com/People/People.aspx?id=138112210254 https://web.archive.org/web/20201108162006/https://www.fajrfilmfestival.com/news/1718/چهرههای-معیریان

Since I have been stucked at this stage so, I need you assistance to review my article and help me for providing the required secondary source.

Your anticipated attention is highly appreciated.

Best regards, --Aria Moayerian (talk) 15:59, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DRN discussion close

Apologies for bothering you, am I still allowed to submit a new dispute here? Sorry I forgot about pinging the other uses. I understand the talk page is veeery long - it was productive for about two weeks but then we hit an impasse. The 3O statement is shorter but ultimately we didn't get anywhere. Do you think I could still try with a shorter statement or should I attempt some other place? It's mostly because I think at this point only third parties could help. Thank you. FelipeFritschF (talk) 06:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:FelipeFritschF - You are allowed to submit a new statement, with proper notice. I think that you and the other users would be better off actually to take a break from the topic for a few days, but that is only my opinion. I think that you would be best off to try discussing the topic on the article talk page in short paragraphs, and see where that gets. If you come right back to DRN and are still as verbose as you have been, the moderator will spend the first week just collapsing your posts and telling you that they are too long, didn't read. So try being concise. It might help without the need for a moderator. Then come back if necessary. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:29, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. Yes, we've been discussing it for a long while but it's been unproductive, that's why I wanted outside input and/or editing. FelipeFritschF (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't able to use Talk:Kaworu Nagisa/DRN and noticed you requested a deletion. It'll probably take me a few more days due to lack of time but I'll still go ahead for the RfC eventually. Thanks again. FelipeFritschF (talk) 02:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have an OK draft there for the RfC there. Take your time if need to, thanks again. FelipeFritschF (talk) 01:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your fast response. I'll take a look. FelipeFritschF (talk) 02:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SPI dealt with

FYI, the SPI has been dealt with. (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Parita, Texas) Both accounts were blocked. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Moldavia on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Remember the discussion at the Administrator noticeboard about an IP user (64.121.103.144)? I am that old IP user who now has an account!

User:StarshipSLS - Sign your posts. And do not say that you are a new user. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Motörhead on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Cook (strategist)

Hi — I came across Ben Cook (strategist) and was trying to decide whether to draftify it or take to AfD for apparent lack of notability and secondary sources, but then I noticed your name on the bottom of the edit history, and thought I'd ask if you know the background to this? Cheers, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all that I did was to disambiguate it. But it reads like a paid piece. It contains marketing buzzspeak. If you have a specific reason to draftify, that would be easier, because the before AFD rules are work unless the article is short enough to say that the article doesn't make a case, and that isn't a short article. What definitely needs to be done is to ask about conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will draftify it, then, so that the creator can add sufficient RS cites to establish notability (assuming that's doable - I have my doubts), and also include a message to dial down the promo. I'll add a COI query, too, while I'm at it. Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Isaac Bashevis Singer on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Faraj Hawwar

Hi I’ve dePRODed this and will add sources in the next day or two. If you still think it’s not notable I think it’s one for AfD. Thanks Mccapra (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moves to user space

Hello, Robert,

I've observed that you sometimes move pages from main space to your user space and then request their deletion. Please do not do this, it is misleading because you are not the page creator. If you believe a page should be deleted, tag it (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/CFD/etc.), do not move it to your user space unless you are planning on working on improving it yourself. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Liz - I will explain. I am willing to stop tagging the pages as U1, but I would like to ask about tagging them as G6 move and then dragging them to user space to await deletion.
The pages are redirects that are preventing me from accepting drafts. First, is there a way, that I have not yet discovered, to accept a draft on top of a redirect that has been tagged for deletion? I don't think so. Second, if you don't want me tagging the pages for deletion in my user space, can I move the redirects to somewhere else instead while I am waiting for their deletion? I realize that I can just wait for the redirect to be deleted. This has two minor problems. First, it may take anywhere between 1 hour and about 24 hours before an admin comes along and cleans up the G6s. In the meantime, if I am working on something else, I may forget what draft I was waiting to accept. (I know. I should keep a ToDo list. I know.) Second, sometimes, if I tag the redirect for G6, then, when the admin comes along and deletes it, they move the draft into article space. I know that is what I requested, but if the admin is not also an AFC reviewer, they must just Move the draft, in which case there are additional cleanup functions that the reviewer has to perform manually.
So what do you want me to do with the redirects that are blocking acceptances? Do I just have to wait? Thank you for explaining. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you were added to the WP:DOWNLINK newsletter Mailing list, by another user. I have removed your name as I am unsure if you actually wished to recive this. If you did then please feel free to re-add yourself. Thanks, Terasail[✉] 16:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:Terasail. I will look at it and decide, but, as you observed, I was added by a user who was just doing too much. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Branko Mitrovic

Hi, I made a draft, named Draft:Branko Mitrovic. You have reviewed it and declined its submission because the subject already existed in Wikipedia. I think because of this draft the main article has not been reviewed yet, and there may be some problems with that. I want to ask if you could delete or redirect the draft, I do not know how to fix the problem. ThanksPurpleandblue-si-eh (talk) 13:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Unilimited247

Hi. I see that you have been critically messaging the above user. I have a problem with him because he just renamed Agricultural value chain to Agribusiness value chain without any prior discussion and for no obvious reason. The page has been there for a decade with the original name. I have removed the redirect and re-inserted the text so that Agricultural value chain is now visible, but I note that the Revision History is no longer there. Would you (1) be able to assist in restoring that and (2) perhaps block the user? Many thanks. Roundtheworld (talk) 17:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Roundtheworld - I am not an administrator. I have posted a request for help at WP:ANI. I see that what is needed is a history merge, which an administrator can do. I don't think that the user should be blocked, but I think that the user should be warned to slow down. I see that the user is making a lot of edits without a lot of thought, and that most of the edits are good and some of them are not good, and the user needs to be cautioned. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your assistance.Roundtheworld (talk) 07:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on racial hereditarianism at the R&I talk-page

An RfC at Talk:Race and intelligence revisits the question, considered last year at WP:FTN, of whether or not the theory that a genetic link exists between race and intelligence is a fringe theory. This RfC supercedes the recent RfC on this topic at WP:RSN that was closed as improperly formulated.

Your participation is welcome. Thank you. NightHeron (talk) 22:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin child prostitution ring allegations

[Image removed] I am Poorpony and what does it matter how many edits I have? The author of this page should be held accountable for implying the Franklin child prostitution ring allegations was a hoax! This article is related to government officials trying to hide the fact that government officials are having child sex, 

This article is of a very sensitive subject and should not have been written so lightly and immature. The author should take the time and add all relevant facts to the case.  For example, the boy was compensated in a civil suit however the author failed to mention this in their sources. There are many articles the author could have shared about this case but chose not to for what reason?  Is the author part of a people trying to hide sources which would portray the United states as faulted as other countries and people?  I have been an avid reader and money contributor to Wikipedia over many years and because of this authors most awful puke display of an article I made an account and my first edit.  

Poorpony (talk) 10:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

|}

When I saw the above by an obvious conspiracy theorist who is obviously not posting for the first time. I though, "Benjamin Franklin? Aretha Franklin? Franklin, Quebec? USS Franklin (1795)? Franklin Roosevelt? Roosevelt Franklin? It turns out that the obvious sock puppet is talking about Franklin child prostitution ring allegations. Which was a hoax. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guy Macon - Is your post (responding to the above post by a blocked editor) intended for me, or for the blocked editor? If it is for me, do you want to tell me something that I don't already know, or to express solidarity among reasonable editors receiving unreasonable posts? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was a simple "here is the page the person is talking about" note so that anyone reading the comment won't have to figure it out like I did. Now that you mention it, let me also express solidarity; every time I see a post by you I am impressed by the high quality and clear thinking. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Donkervoort D8

Hi

It has almost 5 months that this draft: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Donkervoort_D8 was created and it wasn't made a decision to move it to main articles or not. The references show significant information about it. Please decide for this page wherever will be moved to main articles.

Thank you NSHPUZA (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bovhyaluronidase azoximer

Hello. This article now exists in the main space. Could you take this draft for deletion? Валерий Пасько (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Buckinghamshire CC v Moran

Hi,

I noticed you added a comment to my recent draft article. Please may you let me know how I can improve it and I will address the issue as soon as possible.

Kind regards,

clarenciaga (talk)

User:clarenciag - I noted that the article had been moved from article space to draft space by User:Nearlyevil665. Please ask the reviewer for advice on improving the draft to get it back into article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Queen Mary School and KEQMS article

Hi there,

Thank you for reviewing my recent article on Queen Mary School (QMS).

In response to your proposed merge; the draft has been completed and created with documents published by the current Queen Mary School Association. I believe that this article is not to be merged with the KEQMS article, as it was an entirely separate institution with its own history. Going on that precedent, Arnold School has its own article, which has not been merged with any others. I believe this article is thorough enough to have its own page, comparing to the other legacy schools.

Please let me know your feedback.

Thanks AbstractLakx (talk) 12:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:AbstractLakx - Have you read the conflict of interest guidelines? Have you made the required disclosure? The Queen Mary School Association does not have any control over an article about a school, and articles are not written or approved by their subjects. The lack of value of "precedents" involving other organizations is known as Other Stuff Exists, and you may nominate for deletion other stuff that should not exist. You may ask for advice at the Teahouse about notability, and about conflict of interest guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:17, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robert McClenon - Yes, these guidelines have been read. No disclosure has been made, but if you think that it is required, I'm happy to do so. I'm new to this world, so please be kind. I understand your above statements and feel that I should state that I am in no way affiliated with any associations to do with the school. I am a local resident who loves local history. I was shocked to find that there was an Arnold School page and not a QMS one, so thought I would write one to the best of my ability, using Queen Mary School Association documents to ensure it was informative and truthful. In that light, I don't think a merge is necessary either. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks. AbstractLakx (talk) 14:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:AbstractLakx - If you are not affiliated with the school, you do not need to make a conflict of interest disclosure. However, I have a different question. What do you mean when you say that the draft was approved by the Queen Mary School Association? Do you mean that you copied the draft from their documents? If so, there is a different conflict with our policies and guidelines, which is that the wording may be copyright by the school. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, much more seriously than many other media and services. I will again suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The draft in question is Draft:Queen Mary School. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robert McClenon - I maybe should have clarified originally. I did not copy anything, it is all my own work, and cited if needed. I used their documents to write the page, not copy word for word. I am familiar with plagiarism guidelines and would therefore not do this. I have re-submitted the article for review. Thank you for your help. AbstractLakx (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robert McClenon - Also, could the conflict of interest template be removed from the draft now? In response to the above, I should have said something along the lines of "created with documents published by the current Queen Mary School Association" (not copied of course), hopefully this answers your question more fully. Apologies for any inconvenience. AbstractLakx (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Murder of Aya Maasarwe on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian Roma

Hi Robert, the RfC has been open for ages with no comments subsequent to yours. What would the procedure be to close it now? If indeed it should be closed. Boynamedsue (talk) 08:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Boynamedsue - For the benefit of any third parties, the RFC is at Talk:Romani_people_in_Hungary#RFC_on_Hungarian_Romani. The RFC was opened in March and has been ready for closure for a month. I can't close it because I expressed an opinion. On the one hand, the result is clear, and I would suggest that you can edit to implement Option A. On the other hand, I will see if a formal closure request has already been made. If not, I will make such a request. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Robert, I appreciate your help. I will implement the change now. Boynamedsue (talk) 18:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

Hey I saw your comment on my dispute resolution. Sorry about that I did not think I needed to name other people in it. Second when you say inform them do you mean writing on their talk page or just announcing it on the talk page in question? Thanks have a good day. 3Kingdoms (talk) 16:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:3Kingdoms - Read the instructions at the top of the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and follow them. The instructions say that the other editors must be notified on their talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gilbert Étienne

Hi Robert. I forgot to give you a heads up that I fixed Gilbert Étienne and moved it to article space. I came across it in the new pages feed. It turns out there is an extremely good French journal repository for the social sciences, which had dozens of his articles (Persee.fr). It was in pretty bad shape when submitted but I am confident he's notable. Thanks. --- Possibly (talk) 06:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Council of Education Social Consolidation

Hello. How can you help me edit this article? Thank you.--5.197.224.79 (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)--Gülnar82 (talk) 08:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you. This organization has not worked for hundreds of years. It was re-created in April and is currently being updated, so there are no references from reliable sources.--Gülnar82 (talk) 09:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gülnar82 - I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: SztolpenOS | Sunreef Yachts article

Dear Robert, firstly thank you for checking the Sunreef Yachts article. Secondly, I would like to discuss with you some matters regarding this piece. As you claim that the article sound much like an ad, I could start preparatory works on the new text - will try to keep it more like a Wikipedia-suitable article. Hopefully, I could start over again, but if somebody else needs to take over this subject, please let me know. I could write a new article then and start all over. I'd much appreciate you feedback. I think the Sunreef Yachts shipyard article will be very useful for Wikipedia users, especially no when the shipyard is making a great effort towards sustainable development and is gaining more recognition for that. Recently, SY won the UIM Environmental Award for its in-house produced solar power system: https://www.uim.sport/Documents/PressRelease/PressRelease182/Press%20Release_2021-05-05_Sunreef%20Yachts%20-%202020%20UIM%20Env.%20Award%20Winner.pdf?utm_source=BenchmarkEmail&utm_campaign=SUNREEF_YACHTS_WINS_2020_UIM_ENVIRONMENTAL_AWARD&utm_medium=email. Thank you in advance

User:SztolpenOS - You did not sign your post. This makes it difficult to reply to you. Please ask for advice at the Teahouse about how to sign your posts.
The article in question is Draft:Sunreef Yachts. I suggest that you also ask for advice at the Teahouse about how to write a draft Wikipedia article. I will advise you that it is very difficult for a paid editor to observe neutral point of view. If you can persuade a volunteer editor at the Teahouse that an article is in order, it would be better for them to write the article. I do not plan to work any further on the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Southern Methodist University on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft categories

Why did you "<no include>" Category:Drafts about fictional people and Category:Nintendo drafts on Draft:Bidoof, they are both subcategories of Category:Wikipedia drafts, which are allowed according to WP:DRAFTNOCAT. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:(Oinkers42) - I am puzzled. I didn't edit the categories on the draft. I only added a comment that the title had been in article space and had then been cut down to a redirect. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:(Oinkers42) - Interesting. I am differently puzzled now. I see what you are saying. The AFC comment script did deactivate the draft categories on the draft. I will ask for an explanation from the developer of the script. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 07:28:03, 13 May 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by 12think


Hi Robert, I am trying to improve the draft article, I have added content, tried to pad out some sentences, try to be less like a factsheet. It is far from finished. Please could you have a look at what I have done so far, I have gone around in circles a bit and would welcome some tips. Rob --12think (talk) 07:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12think (talk) 07:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace deletions

After I deleted User:Robert McClenon/Louis Burstein and User:Robert McClenon/Central High School (Cleveland, Ohio) I went to the third page on the list and saw you had changed the tag. Are you still ok with the first two deletions, or do you want me to undelete them? Guettarda (talk) 12:53, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guettarda - Yes, those are left over from round-robin moves. If I changed the tag from {{db-move}} to {{db-moved}}, it is just for clarity. I am accepting drafts with history. There is no easy way to do it. Thank you.Robert McClenon (talk) 13:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The history was a bit confusing on those pages, but I figured you were doing something like that. Guettarda (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you Robert, for your feedback on my draft article! I asked for help rewriting it at the Teahouse, as you suggested.

Indyplant (talk) 23:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Indyplant[reply]

DR Volunteering question

I have a question. How long would you let a DRN request sit unedited before you closed it as stale? The MCU request I volunteered for hasn't been edited in over a week, despite me introducing myself as a volunteer on the talk pages of all involved, and linking back to it. Some of the editors have been editing in the meantime, so I'm pretty well convinced they're no longer interested, I'm just not sure if I should let it sit out the whole two weeks, or go ahead and give one final ping to all involved before closing it. Thanks. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:MPants at work - Good question. I prefer to close disputes when it is clear after a few days that they are not going anywhere. In the Marvel case, I see, first, that the filing editor has not edited since filing. Second, the dispute between the three editors listed in the case is now sort of out of their hands, because other editors are also editing the article. I would suggest that you go ahead and close the case, with a statement that they are welcome to reopen a new case if the dispute resumes. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that reads as good advice, and I intend to do just that, right now. Again, thanks. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a totally different DRN-related topic, but I figured this is as good a thread to say it as anywhere.
I've been thinking a lot about your thread that inspired me to volunteer at DRN. One of the biggest problems with our various formal dispute resolution systems that you pointed out was the lack of enforceability. Editors are free to participate in DR, then abandon it if it's not going their way and ignore the result.
So what if we made participation at DRN contingent upon all parties agreeing formally to abide by the decision reached there, with the understanding that failure to do so would constitute disruption of the project?
This is frequently the de facto case with RfCs, and even occasionally with DRN threads, as you can confirm by browsing the WP:AE archives. Many an editor has been sanctioned for engaging in some dispute resolution process, then rejecting a result that went against them.
I understand that this is still not a policy. However, with the cooperation of even a small handful of admins (basically just agreement on their part that a user who commits to abide by a decision and then later refuses to do so and continues to argue about it is being disruptive, which I don't think is particularly controversial), that would be effective enforcement of the results of DRN discussions.
Obviously, discussions that do not succeed would not have this feature. It's certainly not an all-encompassing solution, but it would make it a lot easier for an admin to step in and deliver a warning or sanction to a user, if it can be shown that they explicitly agreed to basically stop arguing about something, only to start a fresh argument.
It occurs to me that something similar might have been tried before and failed, but I'm too lazy to dig through archive after archive to find out. You'd likely be more familiar with the history of DR on this site than I, which is why I mention this here, first. If you like the idea, I could try to get some agreement to implement it going. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:MPants at work - I think that I mostly agree, but will comment more in the next 48 hours or so. Thank you for providing some useful thoughts. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nagalakshmi Shanmugam (May 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Jeromeenriquez were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
coverage for books is available online but about the person is only available on her own website. try to add some more sources focusing on subject and resubmit. subject is notable.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Jeromeenriquez (talk) 01:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Robert McClenon! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Jeromeenriquez (talk) 01:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Importance of DR analysis

Whilst I appreciate you taking the time to look at the DR I posted, you’ll find, if you read the thread, that this is far from a one against many DR. I decided to list two protagonists from the varying points of view but there are many equally weighted contribs on both sides. I believe it unfortunate that you have decided to close this without waiting more than a few hours to see the commentary of others that have listed (I believe that all DR’s should remain open for at least a time zone cycle to pass for comment) and would suggest its reopening.

Thanks gj1 (talk) 02:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I went back and looked at the 1AM allegation and note that actually the opinions are roughly evenly split 4:3.

If your contention for closing is that it is a 1AM dispute, I would kindly ask you to reopen to allow for more independent commentary which is what had started to happen before your unilateral action. gj1 (talk) 02:44, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Brontorex01 - I have reopened the thread, and will wait for further comments. I suggest that you take the advice that I provided anyway. I will not be mediating the dispute, and I do not expect that discussion is likely to result in a change. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:33, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Robert McClenon - much appreciated. I understand your viewpoints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brontorex01 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DS 2021 Review Update

Dear Robert McClenon,

Thank you for participating in the recent discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name here.
--Barkeep49 & KevinL (aka L235) 21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:31, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tabari

Recently, you have closed a complaint that I filed because I didn't attempt to discuss the edits on the talk page of Al-Tabari's article. I have personally had a long discussion about two months ago with many Wikipedia editors and we managed to reach a consensus. I am also willing to discuss it even more. However, new edits are being made by an editor who is not interested at all in defending his position by discussing it on the talk page. He clearly is removing an Encyclopedia of Islam reference because he just thinks it is not reliable, but it is very much. Please take a look at the following diffs and let me know what I might need to do from this point on to avoid an edit war: [2], [3], [4], and finally here he states he is not interested in engaging in any discussions on the talk page of the article because there is 'near consensus amongst all scholars.' [5] Moor9119 (talk) 13:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Moor9119 - I see that there are two problems that compound each other. First, no one has used the article talk page at Talk:Al-Tabari. Second, the editor in question has never used article talk pages, using only edit summaries. Here are a few suggestions. First, you need to try to discuss your edits either at Talk:Al-Tabari or on the talk page of the other editor. Second, after you have discussed your edits, but before going over three reverts, warn the other editor. Third, after you have discussed your edits, but before going over three reverts, begin a Request for Comments. You aren't helping by going along with the other editor's use of edit summaries in place of discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robert McClenon Actually, here [6] you can see a very long discussion led by me about the same issue. My recent edits are not adding new content. I am simply reverting back to the version with consensus and I am asking for the editors I mentioned to read through the discussion and explain why everyone there agreed on something when they shouldn't have. It is not productive (and quite honestly boring) to start discussing everything from scratch when this issue was discussed. Moor9119 (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Moor9119 - That discussion was two months ago. You can see that not discussing isn't working. Have you tried using the talk page of the other editor? If you are certain that the discussion two months ago established consensus, you can start a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robert McClenon To be perfectly honest, I am interested in this particular case because I have noticed many similar cases where people use references which they don't actually read but which contains a sentence here and there that support their narrative. You can literally see that happening when they use Google books links (the keywords they search for still appear when you press the link) I have decided to monitor this page and see to what extent one can hope for such actions to stop on Wikipedia. Anyways, I am new to Wikipedia, and I am learning a lot about how it works. I will definitely read through the Request for Comments page later and see what that is about. Thanks for your time. Moor9119 (talk) 16:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dowsing on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft : Velar

Kindly go through the article (Draft: Velar) and guide me where I need to improve. Tamilan pugal (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tamilan pugal - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process, and I do not intend to rewrite your draft for you. I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse. It needs improvement as to its grammar and usage. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Language and linguistics request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Self-referential humor on a "Language and linguistics" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

Can I nominate you for administrator? StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 16:33, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:StarshipSLS - You have an "interesting" history as an editor, and some editors might be disinclined to vote for me if you were the nominator. If any administrators are reading my talk page and are willing to nominate me for administrator, I am ready. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon: Can I still try? StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 22:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:StarshipSLS - Of course you can try. There is no way to stop you. It will very likely result in my nomination being defeated, and that would end any hope that I have of being an administrator. I might find it better to decline the nomination, but then I would be unlikely to be renominated by someone else. So you have an opportunity to reduce my likelihood of becoming an admin to about zero. I don't think that there is anything you can do to advance me toward being an administrator. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Robert McClenon: I do not really understand why you doubt me so much. I have learned a lot since the ANI thread about me. I now have two mentors. StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) I am taking a vacation in summer and won't edit in July and August. 12:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfC closure

Hello, will there be a closure of this process soon. It was said that it should take 30 days but we are now far beyond that.--Sakiv (talk) 16:44, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sakiv - We aren't that far beyond 30 days. In Wikipedia there is no deadline. I have requested formal closure. Be patient. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:40, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Laura Lee

Thanks for the comment! I'll fix that now.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bealezkodarkmatter (talk • contribs) 17:59, May 25, 2021 (UTC)

@Bealezkodarkmatter: Please make sure to always sign your signature using ~~~~ or by clicking the signature icon on the edit toolbarwhen you're responding/creating to a section in a talk page. Jack Reynolds (talk to me | email me) 12:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

Thank you, Robert McClenon for accepting Heartbreak Anthem to be included in the mainspace! Jack Reynolds (talk to me | email me) 12:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Boring

Dunno why, but your comment caused me to immediately think of the cranial drill. lol Thanks for the smile this morning : ) - jc37 15:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Explaining my MFDs

Re this comment, figured I'd take a sec to explain how I found these targets, and why I'm bothering to tag for MFD, because it definitely did occur to me whether it was better to just leave all of these be.

Recently I stumbled on a misplaced draft in projectspace that had sat there for months, and became curious how many such pages there are. To that end I ran quarry:query/55472 based on a set of indicators that a page is likely misplaced. Most are not in fact misplaced drafts, but most are unsuitable for projectspace for one reason or another (often test pages). Some I've tagged for speedy deletion; others I've redirected, or have marked as historic; with ones created by active users, I've reached out and asked for clarification. I'm trying to MFD as few as possible, but do want to explain that there is a valid maintenance reason to delete/userfy these, namely decluttering projectspace to the end of finding these misplaced drafts. There's a risk of BLPvio stuff, or even OSable material, sitting around for months or years this way, and it's easier for it to hide in plain sight if there's lots of other stuff to blend in with.

So, that's my rationale for the spate of MFDs. I'm definitely open to constructive criticism as to whether this is the best way to go about things, but thought I'd give fuller context, to show these aren't just random things I found for no reason. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 19:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tamzin - Interesting. I don't know what Quarry is, but I see that it is a sort of SQL, and I understand most but not all of what the query is doing. Basically, you are ragpicking, but you are doing a possibly useful sort of ragpicking to try to find toxic rags that may need destroying. I will comment more later. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll await your full response, but just to follow up, I've put a brief explanation of what the query does at User:Tamzin/Quarry 55472. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 00:23, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Malaysia to Amnesia

If you're rejecting Draft: Malaysia to Amnesia for not meeting requirements, then how the Malaysia to Amnesia meeting requirements and tagged with notability? And how that was moved into mainspace without submitted to draftspace or afc? Kirubar (talk) 08:03, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sunny Hinduja

The result was delete on 2019 but now as in 2021 the actor is a part of various notable projects. I request you to verify the article once again. And there is a redirect edit of 'sunny hinduja' to a movie project. If the result was delete then is it good to make a redirect to a project page. (talk) PangolinPedia 15:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Joseph Chetrit (linguist)

Hello If I understood right, your review today says: "Improvements have been made, but the issues previously identified are still present. Article relies heavily on non-independent sources." The sources I used are not non-independent - they are the university or other Hebrew sources materials that are not his own. I don't really know what should be done now. I think it is reliable with the sources I gave, Please advice. Orlysi (talk) 14:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&oldid=1025945147"