User talk:Robert McClenon

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

Dispute Resolution

Hi, I'm writing to ask which is the best way to go about resolving a particular dispute along with some ongoing civility issues. I am asking you because you are the first editor on the Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteers list who has made any edits today. I hope I'm going about this the right way and not too much of a nuisance to you. The editor SchroCat and I are in a disagreement about comma use in the article John Davie (British Army officer). I also feel that SchroCat followed me to this article (no previous edits there). I don't know if this constitutes hounding/harassment, but I do wonder if it is something I should bring up. Several other editors and I have experienced civility issues with SchroCat at Talk:No Time to Die. What is the best way to go about resolving these issues? Thanks in advance! GrammarDamner (talk) 16:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

User:GrammarDamner - Well, my first thought is that if this is an issue about commas, it isn't worth making an issue about. I will review the issue in more detail within 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, no rush. GrammarDamner (talk) 17:07, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

As I said, request a Third Opinion at the Third Opinion noticeboard, but maybe from an editor who is neither an American nor a Briton. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Looks like someone else already did that, and consensus has been reached regarding the commas. That only covers one of the issues I brought up, but I guess that's that. Thanks again. GrammarDamner (talk) 16:19, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to keep bugging you, but I find SchroCat's recent reply to me at Talk:John Davie (British Army officer) completely unacceptable. What is the best way to go about dealing with consistently uncivil behavior? I'm not trying to get this editor blocked or anything, but I feel a warning of some sort is in good order, and as mentioned and pointed out, I'm definitely not the only editor who feels this way. Thanks again for taking the time. GrammarDamner (talk) 07:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas³ (talk) 17:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Paid editing off-wiki evidence

I have added an email address and the link to my user page. I have lots of evidence about paid editing which I am sure will lead to indictments.GDX420 (talk) 19:26, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

User:GDX420 Indictments for what by whom? McClenon mobile (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC submission of Draft:UMass Memorial Medical Center

This is an article of a health network, I think that this draft should be made its own article because of the fact that this is a hospital within the health network. A great example of another article is Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital being separate from RWJBarnabas Health. The proposed draft is just an hospital within the health network. If you look at UMass Memorial Health Care, the line states "...and the largest healthcare system in Central and Western Massachusetts." As you may know, a healthcare system consists of many hospitals as does UMass Memorial Health Care. Andrew nyr (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Andrew nyr - In that case, this is a split request, and I will put a comment to discuss on the talk page of the existing article whether other editors agree that separate articles are in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Question

I know paid editing is very looked down upon, but do you know of anyone who does it well, you know, produces good quality articles in a Wikipedia sense? Or is there a forum or wiki project for sharing best practices about how to comply with disclosed paid editing? I am a very old hand at Wikipedia, but very new to any paid editing and I want to try to fulfill the stringent requirements of disclosure, for example, and I keep doing it wrong. If you know of anyone that does it well, please let me know. Thanks, Integritas888 (talk) 01:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Integritas888 - There is a difference between paid editing and the paid collection of household garbage. Both are looked down on. The difference is that someone has to do the paid collection of garbage, because no one will do it for free, and it has to be done. No one has to do paid editing of Wikipedia, because it will be done for free if it needs doing. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

If you can set up a forum or WikiProject for sharing best practices, the other paid editors will appreciate it. Whether the volunteer editors will appreciate it may depend on whether you do it with as little stinking as possible. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

If I knew of someone who did it well, I wouldn't let you know. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

I have added over 40,000 edits to this encyclopedia over since 2006 over countless hours, for free. I have created dozens of Good Articles, and contributed to at least 5 Featured Articles. I have won dozens of barnstars, and over 98% of all my contributions have been retained thus far. I do not deserve to be addressed in this manner. Some of us need to eat, and love to help people make articles. I guess the articles won’t pass AfC unless they are at featured status first, but I didn’t know that, I am new to the process. Last I knew, we had a policy of “Don’t bite the newbies”, and I was new to this. They should just ban paid editing entirely if this is the way that paid editors who attempt to disclose and contribute are going to be treated. Integritas888 (talk) 15:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Le Concert Spirituel

Help! Draft:Le Concert Spirituel, - the article was created independently by a different user and IS in Main space, merged with content from the draft. The draft is no longer needed. I don't now how to deal with the situation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Gerda Arendt I have redirected the draft to the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Rubiaceae stubs

Thanks. Was going to approve these after I moved them but looks like you are taking care of it. Thanks for speeding up the process. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

User:CNMall41 - I will work them off as I work them off. I am about to go to bed, and I hope that I don't see them or read them for the next eight hours, because if I do, those are weird dreams, but dreams are weird. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah. The more I move, the more that appear. Hopefully they don't appear in your dreams. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Starzoner articles for creation

Many of the articles that Starzoner has had accepted contain unsubstituted uses of {{PAGENAME}}. I don't think they should be accepted until this is fixed; they are causing a lot of work for plant editors. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm gonna go through them and change them all. Starzoner (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Peter coxhead - Okay. I'll start sending them back. Thank you for being polite about this issue. We don't need to create extra work in a labor of love. (It just occurred to me. Is labor of love a double entendre because labor is what happens nine months after love? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:50, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know via the talk pages. Starzoner (talk) 16:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Starzoner: this was discussed elsewhere and I thought you had been told; sorry if that isn't the case. All you have to do is to use {{subst:PAGENAME}}. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Chaeyoung draft

Hello. You said Chaeyoung does not have significant coverage in secondary sources, but you didn't explain why. Chaeyoung has received coverage as an individual from multiple secondary sources. Tempo, GQ, Elite Daily, Korea Herald, korea herald 2, IBT India, SCMP, IDN times, IBT Singapore. Surely the GQ and Tempo articles alone are enough to satisfy GNG. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Apples&Manzanas - I said to discuss at Talk:Twice (group). There have been statements that she has enough individual coverage to qualify for a separate article, and there have been statements that she does not have enough individual coverage to qualify for a separate article. I am requesting that the community discuss at the group talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

That's a strange way of not answering my question. I mean, *you* were the person who said Chaeyoung did not have enough coverage to satisfy GNG, and i asked you to explain that...you dodged that question entirely. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Addendum: Also did you even read the draft talk page before declining the submission? Literally no one has thus far said that sources like GQ, Elite Daily, and Tempo don't constitute significant coverage. The draft was declined *in the past* because those sources *had not been discovered yet*. So far, you have been literally the only person to say those sources don't constitute significant coverage, and when questioned about this above you act like you never even said it. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 03:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Apples&Manzanas - Okay, you are likely right in that maybe I should have given your draft a more detailed review. On the other hand, you are being very undiplomatic if your objective is to get me to re-review the draft. You have now annoyed me so that I am not likely to be neutral. If your objective was to ask for a different reviewer, you will get your request, because I will recuse from reviewing your draft. If your objective was for me to accept your draft as an article, I will recuse from reviewing it, because I am no longer unbiased. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

All good, my apologies. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 04:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Squadron 42 draft

Hello, you left a comment on the Squadron 42 draft that I was a little confused with. I understand the discussion on splitting Star Citizen with Squadron 42, I opened that discussion but so far there's only been one other person talking it over prior to me really working on this draft. In your comment, it says that upcoming or unreleased games don't generally qualify under notability, but the page you linked to doesn't seem to have any information on that, and there are a few articles (Halo Infinite, Half-Life: Alyx, and Final Fantasy VII: Remake) that are all regarding upcoming releases. I'm just curious to figure out how an unreleased game with healthy coverage (ironically much of it being geared towards its unreleased nature) wouldn't be considered notable. I'm definitely waiting to hear from other editors on the Star Citizen page, just wanted to clear up that part. Thanks! — seadoubleyoujay ^{[talk] [contrib] [海倍君ジェイ]} 05:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I will review game notability to see if games are different from other subjects such as films and books in often being notable before they are released. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Seadoubleyoujay - I don't see anything in the game notability guidelines that is different about coverage for games that have not yet been released, but perhaps the game press routinely provides neutral coverage to games prior to release in a way that is different from films, books, or other subjects. My advice still is to discuss the split on the talk page. I would also suggest that a general discussion of games and unreleased games at the Teahouse might be in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Question, is it possible to revert this draft to an unsubmitted state while the discussion at Talk:Star Citizen continues? I'd agree with jumping the gun on submitting it for review, I just don't want it to be deleted while the rest is ongoing (I don't really know how all this works in detail). Or would it be best to leave it in the state it's in now, continue improving it and continuing the discussion, and then making the final decision later? — seadoubleyoujay ^{[talk] [contrib] [海倍君ジェイ]} 19:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Seadoubleyoujay - I am not sure that I understand. I think I understand that you want to avoid having the draft deleted, but I am not sure what sort of deletion you are concerned about needing to avoid. I don't think that there is a risk that it is about to be deleted. Has someone posted something to that effect? If you have a vague general concern, you could ask a question at the Teahouse. I am not sure that I understand the question. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Salomonia

Hi, I am notifying you that I've created 5 articles in the Salomonia genus and I think they are ready to be submitted. Starzoner (talk) 21:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Starzoner You didn't submit them for review, so I submitted them. You also have drafts in some other genera in various plant families, but I have left them alone, because you didn't ask about them. I am willing to accept any draft on a species with a proper source and a proper binomial name, based on the idea, that I stated yesterday, that if there is agreement on notability, cleanup can be done in article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Salomonia longiciliata has been accepted

Salomonia longiciliata, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:54, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Declined submission

Dear Robert,

Yesterday I submitted a draft submission , receiving back a notification of decline from you, for the following reason:

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 organizations and companies).

Additionally that:

This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself. Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject. Not every business corporation is notable, and this draft does not establish corporate notability.

I would like to state the case that this decline is not correct, under the terms of Wikipedia's rules & guidelines. I will address the points made as follows:

1. The citations provided are to articles which are written specifically upon the subject matter submitted, these are not 'just passing mentions' so much as they provide "Significant coverage" by 'addressing the topic directly and in detail, so that no research is needed to extract the content'

2. The subject is published in reliable, secondary sources, as the sources are 'third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy'... The first source is Bloomberg L.P The second source City A.M.

3. This draft is not written from the viewpoint of the company, the submission details only factual points relating to the subject matter & is fully cited for all factual points made, as would be expected from an external source's viewpoint. Furthermore the citations are "Independent of the subject"

4. This business corporation is notable, given the significant coverage that has been provided by multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources.

5. The submission provides "Significant coverage" in its citations as they 'addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content'.

6. The list of markets that the subject covers is not an 'Example of trivial coverage' on the pure basis that, the list of markets that the subject covers, are the reason for the citations & existence of the subject's secondary coverage in the first place, wholly this would seem 'trivial' had it not been for the 'significant coverage' relating to these subject matters.

IN SUMMARY

'The common theme in the notability guidelines is that there must be verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability'. This has been proven by providing numerous citations (significant attention) from independent sources.

None of the citations, or coverage can be regarded as 'Self-promotion, autobiography, product placement and most paid material are not valid routes to an encyclopedia article' The articles to which I've referred are not paid, nor classifiable as the remainder above. They're provided by independent sources.

Furthermore, the Notability terms state 'The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter' .

Which of course is the case, multiple independent, sources have considered the topic notable enough to have written and published non-trivial work of their own that specifically focus upon the subject, without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to this topic matter.

IN CONCLUSION.

The Notability guidelines state 'No organization is considered notable except to the extent that independent sources demonstrate that it has been noticed by people outside of the organization'. It has been proven that there has been Significant attention given to the subject matter by; multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources, from outside of its organisation.

The Notability guidelines specifically state that 'A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.'

Therefore, my submission should be approved wholly as the corporation is decidedly 'notable'. In fact, as one of my citations states, the subject is award winning, this is 'notable' in its own right. My submission has provided multiple citations to 'significant coverage' of the subject, from multiple, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject; of which the citations adhere totally to Wikipedia's Notability guidelines & my sources follow the exact points set out in the general notability guideline.

I have spoken to members of the Tea Room & one comment was that the City A.M. citation is of a 'trivial coverage' nature. To rebuttal this, my comment is, the statement is short, stating the company raised 30k. But just because the statement is short, does not mean it doesn't constitute 'Significant coverage' as it addresses the subject directly in detail, as required by the Notability guidelines. This is no different to referring to a famous persons date of birth, or death. A statement, backed up by an independent, reliable source.

Many thanks for your time. The Dolph

Dolphinhouse2019 (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Please see additional discussion of this matter at User_talk:Dolphinhouse2019. — TransporterMan (TALK) 17:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC) This is an informational posting only and I am not watching this page; contact me on my user talk page if you wish to communicate with me about this.

Request for a separate article for Robam Moni Mekhala (Cambodiaan dance) from Manimekhala (goddess of the sea)

I wish this article will be accepted as a separate article from Manimekhala. This proposed article is a separate article for a Cambodian traditional dance Robam Moni Mekhla while Manimekhala is an article for a goddess in Hindu and Buddhist mythology. Like there are an article for Apsara and a separate article for Robam Tep Apsara (in Cambodia).

The sources cited are the only available references I can find for the proposed article as such English-based books regarding this Cambodian dance is rare although it is a popular dance in Cambodia. The acceptance of this draft article will open it up to other editors who may have access to more photos, sources, and information. As I am alone for this article, I need assistance from other editors.

Please reconsider this draft article! Thanks in advance! Antony Willianson (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Antony Willianson - I will review the draft within 48 hours, probably 24 (since there isn't a whole lot that anyone can do other than use the Internet with the lockdown). Robert McClenon (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon Thanks anyway! I'll try to improve the draft later. I hope this will be my second article being approved. This is all I can contribute. Sorry to disturb you! Take care!God bless you. Antony Willianson (talk) 03:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Splitting

Hi. I just noticed the Manimekhala discussion mentioned above, and I must say I find your notion of what constitutes article splitting to be very peculiar. I saw your addition of a split tag to the article back in January, but could not understand what the request was supposed to entail. In my understanding (and I believe this is the way most people see it), a split primarily concerns existing content in an article. The tag you placed, saying, "It has been suggested that this article be split into a new article titled Draft:Robam Moni Mekhala," made no sense to me, because the content is already in the target, and there's no existing content in the main article to be split. (In any case, one would want to split into Mainspace, not a draft, and the template doesn't even work with Draftspace pages.)

Picking up from my previous comment at User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 27#Template:Talkspin, I think it would be much clearer to frame the discussion as a choice of whether to (1) create a stand-alone article of a subtopic, or (2) merge the draft's content into the main article. A new maintenance tag would be best suited for this, but if we must choose among existing tags, I'd say it makes much more sense to tag the issue as a merge suggestion from the draft page. In this case, consensus not to merge would equal one to create a separate standalone article. WP:PAGEDECIDE would also be the most relevant guideline to point to. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Paul 012 - I haven't been able to find a good way to formulate questions of when to create a second article when there is a redirect to an existing article. It definitely isn't a merge proposal, because a merge either converts two articles into one or pulls draft material into an article. A merge tag is often appropriate when someone writes a draft on a topic that already has an article, but the content is somewhat different but overlapping. If there is an article, and a draft is submitted that has the topic of a redirect to the article, I think that the discussion should be on the article talk page. The problem seems to be that the terminology of split and merge causes confusion. Do you have a different idea in general of how to handle these cases? In this specific case I will re-review the draft on the dance. The question seems to be largely one of terminology. Is there a more substantive issue? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

There are some common cases where a draft has the same title as a redirect, such as the name of an album that is redirected to the article on the artist, or the name of a song or track that is redirected to the article on the album. In those cases, I think it is clear that discussion should be at the parent article talk page. I agree that some cases are less clear. In general, I would prefer to see discussion on a talk page if there is an appropriate talk page, rather than just making a reviewer decision. Do you understand what I am saying? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it does seem it's an issue mainly of terminology. Would probably be best to create a new template to cover this directly. It would make sense to discuss cases at the main article talk page, but a more pertinent question, I think, would be when this is necessary. Redirects that used to be articles will need discussion to determine whether the reason for merging or redirecting still applies. But if it's tagged {{r with possibilities}}, it could probably be accepted as a separate article straight away. Regarding your album and song examples, I'm not regularly involved at AfC, but if I were, I'd probably prefer to approve and "deal with it in Mainspace". --Paul_012 (talk) 00:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Paul 012 - For albums and songs, the musical notability criteria are detailed and well-defined, so that the draft can be accepted if it charted or otherwise meets a specific criterion, and otherwise can usually be declined. One of the considerations, that you mentioned, is that quite often there was an article, and it has been stubbed down to a redirect, sometimes by formal AFD, sometimes after some discussion, and sometimes unilaterally. In those cases, it really is important to ensure that there is new discussion. In cases where there is no special notability guideline and no previous discussion, it is really just a matter of inclusion philosophy, and that gets messy. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

DRN closure

I didn't mention this in my DRN request, but seeking dispute resolution was specifically advised by the administrator who closed Dlthewave's Arbitration Enforcement request against Jweiss11. When you closed my DRN request, were you were that this matter had been referred to DRN from AE?

I'm unable to use an account because I can't enable cookies on the device that I use to edit. I don't know who the other IP is, or whether they have a legitimate reason for editing anonymously, but they're a different person. (It's helpful to compare our respective geolocations.)

I would appreciate you reading the various comments in the Arbitration Enforcement request where this matter was referred to DRN, if you haven't already, and reconsidering your closure in light of that. This dispute has been churning on the talk page and at AE for the past month, so it's very unlikely that kicking it back to those places will produce any further resolution. 2600:1004:B14E:63FD:A8E7:E862:289A:18DD (talk) 20:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I have asked at the Teahouse whether there is a way to edit from a registered account without cookies. That discussion is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Are_Cookies_Required_for_Registered_Editors%3F . Robert McClenon (talk) 00:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

In light of the response there, are you willing to reconsider your closure? 2600:1004:B14E:63FD:A8E7:E862:289A:18DD (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

What device are you using that doesn't accept cookies? I can use cookies on a smartphone, or a laptop, or a desktop. Where are you and what device are you trying to use? McClenon mobile (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The device is theoretically capable of accepting cookies, but for personal reasons I can't enable them. If you aren't willing to reconsider your decision, you can just tell me that. 2600:1004:B14E:63FD:A8E7:E862:289A:18DD (talk) 04:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

DRN Closure Reply

I have reviewed the DRN request as you requested. I see that Race and Intelligence has been to Arbitration Enforcement at least four times within the past month, as you said. That, in itself, doesn't incline me to try to mediate a dispute that keeps going back to conduct forums. I understand that you understand that User:Barkeep49 and User:El_C specifically referred the parties to DRN, but that isn't exactly what Barkeep said. What User:Barkeep49 said was that the parties should have used dispute resolution. Barkeep further said that could be an RFC. With multiple parties coming from multiple directions, RFC is more likely to be an effective method of dispute resolution than is moderated discussion at DRN. You still can formulate an RFC.

After reviewing the explanation of the need for cookies and your personal inability to enable cookies, I do not find a compelling reason to allow anonymous participation in a moderated dispute where moderation is not likely to work anyway. In the absence of an explanation that goes into excessive detail (for which I am not asking), it sounds as though, first, you may be able to find a device at a library or Internet café, second, the "personal reason" sounds like the device isn't really yours, third, I don't know which of the other parties to the dispute you might be.

Do you want assistance in formulating a neutrally worded Request for Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I will note that 2600:1004 has been a productive contributor to the discussion for quite some time and so if that was the only thing preventing this from being handled at DRN I'd ask for reconsideration. However, I will affirm that while DRN is part of the dispute resolution process, Robert McClenon is correct that I suggested an RfC as the proper kind of dispute resolution for this matter. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Someone else has just opened a RFC on a closely related question. As I understand it, dispute resolution requests typically aren't accepted while there's a RFC underway, so at this point I'm willing to accept the closure.

I have one other question, though. Is it a requirement for RFCs to be neutrally worded? That is what's stated here, but this particular RFC is obviously not neutrally worded, including a statement that I have "persistently advocated for lending credence to white supremacist sources".

@Barkeep49: you are the main person who's monitoring behavioral issues on these articles, so I would particularly like your guidance on whether it's acceptable for the opening summary of a RFC to make these kinds of allegations. 2600:1004:B159:F772:1F3:3811:8D45:C868 (talk) 04:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

RFCs should be neutrally worded. I will let User:Barkeep49 or another administrator decide what should be done about a concern that an RFC is non-neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Evelyn Campbell (actress)

Hello. Regarding this note that you left on my talkpage, user:Rosiestep#I have unreviewed a page you curated, please let me know why you unreviewed it. Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Here's the right link to where you left the message, User talk:Rosiestep#I have unreviewed a page you curated, and here's a link to the article in question, Evelyn Campbell (actress) (my 1,390th new woman's biography). --Rosiestep (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Rosiestep - A small issue, which is that the way her dates were formatted made it appear to say she is still alive. That should be changed to b. 1867 or to a ? . Go ahead and review it again. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't know how to "review it again" as I didn't review it to begin with, e.g. I think all of the articles I create are put into auto-reviewed status. Is this something you can do? --Rosiestep (talk) 19:18, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Rosiestep - I've marked it reviewed. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert_McCleon I just saw it after a break. Thank so much! Antony Willianson (talk) 17:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Paul_012 Intention

Hello @Robert_McClenon I suspected the intention of this user Paul 012 from Thailand. After trying to prevent the draft article : Robam Moni Mekhala from being approved as a separate article, now he proposed many of the photos I uploaded to Wikipedia ( including those used in the draft article) for DELETION! Some photos I got them from the facebook page (Hattha) after getting the permission from the owner, so I have to download them from her page & uploaded to Wikimedia Common with her named attached ( I complainted this to the owner of the photos, she said she will try to upload the photos by herself tomorrow, but she never join Wikipedia before). This Thai user proposed many other photos I uploaded to other article for deletion as well! Some photos, I took it by myself from the National Museum of Cambodia and 1 photo, I asked my friend to took it when he was on a trip to Angkor Wat temple! So I get them via FB which is convenient. I am a new contributor/ editor, I dont know much about Wikipedia. Help me! I dont know that technical stuff! Antony Willianson (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Antony Willianson, User:Paul_012 - I have completed my review of Draft:Robam Moni Mekhala. I have declined the draft at this time because it is difficult to read because the English is not good. It needs a heavy copy-edit for grammar, style, and usage. A history merge of the draft into the existing redirect is then needed. (I am not recommending a merge into the article on the goddess, but a history merge into what is currently a redirect from the title of the dance to the goddess.) If you have any further questions, you may ask them here, or on the talk page of the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert_McCleon Quite disappointing after the draft article is declined for the second time. I'm not a native speaker of English, thus limited in the language used! I did my best for the contribution anyway! I'm completely blank who can really help me over here! Will find somebody to help and resubmit the draft again! Sad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antony Willianson (talk • contribs) 07:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Antony Willianson - Isn't it in article space at Robam Moni Mekhala and tagged for copy-edit? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Test

Nothing. McClenon mobile (talk) 18:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert_McCleon,thanks for your help. But can you please add some sections from the second submission of the draft as it contains more information such the characters' costume,...etc & could get help from the team as well. Really appreciate your assistance! Take care & stay healthy! God blessed! Antony Willianson (talk) 16:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, Thank for information!  Antony Willianson (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hi Robert_McCleon! I can not view or edit the draft: Robam Moni Mekhala, is the draft deleted? So, disappointing as I spent lot of times working on it! Or I have to re-draft it again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antony Willianson (talk • contribs) 08:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Antony Willianson - It should be there at Robam Moni Mekhala now. Please do not edit the draft for now. It is waiting to be reworked by an editor whose native language is English. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Antony Willianson - If there is information from another version that needs to be added to the article, go ahead and add it. The article is tagged for copy-edit and is waiting for a copy-editor, so that any additions will also be copy-edited. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Let's fall in love for the night

I was wondering what I can do to improve the article. I also want to let you know that "Let's Fall in Love for the Night" is Finneas' most successful song. It reached the top 20 on the alternative songs billboard chart and number 26 on the rock airplay. Beatleswillneverdie (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Orwell Society submission

Many thanks for pointing out the perceptual gap - should have picked this up myself but it is all good learning. Much appreciated. --2A02:C7F:DC5B:C700:8C6C:BD8E:A197:2CE3 (talk) 07:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Your review in Afc: Alex Ajipe (March 2020)

Hi McClenon,

I got your review of my article "Alex Ajipe" and I acknowledge your observations on how to make the article better. 

I'll go ahead and add more citations from independent and reliable websites to further improve the standard of the article.

I also want to reaffirm my commitment towards following the rules guarding Wikipedia editors. I have never taken com compensations for editing or creating articles on Wikipedia.

Thanks. Thisissegun (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Are you still on Draft:Xbox system software?

I just came across it, and wanted to run reFill on it for a second, but don't want to create an edit conflict. (I wasn't intending to review it.) --Gryllida (talk) 00:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Gryllida - Go ahead and make any minor tweaks to it. I will deal with it within a few hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:René Panthier

I accepted it as is, and then fixed the headings; sometimes in a case like this I fix them first, and then accept. This is simply a decent quality translation from the frWP, not a machine translation. (Iddon ot know why the contributor didn't copy the hreading format, but it's one of the things that don't matter. DGG ( talk ) 02:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

User:DGG Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Jack Harman (artist)

Dear Robert McClenon, I take the view that the Jack Harman article meets the following criterion: "The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument" as demonstrated here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Harry_Jerome He also meets "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor" as a recipient of the Order of British Columbia Please reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheijiashaojun (talk • contribs) 06:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Reyko Article

Hi Robert! Hope you are well? Thank you for your feedback, I'm very new to Wikipedia so I'm trying my best here. I have deleted the draft for Reyko as the article is already published. And I have seen your nomination to delete the article so I have checked the criteria for notability in music and the band Reyko meets the following: 1. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart 2. Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country 3. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. 4. Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network Please, reconsider. But also, please, feel free to improve the article or give me any advice? Thank you! --Bluevespa8 (talk) 18:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 19:25:33, 24 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by MariaAnnelovesyou2

• MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joseph G. Giambra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Robert,

I am unfamiliar with the Wikipage process and hope you will excuse my query here if it does not follow the appropriate protocol. I reach out to you because you left me a message that the tone of my article was not acceptable. I made edits to comply with the request. I just popped in to add an IMBD to the article, but it seems to be moved or deleted. Can you please give me more information on that? Where is Draft:Joseph G. Giambra? There is some comment about copyright infringement, but no requests were made regarding further information. While I do not have a copy of the deleted draft, my recollection is that the photos were taken by me or owned by Joseph Giambra. Or links to other websites such as IMBD. The content was my own.

Please advise as to how I can view the draft.

Thank you.

Maria MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk) 19:25, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk) 19:25, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

User:MariaAnnelovesyou2 - Your draft was deleted by administrator User:WilyD because it was a copy of copyrighted material. You may discuss with the deleting administrator, but copyright infringement is never restored. You may rewrite the draft in your own words and resubmit it. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 20:35:46, 24 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by MariaAnnelovesyou2

• MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Joseph G. Giambra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks so much for the reply, Robert. How can I determine what part he thought was infringement? and how do I get a message to him? I can't find a talk page for him. MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk) 20:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

MariaAnnelovesyou2 (talk) 20:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

User:MariaAnnelovesyou2 - If you are having difficulty with talk pages, ask for help at the Teahouse. You may post a message at User talk:WilyD. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

The copyright infringement was probably of the text of the draft, because copyright to images and copyright to text are handled by somewhat different procedures. We normally will allow the use of copyrighted pictures with the consent of the photographer or other copyright owner. We cannot allow the use of copyrighted text by "ordinary" permission, because our copyleft releases the text for reuse by anyone else under a similar license anywhere in the world, and that is usually not the way people want to give permission. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't remember everything, but a quick check reveals some text was copied from this website: http://www.perniente.org/actors.html; there mqy hqve been others. WilyD 09:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Why rejected?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Danish_Renzu

There is plethora articles on Danish Renzu with released films? https://www.amazon.com/Half-Widow-Neelofar-Hamid/dp/B07XLW36SX And work with Academy winning actor https://bookandfilmglobe.com/film/movie-review-the-illegal/

How is this not worth of wikipedia? Instead, will appreciate your feedback on the page to get this approved

User:Cinephile786 - Please sign your posts. Also please follow the advice to discuss at Draft talk:Danish Renzu. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Math talk page Comment

Do you get what that dude is saying here that the title should be? Am I overthinking what he's saying or did he somehow make it more complicated? I don't want to feel dumb and ask the guy to clarify again. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Sulfurboy - I'll clarify, since this is high school math (and I've forgotten college math). He is saying that the title should be Modular forms modulo p, which is like Modular forms modulo n, except that n is an integer and p is a prime integer. It could be Modular forms modulo 3 or Modular forms modulo 5. You aren't overthinking it. He changed the nature of the complexity from 2 to any prime number. Everything beyond stating what the modulo is gets into discrete higher math, which I haven't forgotten because I didn't study it. (I have forgotten differential equations.) Robert McClenon (talk) 23:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, See, I was a liberal arts major in an effort to avoid any of this. I accepted the page with the suggested name, although I probably should have considered a different approach when I saw the article. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hyperbolastic functions has been accepted

Hyperbolastic functions, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits, you can 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.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Did you really do that? Starzoner (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Starzoner - Yes and no, I guess. I certainly couldn't have written about hyperbolastic functions. They are differential equations, and I have forgotten all of the higher mathematics that I learned fifty years ago. I was reviewing Draft:Hyperbolastic functions and asked other reviewers to review it. I declined it based on advice from mathematicians. I then got a further comment that the text should be in article space somewhere, either as Hyperbolastic functions or somewhere else, and found that comment, that it should be in article space, persuasive. So I resubmitted the draft, and then I reviewed the draft and accepted it. As a result of the fact that I was the last submitter of the draft to review, the script put the message on my talk page, saying that the draft had been accepted and was Class C. So did I really do that? I guess yes and no. There is also a similar message accepting one of your plants, but that is for a stub. Does that tell you more than you wanted to know? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant “song article” Beatleswillneverdie (talk) 04:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Song article

Is there anyway that nirvana books like “Nirvana: The Recording Sessions” be used as a reference for this article. I’ve seen it been used on other nirvana song articles. Beatleswillneverdie (talk) 04:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Beatleswillneverdie - I suggest that you ask at the Teahouse, but I see two separate questions. The first is whether Nirvana books can be used as references. The second is whether a particular song satisfies a musical notability criterion. The two questions are not directly related. Beyond that, I would ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Request on 20:51:38, 26 March 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Markomarkovic1980

• Markomarkovic1980 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nemanja Jovanovic (basketball) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Robert, I would like to see what is the issue of not accepting the article for Nemanja Jovanovic. I see that you refer to Notability for sports but there also exists part for College athletes https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:NCOLLATH&redirect=no which can be applied in this case as Nemanja is part of NCAA team staff. The article is somewhat similar to this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdan_Karai%C4%8Di%C4%87 and if this one is accepted I don't see the reason for not accepting Nemanja, too. Thanks for the review and I hope you'll accept this additional explanation. Best regards, Marko

Markomarkovic1980 (talk) 20:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Markomarkovic1980 - College athletic notability guidelines essentially say that the subject should meet general notability guidelines. If you think that he meets general notability guidelines, explain on the draft talk page, and resubmit. I would suggest asking the advice of other editors at the Teahouse. If they think that he is notable, I will accept. I am not really interested in whether other college coaches are listed, because that is known as Other Stuff Exists, and maybe the other stuff should be deleted, or maybe it should be kept. So I suggest discussing at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I have added it on the teahouse Beatleswillneverdie (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I have added it to the tea house Beatleswillneverdie (talk) 23:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol Flow Through the Strip

I have been told by other editors that a song article can be notable if the references are good. I have done more research and found books and other websites explaining the origin of the song. Please check it out and see if it is good to resubmit. Beatleswillneverdie (talk

User:Beatleswillneverdie - I suggest that we discuss at the Teahouse. My reading of the guidelines is that a song is normally considered notable if the song satisfies the special notability guidelines by having charted. Discuss at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Information Services Group Draft

I was going through some public company pages and noticed you were the last editor to review this page (Draft:Information Services Group) and saw that it was a public company that could use some cleaning up. I think the subject meets WP:N with the citations that have been added to the page but it has been under review for a long time. Is there any way you could re-assess the page when you have a moment? Edproms (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Edproms - I have reviewed the revised draft briefly, and it does not appear to be a significant improvement. I can either decline it again or leave it for another reviewer. There is a myth in Wikipedia about references. The myth is that any draft will be accepted if enough references are added to it. References are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the acceptance of a draft. If you want the opinions of other reviewers, you can ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Recovery of my sandbox

I understand that you have rejected the submission from my sandbox. I understand most reasons for your decision. I do not understand why the info in my sandbox has been erased -- this does not make sense to me if I want to improve the text. Can you reinstate the sandbox content? David.Tomanek (talk) 14:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

User:David.Tomanek - I did not remove content from your sandbox. I moved your sandbox to Draft:David Tománek. It is still there. Your sandbox has a link to the draft, so that you can either go from your sandbox to the draft, or do something else with your sandbox. The draft will remain at Draft:David Tománek but may be subject to normal editing. Does that answer your question? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Grades and guilds

Evolutionary grades and ecological guilds. A grade is a paraphyletic group of organisms that lack the innovations of a derived group. For example fish are a grade, lacking the legs of tetrapods. Herptiles are a grade, lacking the hair and homeothermy of mammals, and the feathers, wings and homeothermy of birds. Non-bat, non-cetacean mammals could be seen as a grade, though anthropocentrism gets in the way of that. Green algae are a grade, lacking the derived features of land plants. A guild is a collection of species with similar ecological roles, such as a carnivore guild, a browser guild, a grazer guild, a scavenger guild, and so on. Algae in general can be seen as a guild of photosynthetic organisms. Lavateraguy (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Lavateraguy - Thanks. Ok. A guild is people or organisms who do the same work. A grade is what you pass thru in school or evolution. McClenon mobile (talk) 23:26, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Recheck my draft

Please recheck the draft I have created. I have put way more references that are both reliable and good. Please check out Draft:Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol Flow Through the Strip. Beatleswillneverdie (talk)

Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol

User:Beatleswillneverdie: Here is a long partial answer. First, as I noted above to another editor, there is a myth in Wikipedia about references. The myth is that any draft will be accepted if enough references are added to it, or the right references. References are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for acceptance of a draft. The first part of my conclusion is that the track does not satisfy musical notability because it has not charted or satisfied another of the criteria for inclusion. The second part of my conclusion is that the track does not appear to satisfy general notability. Any argument that you make for acceptance of the draft should be based on general notability, because I think that it fails musical notability. I personally do not want to try to evaluate whether a song track passes general notability based on added references.

However, second, since you are being so persistent, I am willing to do either of two things for you. I advised you to discuss the rejection with other editors before resubmitting. You have chosen to persist in asking me. I am willing, the first option, just to get you to stop bothering me, to remove the Rejection from the draft and allow you to resubmit it and have another editor review it. I do not plan to review it again. My guess is that another editor will decline or reject it, but you can try.

The second option is that I am willing, based on your request, and on your opinion, and not my review or judgment, to move the draft into article space, without offering my opinion as to whether it will pass a deletion discussion. If you ask me to accept your draft without a review, I will accept your draft without a review. It is likely to be nominated for deletion. In that case, I am willing to remain neutral in a deletion discussion.

Do you want me to remove the Rejection and let another reviewer review it when they are ready? Do you want me to remove the Rejection and move it into article space (accept the draft) based on your request, without reviewing it myself? Your call. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

I am going to go for the second option. Beatleswillneverdie (talk)

Done. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Resolving issues with the k6 article

Hi Robert,

Thank you for reviewing our submission!

I'd argue that testguild.com definitely is a noteworthy independent source, as it is one of the top resources in the software testing space. There are also a lot of other third-party references in the article, including an article in the "Computer Standards & Interfaces" journal.

What kind of source is it that you think is lacking, exactly? I would love to assist in digging up more resources, but I personally think this should be good enough?

Thanks in advance and best regards,

Simon Simon Aronsson (talk) 14:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Simon Aronsson - I will try to research this within 24 hours, but it would help if you would identify the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon Sure! The draft article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:K6, and just to give some additional "meat":

- Ref 5, testguild.com is very well-considered in the software testing space, and, at least in my opinion, counts as a credible third-party source.

- Ref 13 is a study of scalable rest applications published in the journal "Computer Standards & Interfaces" where k6 was one of two tools used, which has since been quoted in an article on wiley.com

Also, I just want to be transparent with that both I and the original draft submitter work for Load Impact, the company providing the open-source stewardship for the k6 project. This is also the reason why we we submitted to the AfC. Simon Aronsson (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

A gentle reminder :) Simon Aronsson (talk) 12:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Simon Aronsson - I have not reviewed the sources for the draft in depth. The draft reads as if it is written from the company's viewpoint, which is expected because it is being written from the company's viewpoint. I have not reviewed the sources, but the draft does not convince me of the need to review the sources in depth. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon Thank you for taking time to go over the article! I fully agree with your feedback and has since removed the content that came across as pitchy and rewrote the rest aiming for a significantly more neutral tone. I've also re-submitted the article for review. Simon Aronsson (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

How can I proceed with this declined article?

Hi Rober McClennon,

Thank you you have read and commented on the Brand activism draft I did. (here is the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Brand_activism?fbclid=IwAR0u5fzm8wvFjtD_Xb-3ZVAFNwSVxsG63w65YPRSpseUFORCN7gtJb8MKJ8 ) I see the draft is declined, for it looks similar to the Consumer activism article, but they are completely different concepts.

While Consumer activism focuses on consumption and how goods or services are produced and delivered, Brand activism is a marketing and business management process by which businesses concern for the communities they serve and the world we live in.

Consumer activism seeks to change the way in which goods or services are produced in order to make the production process safer, more ethical, more environmentally friendly, etc.

Brand activism seeks to change society's biggest problem (such as economic injustice, education, healthcare, immigration etc. issues), using the economic power of the business. The Brand activism claims that today for the companies is not enough to offer good product and price, but they have to understand the long-term needs of the society and to solve global problems as economic problems, regulations, corruption, global warming, discrimination, education, healthcare, and etc. using the economic power they possess.

Can you, please, give me advice on how to proceed? Thanks, Ivan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan gurkov (talk • contribs) 15:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Ivan gurkov - I will respond within 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Ivan gurkov - Here are my initial comments, and I may comment further. First, I didn't decline your article. As you know, User:WikiAviator did. I disagree with both you and WikiAviator. On the one hand, I agree that you have made a case that brand activism is not the same as consumer activism, and so I think that WikiAviator was too quick to decline your draft, in particular after I had said that the evaluation should focus on the differences. However, you aren't likely to make any friends with the AFC reviewers by being too quick to give a trout to the one with whom you disagree. You are asking multiple reviewers for help. They may notice that you were quick to put a big fish on the talk page of a reviewer. I agree that you have made the case that brand activism is not the same as consumer activism. At the same time, your draft does not have a neutral tone. It strikes me as being "in-your-face" in its support of brand activism. If brand activists are seeking to "solve the global problems", that is the sort of marketing buzzspeak I would expect to see to sell a product. The fact that you are promoting a strategy turns my level of discomfort with the phrase down from 10 to 8. So if I had reviewed your draft, I probably would have declined it for a different reason than WikiAviator. So address the tone issues. You might want to find a WikiProject that will help you work on the draft. If you want advice in finding a WikiProject, the Teahouse would be a good place to start. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Thanks, but I still doubt if solving global problems is part of corporate social responsibility. Honestly I've never heard of the term in this draft, so I suspect if this is made up of. Also, apologies that I have to review in breakneck speed due to a busy real life, so sometimes I don't list out all the reason, if I find one reason, I decline it right away unless there are so many problems that I'm not comfortable if I don't tell the author. Sorry for that. However, this article is still a duplicate. Regarding the trout, I don't mind people trouting me but this is not used in the right occasion.

Sizzle! The trout you used to slap another Wikipedian has been gutted, roasted over the coals, and served with tartar sauce. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that, just like the trout in this picture, your trouting of Wikipedians is overdone.

Happy editing for both of you! WikiAviator (talk) 01:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClendon Robert, thank you for your advice on more facts and a neutral tone. It will really help me write better. As for trout, I never knew it was too daring to use. I assumed it was normal functionality, I apologize to WikiAviator for using it hastily. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan gurkov (talk • contribs) 03:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Comment about Wikipedian reputation and small request

You wrote me a comment at 15:43, but already at 16:57 you closed the discussion. Isn't a Dispute resolution noticeboard meant for discussion?)) David_Gerard is cunning when he says that he doesn’t know about Insilico's CEO Alex Zhavoronkov. He initiated the removal of the article about this scientist in 2017. Did I expect any help from David?))

I’m very surprised by your behavior. Why do you not want to check the sources and text style of my draft and suggest corrections for it? I insist on checking my version because it was written on WSJ- or Science-level sources. It's unlikely that anyone will find sources better than these.

My persistence is my character, 🙃 it's not about paid editing. In fact, if your employer needs it, Wikipedia doesn't need it. – non my case. My contract says that I get paid for creating a draft for Wikipedia, and not for publishing and saving the article. But I’m sure that all editors – volunteers or affiliates – should follow Wikipedia rules in the same way. Now my situation looks like discrimination (but I understand that this is caution).

It’s unpleasant for me that people look at my work through prejudice. I have a review-flagg in Russian Wikipedia, I'm a true Wikipedia pop-scientist and tutor, I assist in investigations against unscrupulous editors. The quality of Google translator allows you to easily check this. Why should my word weigh less than the word of David_Gerard? (This is a rhetorical question, no need to answer.)

I want a substantive discussion about draft quality, and not about my paid editing. Please help me phrase a request to the community at the Teahouse. --Birulik (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Birulik - Look up discrimination and discriminate between sense 1 and sense 3. We do discriminate between paid editing and volunteer editing. Discrimination is only considered invidious discrimination when it is based on suspect categories. The employment status of an editor is a category for which we are allowed to discriminate, that is, make a distinction. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm a new person in an established community, English is not my native language, I openly support what most users oppose. This is not like an equal condition for me and you. And you know that your position is stronger now. Don't tell me that this is not discrimination in its general sense. 💁‍♀️ If you want to argue about lexical meanings then let's go into my language – I will continue with pleasure.))--Birulik (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Neither I nor any other editor are required to check a draft in detail. Besides, you didn't ask me to check your draft, and so you shouldn't fault me for not volunteering to check your draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Dispute resolution noticeboard was created to solve issues. You have taken the responsibility to sum up the disputes therefore you must understand the essence of the problem, in my case – to check a draft in detail. You didn't do it yourself and didn't let other people join when you closed the discussion. Please do not engage in discussions where you are not ready to help, especially because of prejudices.--Birulik (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that you need help in formulating a request at the the Teahouse for advice.

I will reply to your request in more detail within 48 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

OK. This is an honest answer.--Birulik (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

• From the claims she makes on her user page and her user data (all projects), Birulik is hardly a new user. Her English is excellent and her suggestion to continue this discussion in another language is very inappropriate. Her comments at Talk:Insilico Medicine are borderline inflammatory and/or personal attacks at David_Gerard whom she also accuses here of being 'cunning'. FWIW, I concur with David's removal of all the promo-speak and McClennon's DRN closure. Wikipedia volunteers are not here to provide WP:BOGOF or any other assistance to editors who use Wikipedia to earn money. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
  • I mostly agree with User:Kudpung, but will comment on his comment on her suggestion to continue the discussion in Russian. It was not inappropriate, but sarcastic, and, on the Internet, nobody knows that you are being sarcastic. She was correct in noting that I was parsing the meanings of an English word to a degree of precision that requires en-5, and she is at en-4, and her English is better than that of some Americans. (It is probably also better than that of some Britons.) I saw a sarcastic humor in her comment about lexical meanings and languages. I agree that her comments about User:David Gerard were uncivil. I will also note that she is changing the nature of her request at DRN after the fact from a request for mediation to a request to review a draft, and that DRN is not a forum for requesting review of a draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
• All my opponents make personal complaints about me and my choice of work instead of formally discussing claims to the text on three discussion pages. I see we are done here.))--Birulik (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
  • User:Birulik - You may publish a Request for Comments to ask the community to choose between your proposed text of Insilico Medicine and the current text. At least User:David Gerard and User:Kudpung have reviewed your proposed version of the article and have stated that they prefer the existing version. They are not required to comment in detail on your version. It is unfortunate that you choose to characterize editors with whom you disagree about article content as your opponents, but that is your designation; I did not see them identify you as an opponent. Again, RFC appears to be the most appropriate way to resolve the content of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Being basically retired now, I'm personally disinclined to actively do anything about it (in any case, I don't have the tools anymore), but the user, IMO, is using their user page to advertise a paid service: ' In 2019 I co-founded slovo.media digital consultancy that does paid editing among its services for notable companies and people. ' slovo.media is precisely one of 'those' agencies. Perhaps Doc James should also take a look. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Comparing the "difficulties" paid editors potentially experience to those potentially faces by LTBTQ is not appropriate.

Paid editors can go through an RfC for their proposed content if needed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wonje (monk)

• Google Search, Youtube Search: [1], [2]
• JoongAng Ilbo: [3]
• Chosun Ilbo[4], [5]
• DongA Ilbo: [6]

thank you. Choikwangmo9 (talk) 23:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Choikwangmo9 - It would be a good idea to provide a correct rather than an incorrect link when providing a URL Dump. You have not answered anything. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I left 'dump' since u claimed that those references in the article was not enough. Choikwangmo9 (talk) 01:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deletion review (2nd nomination)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deletion review (2nd nomination), a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deletion review (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Deletion review (2nd nomination) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:MNL48#List_of_Deletion_Discussions_of_MNL48_members

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:MNL48#List_of_Deletion_Discussions_of_MNL48_members. Allenjambalaya (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Template:Z48

Request on 10:19:09, 1 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 210.6.22.101

• 210.6.22.101 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jiri Prochazka (martial artist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi. Has there been any update to this yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jiri_Prochazka_(martial_artist)

I have submitted the reason. Rizin is an international tier 1 Organization. It is not consistent that many One FC fighters get a wiki page while Rizin fighters don't

Also this fighter has signed with the UFC now and will eventually achieve the fight requirement with a tier 1 organization anyway

210.6.22.101 (talk) 10:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Galerie Chalette

This is just a quick thank you for walking through with the Galerie Chalette article to ensure that the process was correct.

I consider that I'm doing work in a challenging area of Wikipedia--late 20th c artists and their milieu--still a lot of living egos and copyright issues. Thus important for me to get up to speed quickly on Wikipedia standards/expectations. User:Jpbowen was extremely helpful in getting me oriented. But I appreciate also your overlook of the situation. Sicklemoon (talk) 15:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

drat

some people just lack a sense of humor. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 17:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Deepfriedokra Or they lack the okra, or they lack the sunflower oil to mix with the coffee to deep-fry the okra and they can't use peanut oil because it contains an allergen. Or they are in Guam and think it's tomorrow. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Deepfriedokra - I hadn't yet seen the Speedy Keep. They weren't in Guam. They should have made the okra into coffee, but that wouldn't have done any good because okra-coffee lacks the caffeine. Yuck. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Coffee gives life. Coffee is life. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 23:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, User:Deepfriedokra. But we are referring to real Coffea arabica, not a substitute made from okra. And some people still have no sense of humor. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:54, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 16:34:50, 2 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 178.157.253.238

• 178.157.253.238 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Apink BnN (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I was told my Draft Apink BnN won’t be posted, and I still don’t understand why? I don’t understand what Robert meant by “discuss” how can I discuss before submissing178.157.253.238 (talk) 16:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Re: AfC notification: Draft:Return to Dark Tower has a new comment

Hey there. Thank you for your comment on the draft page. I've written dozens of articles throughout my thirteen years on Wikipedia, though I admit this is the first board game article I drafted. I was wondering, do board games receive the same treatment as films and video games, where if the pretense of their development is notable enough, articles may be warranted ahead of time? For example, I wrote the articles for Dota 2 and The Vanishing of Sidney Hall, which held up, as they had enough momentum from their genesis, over a year before their releases. In your opinion, would a board game - which amounts to a toy - hold up for notability, if it's the sequel to a highly-popular board game, was designed by the creators of the #1 and #2 most-popular modern board games and raised $4 million on Kickstarter? I'm interested in your opinion, as board games seem to be an under-developed quadrant of Wikipedia and an article of this medium is a new experience for me. DÅRTHBØTTØ _(T•C) 18:56, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

User:DarthBotto - Well, there is a disconnect between policy and practice. At least for films, the notability guideline for future films discourages articles on unreleased films unless the production is itself notable. There are editors who think that any discussion of the production of the film is sufficient to establish notability, but that is not what the guideline says. As a result, unreleased films can be contentious. I don't see any specific guideline that says that unreleased video games are or are not notable, other than based on significant coverage. However, the gaming press may give significant coverage to games in development. I would prefer not to cover video games or board games in production based on the crystal ball rule, but I may be in a minority. I think that board games and video games should get similar treatment, because I don't see any difference in the guidelines, or any specific reason to treat them differently from each other. I would still prefer not to see separate articles on films that are in production unless there has been coverage of the production in general newspapers, and would prefer to see them mentioned in the articles on their directors, but that is only my opinion. One of my concerns about unreleased films is that I see undisclosed paid editing to publicize the films. Other editors may disagree with me. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

You raise some valid points and it makes me think that there should be further development of Wikipedia policy for art mediums. Around the bend is yet another hotly-anticipated board game in the form of Frosthaven - the sequel to the #1 modern video game, Gloomhaven. With what you've written in mind, I'll refrain from writing an article on that until further notice. Because there are so many unanswered questions and under-developed facets of Wikipedia's coverage of board games, it's nearly impossible to identify a proper formula for writing board game articles. DÅRTHBØTTØ _(T•C) 18:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Rostrevor Old Collegians FC

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

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:19, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

User:UnitedStatesian - Huh. Twinkle strikes again. I assume that I moved it from a sandbox to draft space and probably declined it. Huh. As long as the real creator is notified, okay. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:13, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Ralph Weber

While the disambiguation page Ralph Weber didn't appear to qualify for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G14, I accomplished the same effect by moving Ralph Weber (skier) to Ralph Weber. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Metropolitan90 - Thank you. It doesn't matter how we get to the result in this case. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:39, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Drtcgoel page rejection

Dear Robert, Thank you for reviewing the page I created so promptly. I apologize in advance for my mistake. I am new to Wikipedia. This is my first attempt to create a page. I thought it would be better to write an article on Dr T C Goel but hadn't realised that creating a page as "him" would prove to be a disadvantage. This is not an autobiography as I am not Dr T C Goel. He doesn't work on computer and works non-electronically. I am a person who heard good things about him and researching at all his work, books, research and awards he has accumulated, I thought he should get a mention in Wikipedia. All the references I have mentioned are reliable sources: KG Medical University website, Pubmed PMID, ORCID, ISBN numbers for his books and Times of India (a reputed news website). His other awards are local so I did not mention in the wiki as I have no reliable references to support them. Please reconsider this page and if you still think that it is not worthy, then please advise me how to make it better as this man surely deserves a mention in this knowledge base. Many thanks for your help in this matter and look forward to (hopefully) a positive response. Kind regards, Drtcgoel (talk) 17:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Drtcgoel - Please ask for advice at the Teahouse. If you are not T.C. Goel, then your user ID is incorrect, because your user ID is that of a real person. If you are not T.C. Goel, you need to change your username. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 23:16:50, 6 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by MELDS212

• MELDS212 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gamut (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Mr. McClenon, hope you're well! I've submitted my draft, Gamut, twice for your review and I truly appreciate your feedback. I'm quite new to the Wikipedia space so I'm here asking for your editing expertise to avoid wasting your time when I submit my third draft. I understand you've raised questions over Conflict of Interest, which I've now addressed on my User Page. Draft content wise, I was wondering if you have any suggestions on ways to improve the article? For my next submission, I plan on adding a new section to elaborate on the OTT (over-the-top) media industry since it's a new, and niche topic that I'm deeply interested in. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated, thank you. MELDS212 (talk) 23:16, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

MELDS212 (talk) 23:16, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

User:MELDS212 - First, I do not normally advise conflict of interest editors in detail. Second, what is over-the-top media? Your draft doesn't say, and that is a lack of context. Third, some of the editors at the Teahouse may be willing to give advice to paid editors (although some of them are hostile to paid editors). Robert McClenon (talk) 00:43, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about that

Please ignore the speedy deletion notice. Most of the Tahiri draft is a copyvio so I'm tagging box the sandbox and the draft for deletion. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

User:GPL93 - I think that you are in the wrong place now. What Tahiri draft? What speedy deletion notice? We know that we agree that copyvio should be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:07, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

After you moved User:Y.tahiri/sandbox to Draft:Youssef Tahiri, User:Y.tahiri wrote over the redirect with the same draft. When I tagged it under G12 a speedy notice went to your talk page (which I deleted) instead of to Y.tahiri's. Sorry about the confusion. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:49, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

User:GPL93 - Yuck. It's a mess. It needs getting rid of. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for the invite to the treehouse! Eric0892 (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 21, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 21:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Comic_Con_Liverpool Request on 10:19:46, 08 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Surflou

• Surflou (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Comic Con Liverpool (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi User:Robert McClenon, thank you for your comment on my submission of Draft:Comic_Con_Liverpool, can you tell me what information you might need to satisfy the notority query? I can tell you that the event has been agreed to stay in place with the venue for the next 10 years? The footfall has risen from 8000 in 2018 to over 28,000 in 2020 and popularity on social media and website stats show a continuation and a rise in interest. Prior to this company taking over, Comic Con Liverpool has been an annual event since 2015, first run by MCM then Monopoly Events since 2018. They are also notorious for displaying a large selection of props and sets which no other convention in the UK does. Surflou (talk) 20:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Surflou (talk) 10:19, 08 April 2020 (GMT)

Sullivans

"the author of the draft does not appear to have been the author of the article that you deleted"

Maybe not, but the two pages were character-for-character identical. One account had edits going back a few years, the other had no edits except for the draft. We'll see what Woerich says. DS (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

User:DragonflySixtyseven - As I said. The author of the draft does not appear to have been the author of the article. I didn't see that it was Woerich, but I saw that there was a new account, and that the deleted article was not by that account. They do not appear to be the same author. Either one human using two personae, or one human ripping off the work of another human, or something. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi all, where are you finding the other Michael G. Sullivan article? I am unable to find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K.L.Neigel (talk • contribs) 01:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User:DragonflySixtyseven - You can see the deleted edits. You know which account ripped it off from the other account. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User:K.L.Neigel - It no longer exists. If you really don't know what happened, then that is an interesting story about the copying of what may be a story. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft was created at 11:10 AM; user:Woerich created an identical version as an article at 11:12 AM. Woerich has been around long enough that we expect him to have some sort of idea of what he's doing. Are you saying that there's no connection between you and Woerich? DS (talk) 03:02, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I do not have any connection to Woerich. I am a new user to wikipedia, and the Michael Sullivan article was my first draft submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K.L.Neigel (talk • contribs) 03:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:Robert McClenon, it appears user:Woerich copied this article from the draft and made it into an article. User:DragonflySixtyseven has helped me re-write the article, can you please look it over and see if you have any further recommendations. Note I was required for a course to write a Wikipedia article on a leading Canadian conservation biologist. I chose Michael Sullivan as he is very well known within the fisheries world as one of the main biologists who helped recover Alberta's walleye populations. While I have never met Dr. Sullivan, I did send him an email to his publically available government email to ask him a few questions to assist me in writing the biography for the course. He is not my professor. I hope this helps clarify things.

I apologize if I was not following wikipedia standards, this is my first article/draft and I am still learning.

Thank you for your help, User:K.L.Neigel —Preceding undated comment added 20:13, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User:K.L.Neigel - User:DragonflySixtyseven is an administrator and an experienced editor. If you have worked with DS to improve the draft and they are satisfied with it, then I am satisfied with it. I will comment that I disapprove of academic assignments involving Wikipedia. Too often the instructor makes demands of the students that they have no control over, and this results in the students asking the Wikipedia community to relax Wikipedia's standards in order to allow them to pass a course, when the problem is that the instructor is simply completely wrong. Sullivan does appear to satisfy academic notability. If DS is satisfied, I am satisfied. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Matthew Kaminski

Thank you for reviewing the article I submitted on Matthew Kaminski. Matthew Kaminski has been the Atlanta Braves organist for 11 years. Before that they used recordings. He has developed a body of work that is used by many baseball teams that can no longer afford an organist. He is one of a handful of baseball organists in the US today. Most baseball venues use taped music. Although he is based in Metro Atlanta he drives to several universities and is well known to over 10 million people who hear him when games are broadcast. Would it be better if I didn't list him as a musician? There is another Matthew Kaminski who edits Politico which is why I added musician. Maybe a polka playing peripatetic organist does not on the article's face seem notable, but he truly is notable to the many millions who hear him during baseball season. I will try and add some more articles.Kmccook (talk) 12:09, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Kmccook - The draft on Kaminski should make its own case for notability, which can be either musical notability or general notability. You may explain on the draft talk page, Draft talk:Matthew Kaminski. The discussion of notability should not be on my user talk page. I see that your draft had described Kaminski as a musician, and then that was taken out of the title, and then I put that back into the title, so that is not the issue. Please make the case for notability in the draft and its own talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm Sorry

I'm sorry if I was a jerk for the past few days. I have just been going through a lot. I promise that this will not happen again. Thanks.Beatleswillneverdie (talk)

Deletion of Draft:Andrew Naimanye

Hello, just to let you know that I have deleted all material related to Draft:Andrew Naimanye from my sandboxes and userspace. The material is of no use to me at this time. The person I was trying to help using this material has disappeared. Just for your information. Tank you. Fsmatovu (talk) 07:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Fsmatovu - Okay. Please do not try to use Wikipedia to help people find work, and do not use Wikipedia to help your family, friends, or acquaintances do anything other than improve the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a social network. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #1 – Discussion tools

Read this in another language • Subscription list

This early version of the Reply tool automatically signs and indents comments.

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. The goal of the talk pages project is to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. This project is the result of the Talk pages consultation 2019.

In a future update, the team plans to test a tool for easily linking to another user's name, a rich-text editing option, and other tools.

The team is building a new tool for replying to comments now. This early version can sign and indent comments automatically. Please test the new Reply tool.

• On 31 March 2020, the new reply tool was offered as a Beta Feature editors at four Wikipedias: Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian. If your community also wants early access to the new tool, contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF).
• The team is planning some upcoming changes. Please review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page. The team will test features such as:
  • an easy way to mention another editor ("pinging"),
  • a rich-text visual editing option, and
  • other features identified through user testing or recommended by editors.

To hear more about Editing Team updates, please add your name to the "Get involved" section of the project page. You can also watch these pages: the main project page, Updates, Replying, and User testing.

– PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Olivier Varenne

Hello, You disapproved the original Wikipedia page for Olivier Varenne. I was employed to renew, update and give the proper citations and information requested. Could you please let me know if you can approve it now? With thanks Ruby Rubyocean (talk) 08:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Rubyocean - Who employed you? Are you editing Wikipedia in the course of your employment? Read the conflict of interest policy and make any required disclosure. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Why DID YOU decline Son Chaeyoung From Twice Wiki?She’s so talented and did so much for that group. ArmyGurl1 (talk) 08:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

User:ArmyGurl1 - You are asking me about Draft:Chaeyoung. Individual notability of a member of a musical group is based on significant coverage of the individual in secondary sources separately from that of the group. If you think that she has had that coverage, please discuss it at Draft talk:Chaeyoung or at Talk:Twice (group). You may ask for the comments of other reviewers about individual coverage of members of groups at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

IOTA (technology) draft

Hi Robert. Re this diff: the reference error was actually introduced inadvertently by one of our new AfC reviewers. I have fixed it; it was a bit fiddly, and not something that the submitter should have to cope with. On that basis, unless I am missing something, could your comment be withdrawn? The text in the Referror template seems rather severe? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 20:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Curb Safe Charmer - If the reviewer introduced it, the reviewer can fix it, and I will pull the comment. That template probably is harsh for that draft, and is meant for cruddy drafts. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Tony Michael concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Tony Michael, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:StevenLassalle/sandbox

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:StevenLassalle/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Dan arndt (talk) 03:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Dan arndt - It wasn't my draft. I was moving it to draft space and was about to decline it and you declined and tagged it first. Oh well. Twinkle did also notify the real originator. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Robert you were too quick for me. You moved it at the same time I was requesting it being speedily deleted. No harm - no foul. Good work with the AfC assessment. Dan arndt (talk) 03:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank You

Dear Editor Thank you for your valuable review. Thoufiq313 (talk) 05:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Clarifying

Although user:Abhibedi999 does indeed have a conflict of interest, they are not being paid; rather, they are one of Dr. Johnson's students, and writing about her as an assignment.

I've trimmed the draft some more; have another look? DS (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

User:DragonflySixtyseven - The matter is now being discussed at WP:ANI, and the nature of the conflict of interest does change things. If you have trimmed the draft, then you can be the neutral experienced editor whom I was looking for. Did Johnson assign her students to write about her? If so, that is a different questionable practice. We can discuss with User:DGG and others at WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

I find it quite likely that Dr. Johnson assigned one of her doctoral students to write a Wikipedia article about her, yes, although I have no proof. DS (talk) 19:36, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

So I thought myself, though I decided not to say it. DGG ( talk ) 20:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, the beans essay says that there are certain undesirable behaviors that we don't have a guideline against, either because we don't need to have a rule, or because it would only give people ideas. I think that this is another variety of beans. Don't stuff white beans up your nose. Don't put kidney beans in your ears. Don't assign your students to write your BLP, and then they won't mention beans in it. Don't feed magic beans to the goat after you have sold the cow; if you do, as the technical manuals used to say, results are unpredictable. Ratatoskr might run down the stalk and tell you fake news. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• RE [7]

When you are so annoyed, you should get up, go for a walk, make a cup of tea, something like that, but NOT BITE the newcomer. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Ignored with a Diet Coke. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok i have understood, no offence,but as u know it's abit frustrating. That said, am afraid the same fate awaits my draft Alum Sandra ogwang Santa because I created it 3 days ago it's awaiting review. Advise me, is it better if i created articles directly in the main space and not submitting them as crafts for review. Thanks, kind regards Alvinategyeka (talk) 05:34, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok i have understood, no offence,but as u know it's abit frustrating. That said, am afraid the same fate awaits my draft Alum Sandra ogwang Santa because I created it 3 days ago it's awaiting review. Advise me, is it better if i created articles directly in the main space and not submitting them as crafts for review. Thanks, kind regards Alvinategyeka (talk) 05:42, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

CodeLaunch: Startup Accelerator

Hi Robert,

I received this response from you regarding a declined article for submission:

"User:Chascal - First, do you have a conflict of interest? Are you being paid by CodeLaunch? (If not, why are you working so hard to get the article accepted?) Second, you have reference-bombed the draft, by adding a very large number of low-quality sources. There is a myth that, since sources are required in Wikipedia, adding more sources is what needs to be done to get an article accepted. Sources are necessary but not sufficient. You can always find low-quality sources, but you cannot make a non-notable subject notable by adding low-quality sources. That is a myth. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:07, 16 April 2020 (UTC)"

In response - No. I have no conflict of interest nor am I being paid by CodeLaunch. My motivation is purely to provide information. There is no personal gain or promotional intent in my attempt to get this article published.

As for the reference-bombing, I wanted to ensure that there were adequate third-party references on the topic to validate its inclusion. I was not aware of the term "reference-bombed" or that this was in any violation of Wikipedia policy until just now but I appreciate the clarification. I can certainly remove some of the lesser quality sources if that would be of any help.

I would like to know what modifications or methods I could implement to increase the chances this article gets published.

I look forward to your response.

Thank you,

Lucy Achiro

For real am disappointed, I created my article draft; Lucy Achiro 2 days ago. As it waited to be reviewed, another editor made the same article but in the main space. Now you have rejected mine, just because It took long before it could be reviewed. Is this fair? Am really out of energy because this is the 2nd time this is happening, I created Nasiyo kamugo and as I was waiting for it to reviewed, another editor does exactly the same but in the main space, that's how mine was rejected! For real is it a crime not to create an article directly? Kind regards Alvinategyeka (talk) 05:06, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Alvinategyeka - I didn't reject your draft. I advised that the information in your draft can be merged with the article. If you do not understand, you may ask at the Teahouse for an explanation. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. It shouldn't be that important to have been the first of several authors of an article. Maybe someone can explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Can this move hurt anything at the WP:DRN?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Gadget-DRN-wizard.js#Requested_move_1_April_2020
(asking for a move of MediaWiki:Gadget-DRN-wizard.js → MediaWiki:DRN-wizard.js

This move appears ready for an admin to carry out, but I wonder if it is technically sound. Do you know? -EdJohnston (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

User:EdJohnston - What is that meant to do? Is it meant to fix an annoying bug in the display of the list of DRN cases? Will it cause a red tide in the Nile that causes frogs to swarm? If so, there will be four more problems caused by the insects that the frogs had been eating. Who is proposing it? My thinking is to go ahead and do it, and if it breaks something, the something can be fixed, but that is just my thinking. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:19, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

No idea. It got listed at WP:RMTR so now it's a problem for some admin to solve. I punted it over to the interface administrators since a regular admin can't do it. EdJohnston (talk) 22:57, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shenandoah salamander (April 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: 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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Shenandoah salamander and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Shenandoah salamander, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

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! Robert McClenon (talk) 23:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Scott Disick draft page feedback

Hi Robert, Thank you for the feedback and for taking the time to review my Draft:Scott Disick. One question I have regarding your feedback is that you stated the sources were only passing mentions. This simply is not true. I cited more than 100 sources in this article, and while some of them do contain passing mentions, many do not. I included the pages with passing mentions because I felt they still revealed details about Disick, not to clog the page. I understand that you do not want to look through 100 sources to find the most notable ones, so I'm hoping I can show you some of the sources that are not passing mentions:

• Chicago Tribune
• E! News
• Architectural Digest
• People
• HuffPost
• Hollywood Reporter
• Los Angeles Times
• TMZ

I'm not trying to explain the rules to you, as I know you're familiar, so please don't take this that way; however, notability is not temporary WP:NTEMP, and the most recent community consensus for Scott Disick was to allow a new draft. You can find at least two other editors (alongside myself) who have commented on the main page talk page requesting that an article be made for this subject, and an additional discussion on Talk:Kourtney Kardashian. I believe he meets WP:ENT parts one and two. He has been a main cast member in more than 140 episodes of Keeping Up with the Kardashians. Since the last discussion, he has started his own show on E!Network without the Kardashians and has guest starred on a number of other shows. Even though Kourtney Kardashian, where the main page redirects to currently, has left Keeping Up with the Kardashians, Disick has continued to star on the show and is considered a main casts member with his own plotlines separate from her. In reference to point two of WP:ENT, he has a large fan base (23.5 million Instagram followers; 6.8 million Twitter followers - more than Adam Sandler, Gwen Stefani, the White House, etc.). Finally, the current redirect does not make sense, because he is no longer dating Kourtney Kardashian. He also meets WP:GNG, because he has significant coverage (which a quick Google search will show).

I already asked at the Teahouse, and they suggested I bring it here. Thanks again for taking the time to help out with this. I'm willing to look at next steps if the above is not enough, but I have never worked with a SALTed article before. Mukedits (talk) 17:27, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Mukilteoedits - Well, I will look at the thread at the Teahouse, but I disagree with the advice to discuss on my user talk page. (However, I agree with asking for advice at the Teahouse.) I disagree with discussing acceptance of an article on a reviewer's talk page, because an article should speak for itself, and should not be accepted or declined based on a side conversation. I will also take a look at the Deletion Review. Where else has there been discussion? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon Thanks for the response. There is a short discussion on Talk:Scott Disick. The Teahouse did not suggest that I discuss this on your page, but I am unsure what to improve, since it appears to me that you did not approve it based primarily on previous AfD discussions. The Teahouse editors did tell me to point out the best sources (or it might have been the AfC discussion, I started both). Mukedits (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

They told me to bring up any questions I had about the review here on your talk page, and to show you the most relevant sources. Sorry to keep posting here, I should have collected my thoughts a bit first. Above I posted a link to the most recent discussion about Scott Disick, allowing a consensus for a new draft to be made (2019), the link is above. Mukedits (talk) 19:47, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Robert McClenon I opine AfC is fine.

How about reviewing the Draft: Aaron D. Lewis for mainspace? Corrections made. Many thanks. TheEpistle (talk) 20:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Change of Nomenclature from the earlier Draft entry of AlMaarefa College of Science and Technology\ to AlMaarefa University,

Sir,

I refer you to the above. I Am just an acquaintance with no conflict of interest. I would like that you alter the old name and make a permanent entry with the new name on your esteemed page.

User:Ahmed Bombosh - The draft appears to be Draft:Almaarefa College for Science and Technology. Do you want to rename the draft to Draft:Almaarefa University? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

You can ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Article Review

Hello Robert McClenon. 1. The article draft Draft: Aaron D. Lewis has been well edited, I have deleted the external links, and I think the article is ready for mainspace, may you help me review it again, comment on possible changes or publish if it's up to standard. 2. I have two articles in place that I have intentions to publish; they are on murder mysteries (about Canadian Nathalie Fraser's reported murder in Cuba and reported suicide of Philadelphia's Ellen Greenburg), my investigations are almost complete with reliable sources like MSN, Inquirer, CBC and the sun. What's your advice, do I still need to go through the AfC review process, or could write directly into mainspace? Many thanks! TheEpistle (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

User:TheEpistle - I would suggest that you ask at the Teahouse whether to use the AFC review process or to go directly into mainspace. However, my observation is that a number of your pages have been either tagged for speedy deletion or draftified. I would suggest going through AFC review before the fact unless you are prepared to deal with having your pages go through AFD review after the fact. Your call, but I suggest asking for advice. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Robert McClenon, I opine AfC is just fine. How about reviewing the Draft: Aaron D. Lewis for mainspace? Corrections made. Many thanks. TheEpistle (talk) 20:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Express Zip File Compression Software concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Express Zip File Compression Software, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Express Zip File Compression Software concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Express Zip File Compression Software, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

On the comment on my Incineroar article (JTZegers)

So you're basically saying that I might run the risk of getting the article replaced to that redirect you were talking about when you declined my draft? He's in Smash for the heck of it! I think he deserves this article. I'm just trying to do my best. I'm new here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTZegers (talk • contribs) 14:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC) I had a discussion with the Pokemon wikiproject and they said that I need to make minor improvements to the article. They really want it back. JTZegers (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

User:JTZegers - I just read the discussion at WikiProject Pokémon. I don't read it as an encouragement to resubmit after minor improvements. I read it more as maybe. I don't see the brief discussion as an encouragement to resubmit, or a request that I approve it when it is resubmitted. I am not ready to approve it until more than one editor agrees. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon Maybe if I continue to work on it, which I am doing. JTZegers (talk) 19:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Dispute about edits on industrial and organizational psychology

user:Robert_McClenon, after you wrote to me, I rewrote what placed on the Dispute Resolution page. I made sure that only the i/o psychology page is referenced. My notice is right below transubstantiation. I hope that I filed correctly. If I made a mistake, please tell me what to do to correct it. Thanks. Iss246 (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Pls review Trevor Nkosi

Hi Robert

Pls review Trevor Nkosi once more ZS Khumalo (talk) 21:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Notability

Hi As per the notability for actors. This particular person https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nisha_Ravikrishnan in the article has acted in several serials whose links are provided in reference section. So,all the required references are provided as per the notability rules. Please help me out to know what else is required to be added. Happy to add all the required information such that this qualifies to be article. Cinemapremi (talk) 03:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Cinemapremi

Dorothy McNeil/Club Zanzibar

Please look again at the material on Dorothy McNeil and then at the existing Club Zanzibar page. The existing page is about a club in Newark (McNeil's was in Hoboken) that operated about the time that McNeil's club closed, and their roster of performers is not the same. McNeil doesn't mention the Newark club in her oral history. I have no further information about it, but they seem to be absolutely separate entities. Therefore it would be inappropriate to merge the McNeil material into the existing Club Zanzibar page as you advise. --Tarkiwi25 (talk) 06:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Omlet Arcade concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Omlet Arcade, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Volareo (manufacturer)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Volareo (manufacturer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spencer^T•C 03:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me with the Brand Activism article

Dear Robert, Thank you for your help to revise and clean up the Brand Activism article. Your guidelines for the style and structure of the article helped me a lot.  Thank you very much! Ivan Gurkov (talk)

A slice of lemon...

	A slice of lemon...
	A slice of lemon to garnish your {{trout}} for this report... Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WikiLeviathan. Seriously, a non-existent sock spamming a non-existent article? Cabayi (talk) 09:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Cabayi - A combination of the inherent limitations of Twinkle and of doing advanced editing in the middle of the night. The lesson should be to leave stuff like SPIs until 1030 local time. The inherent limitation of Twinkle is that I can't preview some of the things it does to see that there are typos. The typos were omitting the unnecessary disambiguation on the name of the company, and a case error in the name of the sock account. You know that I meant well, which is why you provided a trout and a lemon rather than a templated warning. I will leave those accounts and pages alone for now. I will also inquire about whether there is a way that previewing can be done with Twinkle, since this is not the first time I have had that problem. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

What got me onto this, by the way, was another case of Twinkle confusing things, which is that on my talk page, there is a notification that Volareo (manufacturer) was tagged for A7. I had even less to do with it than with some of these oddities, because all that I had done was to move a sandbox to draft space, and then the sandbox was reused for another cruddy draft, and then that cruddy draft was tagged for deletion, and then I suspected sockpuppetry, and reported it badly in the middle of the night. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:04, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Ummm, there is some stuff in your user space that needs attention and progressing. (That's as close to subtle as I get) Cabayi (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Concealed, unless you or someone else wants to go forward with that in spite of my making a mistake on that SPI. The admin who was going to advocate for me either has taken a very long wikibreak or is ill or something. If you want to go forward, we can go forward. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Goodbye article

User:Coolmarc has proposed deletion on Goodbye and then redirected the article without proper census. The song has charted and he still says no. What do I do about this? DarklyShadows (talk)

User:DarklyShadows - I have removed the PROD because that can only be applied to an article once and is for non-controversial deletion. Maybe they don't know that that is a rule about PROD. You removed the PROD the first time, which means that you disagree, so that the deletion is controversial in the sense of requiring further discussion. The next steps are either discussion on the article talk page, or a deletion discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Request on 21:41:57, 30 April 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by QuincyBalius

• QuincyBalius (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mike Clark (conservationist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi! You declined the draft of my article about Michael Clark and I was wondering why. Could I have assistance on how to improve it? Thank you!

QuincyBalius (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Petals by Kaija Saariaho - Article Review

Dear Mr. McClenon,

I understand that my article Draft:Petals (music) still has some room for improvement. Kaija Saariaho is one of the most prominent contemporary composers in the world (having even won a Grawemeyer Award in 2003). Because of that, any piece she writes immediately acquires relevance and notability. How can I better show such notability in the article? Furthermore, you state that my references aren't reliable yet they come from Edexcel's (and other A Level exam boards') marvelous teaching resources. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

--Raeshouse (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Raeshouse - The article that you are asking me about is Draft:Petals (music). In the future, when asking a review or another editor about an article, please indicate the article. Please see the musical notability criteria. Not every song or composition by a notable composer is in itself notable. The composition should satisfy at least one of the musical notability criteria, or it will be redirected to the article on the composer. If you wish, we can discuss further at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Gates of Hausa kingdoms

Hello, I have make all the necessary copy edit which is needed to be done, you can review it once again, but take note, you might find the tone (dialect) entirely different from yours, this is because the Article is written in Nigerian English.--- An@ss_koko^{(speak up)} 18:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ute Lotz-Heumann

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

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Lapablo - You tagged Draft:Ute Lotz-Heumann as G13, an abandoned draft. I see that the last edit that I made to that page was on 5 November 2019, which was six months ago. However, I accepted the draft, moving it from draft space into article space, because Lotz-Heumann satisfies academic notability as the occupant of a named chair. Such a chair is normally established by the gift (normally by the will) of a donor to allow a distinguished academic to continue a career consisting largely of writing or research with reduced needs for teaching duties that are funded by tuition. You tagged the redirect from draft space to article space for speedy deletion. This would only have deleted the redirect while leaving the article appropriately in place. The fact that you were able to tag the draft for deletion, when the draft was a redirect to the article, appears to be an error in how G13 is implemented. I will be inquiring about how this incorrect tagging (which would have caused only trivial harm anyway) happened. I thank you for trying to do the job of cleaning up abandoned drafts. I may have more advice for you in the next few days. It does not appear that you made a mistake; the "system" made a mistake in allowing you to tag a redirect from draft space to article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon Oh I'm sorry about that but while i accessed the draft page i can assure you it wasn't redirecting to any target if not i wouldn't tag it. There must be an error somewhere, i sincerely apologize. If you check this revision here you will see that the redirect was actually there but i believe it wasn't pointing to the mainspace article and the edit summary says Removed redirect. Best regards. Lapablo (talk) 12:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Lapablo - As I said, you didn't make a mistake. However, the tag is wrong. That is a system-generated tag, being applied by the software to try to tag things automatically. I didn't removed the redirect. I don't know why it says that. There was still a redirect, and you marked it (not the article) for speedy deletion, and I prevented the speedy deletion. The tag was wrong. As I said, you didn't make a mistake, but the system has screwed up. Fortunately, it is not a serious screw-up. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Shankyouverymuch08/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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

article published in WIKITIA

Hello I have been trying to contact you and this may be the easiest way. You reviewed my article about "Dr Ross Petty" and sent your answer back on May 4th. One of your comments was I should delete some phrases that praise the scientist. I agree with that, however, you also modified the sections headlines and the info in each section. I consider that was ok. The point here is that I found a publication in WIKITIA made on May 3rd, where the information I wrote plus the changes you made, was already published. I don't know how many people have access to my draft while it is in revision, besides you and me. But I found it outrageous that some took my information, not even public yet, and published it in a different page. I am not accusing you or anything like that. My question is, how can that be possible? how could someone from WIKITIA stole unpublished information? Do you have any recommendations on how to proceed?. Could I still publish my article even though the information will be the exact same? Thanks, Im looking forward to your response.