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/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)

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)

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