User talk:Robert McClenon

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Liz (talk | contribs) at 06:00, 18 November 2020 (Notification: speedy deletion of User:Fluteforce/sandbox.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

About Laycon article

Hello, I noticed you added a notability tag to the Laycon article. The subject is notable for winning Big Brother Naija season 5 on 27 September 2020 and not for his music. See [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]. I've removed the tag and if you've any questions, you're welcome to ask them. Best, —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 03:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Autonomous Alternative Christian Tribe of Parpaillo

Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Autonomous Alternative Christian Tribe of Parpaillo".

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Liz - Okay. I see that this version of the notice is slightly different than some versions, because the tense of the verb is different, because you tagged it and deleted it in one motion. I have no idea what this was. Does Twinkle also notify the real creator as well as the mover? (As I said, I am satisfied to receive these notes, because I can ridicule them.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey, Kentucky

Please restore this page—it contains NO errors, only omissions to be remedied—it is under construction ... BlueLevelBoy (talk) 17:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See Draft:Jeffrey, Kentucky. You may resubmit it when it is ready for review. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa Greenfield

I've raised the issue of the draft and the confusing AfC situation at WP:AN and have mentioned your involvement, seeking clarity on what should happen next. The thread is WP:AN#Theresa Greenfield. Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added that Greenfield has raised more money than any Senate candidate in Iowa history to the article, but I was afraid to put the article up for review again because y'all have created the fake rule of "She is not notable until she wins." A candidate who lost the Democratic primary to her has a page, and she does not. The behavior here does not look great. Sepideh (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Odd mediator

Hello. I am sending you a talk page message only because I noticed that you are a regular on DRN and I found something odd happening there. On my dispute, we were waiting for a mediator's comment and recently a "new editor" who has been on wikipedia with only a few edits and who joined wikipedia only after my dispute on talk page started, set himself up as a volunteer and then commented on the dispute that he was volunteering as a mediator. I find it odd because he does not know how to sign his comments [6] but knows how to install advanced scripts on his user as his first edits on wikipedia. He also added a fake tag of Pending Changes reviewer which he does not have [7] only to recently remove it. I fear that this may be some one involved or too close to the dispute and I dont want to accuse any one but do feel you should check it out so that the dispute does not get disrupted badly. MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 09:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MkNbTrD0086 - I will take a look. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking a look. Unfortunately you had to close this dispute due to other editors derailing discussion. But do you think it is normal for an editor to sign up this recent and then volunteer to take the lead as a mediator like this user BJackJS did? MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article Creation

I would like tips on how to improve the article. As you know, I have made an attempt on creating an article. Cwater1 (talk) 00:05, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Wanderword

Hello,

Thanks for taking the time to review my draft about Wanderword. I would like to commend that i don't have any sort of financial or other connection with the subject, just wanted to write about this company because i like its work. Also, i would like to say that this is a new studio, so its work isn't so acknowledged yet. The sources are really limited and to be honest i think that i have already mentioned all of them.

Τhe last thing that i can try, is το write about it from an even more neutral point of view and maybe try to cut some things that they seemed "too much".

Thanks again and have a nice day (or night). :P DimZoum (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft declines

Just a quick note to highlight the professional way you approach decisions on new article drafts, especially declines. Your positive and encouraging tone is good to see and I’m sure is appreciated by the editors. Your positive attitude does not go unnoticed! Go4thProsper (talk) 23:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Tell Your Friends( The Weeknd song )" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Tell Your Friends( The Weeknd song ). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 2#Tell Your Friends( The Weeknd song ) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 06:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Kolathur, Chennai has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Kolathur, Chennai. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

You've got mail. — TransporterMan (TALK) 16:26, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting an article

The article West Block Blues does not even have the enough contents and independent sources to be considered as an article. Yet still it exists as a seperate article. I dont know why it overcame two deletion discussion. Please take action to merge it into support section of Bengaluru FC Shahoodu (talk) 04:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shahoodu: I assume you are a Kerela Blaster supporter and there is nothing wrong with that. And I assume Bengaluru FC are your rivals. But if you approach on the result of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 September 25 is to go around attacking all fan club articles then that is the likely result you will get. You will simply annoy Robert more than I currently do. And if you want to AfD an article have the courage to do it yourself and not go around dishonourably egging on others to it like a schoolboy coward. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Djm-leighpark Just understand that this has nothing to with the rival team of the club that I support .I am just showing the mere facts. If I had tje admin power I would have surely solved this problem.Actually I started an AFD long time ago but it was removed by some admins.So what should I do.Can you expalin that to this schoolboy coward. Since robert were one of the admins who were against keeping the article Manjappada,I just want to show him the facts. And dont say I am attacking other fan clubs. Bengaluru FC may be our rival. But thats just inside the pitch. Here I am just showing the discrimination faced by the fan club Manjappada.And I am comparing that with WBB by WP:Other Stuff Exists.So how can that be a attack.Please tell me. I still stand with my words and I believe I had done nothing wrong.I will continue this till this problem gets solved Shahoodu (talk) 09:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

I really have to disagree with that assessment. It's been met with significant media coverage, the crutch was that since filming had not begun, it failed WP:NFF. A reliable source has been provided to confirm filming had begun. Rusted AutoParts 22:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kolathur, Chennai (October 6)

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:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
This draft has been reference-bombed with low-quality sources.
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.
Robert McClenon (talk) 03:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Robert McClenon! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Standards of sourcing in South-Indian Film Industry related articles

I noticed you nominated an article about a South-Indian TV personality for deletion. I was wondering if you've seen how much other stuff of similar or lower quality exits on Wikipedia. I'm actually really concerned that there are possibly tens of thousands of BLP articles which at best are sourced to a handful of paid-for tabloid advertorials. Most of these film industry biographies have entirely unsourced filmography lists, and what seems like a gang of editors willing to defend them no matter how trivial their contribution. Here's an example of an obvious D-lister: The article owner's defence on AfD makes it painfully obvious that this subject does not meet any of our notability criteria. --Salimfadhley (talk) 09:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Salimfadhley - Yes. If you are saying that there are a lot of low-quality Indian articles in draft space and lot more in article space, I agree. Is there a specific conclusion or request, or is that a statement about the way things are? If the latter, yes. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:30, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just ranting, thanks for indulging me. --Salimfadhley (talk) 08:24, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambigution title

Hi, you tagged the disambigution title Draft:Amanat_Ali_(born_1987) let me explain that there are 4 Amanat Ali in Pakistan. two Amanat Ali are dead and two are alive, this Amanat Ali is at number four and he is a singer from Pakistan and anybody from India or Pakistan will recognize him so the title 1987 birth is little bit bad i guess... it should be Amanat Ali (Singer) or Amanat Ali (Kohraam). --39.34.148.97 (talk) 16:17, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patrol - Rafael Mikhailovich Minasbekyan

Hello. Please see the article. The results were summed up and it was restored. I would like to remove the ad notification and patrol it. I have deleted some information. Could you help me with patrolling and deleting a template? Thanks! Namerst (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me to do the exact same thing. Why are you asking so many editors to do the same thing? --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe he gets paid for the requests? McClenon mobile (talk) 22:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't get paid. I just don't know who to go to for page patrolling. Namerst (talk) 09:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a problem with the article, please just address the matter on the article's talk page. There is no need to ask other editors to do this for you. --Salimfadhley (talk) 10:14, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help please make these changes to Lee Min-ho (actor) article some people like User:CherryPie94 are anti-fans of lee min ho and they removing his quotes from the article

The success of lee's television series globally established him as a top hallyu star and a global celebrity. could you please include the word global celebrity in the above sentence.it has been mentioned in the lead with scmp source added to it but someone removed it so can you add it thanks again


- through boys over flowers he is popular in Asia-fact

-this scmp source says he is popular in europe continent through city hunter https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3088074/hyun-bin-lee-min-ho-park-seo-joon-and-5-more-korean-drama

-this source says he is popular in African continent currently through TKEM https://ynaija.com/all-you-didnt-know-about-the-lee-min-ho-trend-nigerian-ladies-are-jumping-on/

thus, lee is popular in Asia,Europe and Africa based on above sources he is popular in three continents is more than enough for mentioning worldwide fame or else fame between continents. so please change it

add this sentence in continued success section- On August 6 2020, Studio Dragon announced their financial performance of TKEM over the second quarter on Netflix with a record-breaking US$135 million in total sales.source below http://www.munhwa.com/news/view.html?no=20200807MW07423210103

in media influence change to be crowned as the Asian male god to was crowned as the Asian male god since he was the winner and past tense

Continued success section--The King Eternal Monarch is 12th most watched series on Netflix worldwide beating other k-dramas released that year. source below https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/the-king-eternal-monarch-beats-crash-landing-on-you-to-become-most-watched-k-drama-on-netflix-in-2020-yet/ar-BB17v1zQ?li=AAggjDC

Thanks Jenny from phillipines 116.93.120.231 (talk) 13:12, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

two people called Jeffrey West

Hello - thank you for checking this out - just confirming that there are two people called Jeffrey West, both born in 1950, and both Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries, as per this link: https://www.sal.org.uk/?s=west&post_type=sal_fellow - Dr Jeffrey [K] West was elected FSA on 5 May 1989, and The Revd Canon Jeffrey [J] West was elected FSA on 6 June 2011. I've added these election dates to both articles. The published article is Jeffrey James West and the draft article is Draft:Jeffrey West who incidentally has a middle initial K. And of course they have no connection at all with Jeffrey West whose middle name is Harold, connected with American football! I don't know where we go from here, but really appreciate your help, as this has helped us to clarify matters. Thank you and have a nice weekend! CourtauldGill (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @CourtauldGill: the way that we deal with articles that should have the same or very similar titles on Wikipedia is called disambiguation. It seems to me that these two articles can be naturally disambiguated by including the individuals' middle names or initials in the page title. The third Jeffrey Harold West is already naturally disambiguated because the title of their article is Jeff West, but what you will probably want to do is overwrite the Jeffrey West redirect with a disambiguation page listing all three individuals. This of course is all presuming that your draft is accepted and becomes Jeffrey K West or something similar. If you need help you can send me a message, or ask at WT:WikiProject Disambiguation. Happy editing! Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:CourtauldGill, User:Ivanvector - Thank you for explaining. That is unusual and interesting in having two people who are so easily mistaken. I will take another look shortly, but will go ahead and rename the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:CourtauldGill - The draft on Jeffrey K. West doesn't contain the K in the text of the draft. Please include his full name in the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ivanvector for the advice, and thank you Robert McClenon for renaming the draft - I'm not the writer of the draft, but was just helping out with the research. I'm sure the writer will be very grateful for your help in moving this forward. I've added the K. middle initial in the intro section - I hope that's where you meant? Thank you! CourtauldGill (talk) 17:52, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

need your help in creating a page

please reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjanvii (talk • contribs) 19:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jjanvii - What is the problem? It looks to me as if Bruce Taylor (American football) belongs in article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Masked Singer (Belgian TV series)

The page Draft:The Masked Singer (Belgian TV series) can be deleted, it has been merged into The Masked Singer (Belgian TV series). Thanks. 91.180.167.15 (talk) 00:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Breathe 2

I expanded on the information for Don't Breathe 2. I included a well sourced premise, filming locations, and a generalized filming start date, all sourced by major news corporations. However, the problem I am facing, currently, is the exact day and date of filming commencing. Several news sources state, in the page, that filming began shortly after April 2020 in the country of Serbia. A discussion on Talk:Don't Breathe 2 is ongoing on the recent inclusion of filming information. I pinged the users who submitted and moved the draft to the mainspace on the film's talk page, and I would highly appreciate any comments on the recently added filming information. Cardei012597 (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heads-up for ANI

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Hi there, I wanted to give you a heads-up about this ANI case, since I mention you there as the mediator of our ongoing DRN case. --Pinchme123 (talk) 18:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no sir I want your help in building a page name kritn ajitesh

Nothing useful here. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

please help me your guidance will be truly helpful . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjanvii (talk • contribs) 09:35, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Evan Hansen (film)

I saw that you have addressed the creating of the article once already.[1], but unforbutely HM2021 created it again. I have submitted the article for SD. This user, HM2021, has been creating a lot of trivial content, which seems for as promotional one. I looked as you have more wiki time under your belt, so I am sking you to help to "restrain" that user a bit ;). Let me know what can be done. Cheers, /k8 11:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC) Kolma8 (talk)

User:Kolma8 - Fancruft. The article on the film has been created, and has been nominated for deletion, and I have explained the policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "User talk:HM2021", Wikipedia, 2020-10-11, retrieved 2020-10-12

Roman numerals

You may have already noticed - but the "rules man" is at this article again with his stubborn disruptive ignoring of the consensus, to which he remains the only dissenting voice. I am SO fed up with this -which is possibly all he really wants. Trying hard to be patient but what the [naughty word expunged]. I suspect you are even more fed up than me, but would appreciate your support in establishing a firm consensus here. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone interested, I responded at User talk:Johnuniq#Roman numerals. Johnuniq (talk) 03:34, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The disambiguation page for the primary name is Javed Khan

Hi Robert,

Thank you for mentioning about disambiguation on my article. As you mentioned that i have to make an entry on disambiguation page of the title name if the draft is approved , it has to be done only if it is approved or i can add the entry right now ?

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Javed khan39 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I can't block the user because I'm not an admin. Sorry. Firestar464 (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Firestar464 - Neither am I. What do you want? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello ! Robert McKeon,

You accepted new Article (for Creation, from, viz. Draft:Kolathur, Chennai to) Kolathur, Chennai. I am very grateful to you for the same.

But, I made some mistakes as you mentioned, that I had removed some Templates in the Draftspace. I thought of them to be removed before, for the approval for Mainspace. I hereby request your help in this regard, to retain the article in Mainspace; as technical issues or how to rectify them?

Please advise me. Thanks. --Helppublic (talk) 05:22, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Helppublic - I suggest that you ask for advice or help at the Teahouse. I will take a look within 48 hours, but that is what you should do next. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A concern

Sorry to bother you but I'm not sure how else to address this. I've been editing for six years and I know pointless obsessing over detail is not uncommon in Wikipedia but I am genuinely concerned by 021120x, who's now threatening to raise yet another ANI on the French Revolution. Maybe he needs to be barred for a couple of weeks for his own benefit. If you think I'm being overly dramatic, please just delete this and move on :). Thanks for your time. Robinvp11 (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Robinvp11 - I will take a look within 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well said

The offer you made here seems very appropriate. EdJohnston (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:EdJohnston - You're welcome. We will see if they accept it. If not, it is either an RFC, or just shut up, or topic-bans. If they take up my offer, I may appreciate having an admin with a big stick that does not need to be used, in the background. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sastha Aravind (October 18)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V Aravind Subramanyam.
Robert McClenon (talk) 04:10, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
I just want to say thanks- Thanks for consistently modeling Diplomacy and giving me something to aspire to. ;-) I'm not consistenly as kind as you are- but I do appreciate all you do to keep WP Drama under control.... ish.... Nightenbelle (talk) 15:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Nightenbelle - Well, I'm probably older than you are, but this French Revolution dispute is really pushing my patience. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
..... Yuuuuup. Nightenbelle (talk) 17:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

German / Dutch

What makes you think that the Dutch Stichtsche Cricket en Hockey Club (SCHC) is a German athletic association? The Banner talk 18:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Banner - Probable error. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Hi, Robert - I was wondering...are user names sometimes an indication of socking? What do you consider to be the best indicator to warrant a sock investigation? Atsme 💬 📧 18:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Atsme - User names can be a confirming indication of socking, but overlapping questionable edits are the usual principal indication of socking. Do you have a specific area or account or issue? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not at the moment but I was involved in a recent discussion (I think on Jimbo's UTP) where a sockmaster was running 2 or 3 socks right under my nose, and I never realize it. But then Jimbo didn't catch it, either, so I thought maybe there's a pattern or clues that I'm not seeing. I'm better at determining when sock activity is not related to an editor I'm familiar with, but even then it's hit and miss. I have used the editor interaction tool a few times for suspected socks in the past, but I wonder about the reliability of that method. I know the easy clues - like when socks use the same words, slang, or phrases, etc. or consistently make the same errors in typing - but that's about it. Atsme 💬 📧 19:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Closure

Robert McClenon, in response to your post, my preference is to close the ANI and resolve matters on the article talk page. This was always my preference, however this reached point where it would seem difficult to accomplish without external help, which is why I went to the ANI. The ANI directly sent me to the DRN, which began its review, then closed for several stated reasons (too many editors, contributors not pausing TP discussion while the DRN review was in progress, and because the ANI was left open). So, we were sent back to the ANI. One editor originally expressed desire to close the ANI and go back to the DRN, then reversed this position, which is why it remained open. Things appeared to be resolving on the talk page, then the concern of "stonewalling" held by a few editors in regards to one user arose. Despite the frustration, I would still like to keep matters in the Talk Page. It appears that there is no way to establish a discussion outcome as a precedent for the article, even if the discussion goes through the DRN, so just letting the conversation finish its course is my position at this point. Also, I already told the ANI that I would like to close. 021120x (talk) 20:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Candleman has a new reply

I've left a reply on my Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Candleman. Thanks! Le Panini (Talk tome?) 00:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask?

Hello, I saw on the Dispute resolution noticeboard you frequently act to calm thing down, may I ask you to do something before/instead of me putting a formal request? I feel Konkorde just don't live up to his name, and while i can stand a lot, he just went way to far with the alien-biting, racist, personal attack below. Can you, and will you, do something? if not, that's OK, no pressure, a simple "no" will do, no question asked. No emergency either, this affected me I have rather step back a while. In a way he succeeded, and this sad, but if I don't I will put myself in danger. Gem fr (talk) 15:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hunter_Biden&diff=prev&oldid=984691231
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AHunter_Biden&type=revision&diff=984693084&oldid=984692194

User:Gem fr - Uncivil exchange hidden. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is far from uncivil to point out basic WP:COMPETENCE of someone whose whole spiel is to make personal attacks, demand editors step down, accuse them of lying and / or being conspiracy theorists, deny self evident things, refuse to read sources, deny sources contain content they evidently contain then rush off to complain. If the user returns the same issue remains. They are not here to build an encyclopedia. Koncorde (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Godzilla draft

Hey, just giving you a head's up that we both seem to have reviewed Draft:Godzilla Singular Point simultaneously, with mine being the slightly later review. I made sure to go back and add your comments as well. I'm honestly kind of bemused by this, since normally I'd have received an edit conflict notice. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:ReaderofthePack - My experience is that scripts do not recognize edit conflicts, so that edit conflicts with scripts result in a race condition. This is definitely the case with the AFC script, and I think that it is an issue with scripts in general. Edit conflict is only recognized if you are editing with either Visual Editor or the traditional markup editor. It's not even so much a bug with scripts, as the lack of a feature, where the feature is the recognition of the race condition. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Licht (Nena album)

Hello Robert - I've just replied to your question about the above draft article, so would be grateful if you could please take a look. Regards, Duncan R2 (talk) 19:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Robert - just a quick note to thank you for reviewing and publishing the above article so quickly. RegardsDuncan R2 (talk) 10:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 15:05:12, 26 October 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by CSTeller


Rebecca Hawkins Draft Comments Hello Robert, Thank you for your comments. This is my first Wikipedia article and I hope you can assist me in resolving them so my article can be published. On the first comment about the picture of Rebecca Hawkins. It Is actually in the public domain as confirmed by the Jackson County Historical Society which sent me scan of this portrait. It is more than 160 years old from a family collection of portraits that a descendent donated to the society who confirmed that there are no restrictions on its use. I did read the lengthy rules and talked to the society to make sure this was acceptable. However, I think I mistakenly uploaded the wrong one from my files. Instead of the one I received from the society, this may be the copy I had sent to the society so they could identify Rebecca Hawkins in their collections. I cannot see much difference in them but it was a copy I found in a publication that used the photo with the society identified as the owner. So I think I selected the wrong one as I was uploading it. It may take me a little because I’m still figuring out how to navigate my way around, but I will figure out how to get the original scan from the society loaded instead as quickly as I can.

On the comment about the work being copied from another source. Please let me clarify that the writing is all my own. I have cited my sources but none of it is copied or even paraphrased from the sources. I wrote it all in my own words (It took weeks of consulting multiple sources). This is a project for a history course I am taking toward a master’s in History). I think it appears copied because I did copy it from what I thought was a sandbox where I could submit the draft from. I wrote it all in word and copied into this sandbox and tried to submit it for review from there. I could not get it to work so I created a separate draft and copied all of my work into the new draft and submittted it from there. I believe this may be why it looks like it is not my original work. I was crushed when I originally thought I was going to have to re-type all of my work again and happy when I figured out how to copy it over with all the references and links I had created in the sandbox. I will do it if that is required, but I hope not. Any tips you can give me on how to get my work into a draft page for submission that reflects that it truly is my own work, which it definitely is, more easily I would be extremely grateful. I will figure out to delete the redirect. It’s good to know what was causing this. I was wondering why that was happening and how to fix it! Again thank you for your comments and any advice you can offer that will help me get them resolved. CSTeller CSTeller (talk) 15:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CSTeller (talk) 15:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Bednar

Hi Robert! Thank you for your comment on my draft. Hopefully I am replying correctly — I'm still new to Wikipedia. Since the subject of my article shares a name with an already existing person, how should I proceed? I'm a little confused on my end. Should I change the name to Jan Bednar (entrepreneur)?

Beatanese (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability criteria

Please see my response at Draft:James Gulley. --2604:2000:E010:1100:943E:8385:E170:7619 (talk) 06:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Karikku

You sent me a comment on another file named- Karikku sent for deletion. But it was not made by me. So how does it affect my article. Please answers my querries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlantis77177 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize

I was the one, who created that article. But, I made an error and all was lost. I have decided to rewrite it and you may review it. Thank you--Atlantis77177 (talk) 04:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tyrant Band Page

Hey Robert, thanks for help with the page. Really appreciated! Are we not able to do Tyrant (band) and have to have it Tyrant (Michigan band)?

Please let me know! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipwinters1 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Philipwinters1 - There are already three bands named Tyrant. You did the right thing in trying to disambiguate, but it wasn't an adequate disambiguation. See Tyrant (disambiguation) and look at the bands. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:RobertMcClenon Okay, thanks for the clarification! Would Tyrant (American band) or Tyrant (Metal band) be acceptable as well? Still trying to learn how to properly edit articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipwinters1 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Philipwinters1 - We normally use the least restrictive name. I haven't checked whether any of the other bands are American bands or metal bands. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Janjar

Would you be so kind as to add a population infobox? Because I have no idea whatsoever. Edion Petriti (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question Please

Hi User:RobertMcClenon (please remove if not allowed to post here).

As a fairly new not so active editor, I was wondering if you could please take a look at something for me. On the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Fraser_(psychic) article there was a section there for a long time called "TV & media appearances", so I proceeded to add some tv and media content to it with secondary refs etc. It was immediately reverted by MrOllie as "promotion" (99% of his dozens of daily edits are just reverts). But I've seen similar sections on hundreds of other articles so why not there? So I reverted MrOllie and then MrOllie came back and not only reverted the one line of content I added but the whole section. So I reverted again and then Drmies comes in and reverts within one minute and slaps my talk page with two tags (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MkNbTrD0086)!? The article in question was already extremely biased and imbalanced and full of repetitive citations/refs, but now it's totally out of balance. Everything is criticism related about the subject with some BLP violations.

My question is: Did I do something wrong here and why the removal of the whole section as I only added one sentence to the already existing section? How come I see similar sections elsewhere allowed but I get "slapped" and warned on my own talk page if I try to edit? And how can I prevent been blamed for "disruptive editing" in the future when I just added a little content and it was these two editors/admins who reverted my edits first?

Thank you. MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 21:36, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)@MkNbTrD0086: Wikipedia sticks to professionally-published mainstream sources, which means Wikipedia takes the stance that psychic powers aren't real. Not just "unproven" but that tests to prove them have repeatedly failed. See WP:FRINGE for more info on that.
Mistakes in other articles do not justify new mistakes. Also, are you sure you're getting it right that other articles list every single TV appearance by the subject? Or are you thinking about about actor pages listing the shows they've acted in? Because those are not the same thing, and you'll notice that those pages don't list every single interview or promo spot they've done.
One way to avoid disruptive editing is to stop when a more experienced editor reverts you or leaves you a message. For example, MrOllie has been editing for 12 years and has over 100,000 edits. Sure, we'll say that 99% of his edits are reverts, but if you look at them, what do you know, he's pretty good at spotting and removing promotional material. Drmies has been editing for 13 years and has almost 300,000 edits, and he's an administrator. Maybe they know what they're talking about and maybe you should pay attention.
Another thing is to never never restore changes you made more than three times within a 24 hour period.
Another thing is to assume that other users are here to help the site, which comments such as this and this indicate you are not doing with other users.
Even if you don't want to listen to anything else I have to say, one piece of evidence that can only help you is this: find another topic to edit to learn how the site works. Part of the reason that everyone assumes you work for Fraser is that your activity is almost completely focused on making him look legitimate (which, again, we're just not going to do). Ian.thomson (talk) 21:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Ian.thomson, Thank you for explaining why I'm getting hammered left, right and centre since I picked this article as my starting point on the wikipedia platform. Your first sentence explains everything. Now I finally know why and I'll stop for now.
I did NOT say that other articles list all appearances by the subject. What I said was 100's of other articles have similar sections on them as I've seen on the subjects article (meaning different articles on different topics have a place of their "recognition or career"). And neither did I try to add "every single interview" so please don't be daft. I found a few and I thought to add them (at least it may balance the body a bit was my thought process). But I've been met with hastiness as a result to the point where it is almost scary.
I'm NEW to wikipedia, don't you understand that so I do not know every rule in the book. Of course more senior editors know more than I do and I will, of course, pay more attention in the future but it does not make them right 100% of the time, or does it?
Also, I've never broken the 3RR but thanks for pointing that out to me, I will be very careful of that.
I always go with the assumption that others are here to help but this same editor followed me to my talk page before and after having a go at Robert McClenon himself on the DRN page and accused me of all sorts. If you had read the subjects talk page and DRN section, you would see the reason why I replied like I did. Although I am not trying to justify it.
Of course I want to listen to what you have to say and I'm grateful for your input. And I'm not trying to make anyone look legitimate nor do I need to - the article is simply biased and very critical and there is even a trivial sentence in the lede about a sting which was unsuccessful/failed but I do not see you falling over yourself to "correct" that. BUT again you've explained to me in your first sentence why it is allowed (Wikipedia sticks to professionally-published mainstream sources, which means Wikipedia takes the stance that psychic powers aren't real. Not just "unproven" but that tests to prove them have repeatedly failed.), so thank you, now I know.
You mention I should find another topic to edit to learn how the site works - that's a great idea but what's there to stop any other editor or admin to revert everything I "try" to do on another topic or article like with the one I started with?
One last thing, Wiki is extremely complex and I'm learning as I go along. Thank you for your above reply. I appreciate it. MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:MkNbTrD0086 - I am not entirely sure why you are asking me, although I haven't followed the recent history of the Matt Fraser article. You opened a DRN request about a month ago. Editors then began arguing in the DRN before the volunteer moderator could take over, and I failed the discussion. I advised that any questions about either the lede or the body of the article could be decided by Request for Comments. I still suggest using a Request for Comments. That is often what I suggest when there is a content disagreement. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am troubled by your words: 'You mention I should find another topic to edit to learn how the site works - that's a great idea but what's there to stop any other editor or admin to revert everything I "try" to do on another topic or article like with the one I started with?' You started editing on a topic whee you disagree with the majority of editors, because you think that Fraser is authentic and the majority of editors think that he is either a fraud or self-deluded. So you are being advised to edit in an area where you do not have an emotional involvement. If you think, from the outset, that other people typically are against you, then your problem is not just being in a minority on Fraser but having a confrontational attitude. So either use an RFC on Fraser, or find another topic area, or expect everyone to be against you. (Unfortunately, the last is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Editors don't like editors who are looking for trouble.) Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:RobertMcClenon, thank you for your reply and feedback. Yes, I remember your suggestion but as I'm fairly new to wiki and don't edit often, I do not know (yet) how to just do that (using a RFC). Also, I'm not sure if it is worth my time and energy as I'm learning on the go and it's not easy. Apart from my original question to you, I just found it so strange that an unsuccessful sting is part of the lede and takes up a huge portion of the body (as I've read it twice in full). And the title of that sting is "Inside the Secret Sting Operations to Expose Celebrity Psychics" (going by the NYT article) but when different editors tried to add the word "celebrity" to the subjects lede, other editors opened up a section on the talk page and nearly went to war to prevent it. So which is it? Either both the failed sting stays with the word celebrity in the lede or it all should go. You see, I'm thinking logically here and it doesn't add up. The article is good enough to promote a failed sting (a one-time trivial event) but it is not good enough to have the word celebrity in the lede as the NYT article is titled. Get my drift? But as you said the majority of editors think the subject is a fraud and they equally think that I think he and that industry is authentic, so where does one go from here. So best to find another topic area like you suggest I think. Also, just to clarify, I do not think every editor is against me personally, of course not. It has just been my experience since I joined up. After User:Ian.thomson clarified WHY in his first sentence, I now understand the "aggression" more as Wiki as a whole are "against" that industry (Wikipedia sticks to professionally-published mainstream sources, which means Wikipedia takes the stance that psychic powers aren't real.) But then I ponder to myself; why are these articles created in the first place on wiki or allowed on wiki if the platform is "against" them? There are tons of similar articles. Anyhow, thank you for your input and I'll take it on board regarding another topic area too. Regards. MkNbTrD0086 (talk) 01:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Matthew Axelson

Hi there, I apologize for being so late to explain myself, I never meant to upload this article for AFC, I had requested this draft's deletion a while back and when I refunded it, I had forgotten that the article had been submitted for review prior to my deletion request. I would also like to mention that I did want to start a discussion regarding the subject, however no-one had followed up on the talk page and I decided to delete the section from the talk page as a result, you can see it here [8] (it's the latest talk page edit made on the 8th of October). I've since edited and updated the article with a couple of references in the legacy sub-section of the article, kindly take a look at it and let me know if it's clear to put through the AFC. Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 10:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Delta fiver - This draft doesn't appear to overcome the existing deletion discussion. I will be declining it within 24 hours. If you think that it should be accepted, please provide your rationale on the draft talk page or in an AFC comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:23, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have responded on the talk page. Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 09:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I woke up to this notification on my phone and I really appreciate you taking the article to deletion review, I apologize for the earlier mistakes I had made. I do have one request if possible, to make the draft that I'm editing to be in the main space rather than removing the prior redirect, as it saves me sometime time updating the prior article. Thank you again. Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 20:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Robert, it has been a couple of days now, is there any update on the deletion review, is it fine to submit the article for review again? I'm an AFC reviewer as well, with your permission I could accept it and save time. Cheers Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 15:03, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any update with the article? Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 06:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

question about a draft you reviewed.

may i know a detailed answer as to why the draft article for emergency tsunami does not meet the notability criteria? from what i know for a fact the tape is from a notable artist and i believe i have provided enough references as per the subject. i have added one more reference as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allee143 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Allee143 - First, not every tape by a notable artist is independently musically notable. Second, unreleased works and products are normally not independently notable, but are mentioned in another article if they are reported by reliable sources. I advised that the draft be resubmitted when the tape is released. That is still my advice. If you want more explanation of musical notability guidelines, you can ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French Revolution hey ho

I do appreciate your action on this and I haven't intentionally been difficult :) My frustration is this is not about content but winning an argument. We have one individual who's still keeping it going; I've come across them before and removed myself from any pages they were editing eg the American Revolutionary War. This is not a one-off, its a pattern.

Hence my scepticism about a DRN and you're right, I did misunderstand the purpose of an RFC, so I've learned something new! Robinvp11 (talk) 17:39, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, User:Robinvp11 - An RFC is the procedure for voting. If you didn't know that, you learned that. I was counting two pro-American editors, one of whom was blocked and is now off block, and is leaving the remaining discussion alone. This is a case where in Wikipedia, there is no deadline, so that we can just wait until the bot guillotines the RFC. Just be patient, please, and it seems that you are being patient. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:06, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Wanderword

Hello! I would like to know if you can open my draft again, in case i want to edit it in the future. Thanks! DimZoum (talk) 17:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:DimZoum - My advice is to discuss at the Teahouse. I will bring the issue up there in a neutral way. You can, if you wish, tag the current rejected draft for G7, which requests that it be deleted, and then write a new draft, but I would advise getting advice before doing that, so that we don't repeat history. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:06, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Owen

Hi Robert

Thank you very much for your observation that my draft article on Jan Owen will require a disambiguation, since there is more than one Jan Owen! I think you suggested 'Author'. A more appropriate appellation would be social entrepreneur, since that is her main claim to fame. For this reason, I have moved the draft to Jan Owen (Social Entrepreneur). Thanks again!Davidetalg2 (talk) 03:07, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ragpicking

Sorry I hadn't checked in on this conversation before it closed, but on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Contents/History and events/Topics, you used the word "ragpicking". I'm not familiar with that term outside of textile recycling, and was curious what you meant? -- Beland (talk) 05:26, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Beland - I may be the only person who uses the term at MFD. It consists of going through draft or user space for no obvious reason (although there usually is an unobvious reason) and finding "rags", pages that one nominates for deletion. I make that comment at MFD if I don't know why the nominator was there in the first place. If you look in someone's bureau drawers and find that their drawers are dirty, you don't know whether the drawer that you were in was for clean drawers or drawers waiting to be washed. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'm still not entirely sure how to interpret the question "was the nominator ragpicking?" I was in fact cleaning up after a merge and noticed some pages that looked neglected and redundant, and thought long-term maintenance would be easier and readers would be less confused if they were deleted. -- Beland (talk) 05:45, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My AfD deadline

Hi again, I have restructured, rewritten, and found all secondary sources now! It's final day for decision I think (?) for J. Jaye Gold Can you take one more look? Very much appreciated.Onganymede (talk) 18:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia women's national junior handball team Comment

Hiya. I'm interested in the decision you took (not contesting it, just interested) - this is one of a very large number now of articles on 'handball teams' created by this user with little sourcing and I took my lead in moving it to draftspace from another patroller who had moved two previous articles. I'm new to patrolling, so would appreciate the input! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alexandrmcnabb - I am confused. I don't know what decision you think I made about this article, but only have a few minutes and will be back in a few hours. It appears to me that you were right in moving the article to draft space, but the author then re-created the article in article space. This is tendentious behavior on the author's part, but it gives the reviewers only the choice of leaving the article in article space, or of nominating the article for deletion. I haven't yet had time to review whether to write an AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Robert. I got a template 'unpatrolled' message on my talk from you, hence the original query. I'm glad the remove to draft call was right - but he's created tens of these virtually empty pages now. Move 'em all to draft? Speedy? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 03:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Alexandermcnabb I will check within the next 12 hours, maybe sooner. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Alexandermcnabb - I have tagged a bundle of them for deletion. This will start a deletion discussion. If there are more of them about which you have concerns, follow the procedures described in the AFD page. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:14, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Thanks - and phew, I was worried that draftifying was the wrong call! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Alexandermcnabb - I think that the right call at this point is not draftifying but letting the community decide, which is what will happen on about 16 December, when the AFD closes. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:45, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Dmitry Borisovich Volkov

Hello. Please see the article. I cleaned the advertising style as much as possible and brought the criteria of significance. Thank you very much! 95.153.130.99 (talk) 07:14, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My submission of Draft:Imlie

Actually I created the page of this article first and the other page of this article is completely wrong in my point of view. I want my draft to be redirected to other page, so can you help me in this? Regards Unknownnreasonn (talk) 07:55, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries has been accepted

2024 Republican Party presidential primaries, 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.

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

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

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Khalil Berro

Hi Robert McClenon. Thanks for moving this to the draft namespace. I wasn't sure whether the creator and the subject were the same (though that seems highly likely); so, I didn't do so myself and decided to leave it for an AfC reveiwer. Please note though that another SPA editor has created Khalil Berro which means both a draft and an article are no longer needed. The article has been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:G11 and then there's also this. If you, based upon your experience as an AfC reviewer, feel the subject is notable, then perhaps the article can be kept; otherwise, it might be a good idea to redirect it back to the draft (if that's possible) and let it finish the AfC process. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:50, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Marchjuly - As a reviewer, I very seldom think that the subject of an autobiography is notable so as to deserve an article, and in the rare case that the subject is notable, it is even less common for the autobiography to be a useful draft. (Even if the subject is notable, the draft usually needs to be stubbed down to a lede sentence and started over.) This is not an exception, and appears to be simply a self-promoting teenager, and besides he appears to be sockpuppeting. I think that the best thing to do with the version in article space is to have it deleted somehow, and that is almost always what should be done with articles that are persistently created by SPAs. I do not really care much how the article is deleted, whether G11, A7, PROD, or AFD. I very seldom tag a biography as G11, but I am often satisfied if someone else tags a biography as G11, and this is fine. I do not really care what happens to the draft as long as it is not accepted, and I do not object to having it tagged for G11 also. If the admin declines the G11 on the article, I am willing to write the AFD or to support an AFD. Does that answer your question? The article needs deleting somehow. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've got no problem with either the draft or article being deleted if they're deemed inappropriate for Wikipedia. I was just giving the creator the benefit of doubt because technically it's not against policies or guidelines for someone to try and create an article about themselves, especially if they do so via AfC. However, the appearance of two SPAs to try and create an article about this person not only on English Wikipedia, but also on German Wikipedia is of a concern due to the possible sock puppetry or meat puppetry and even perhaps some WP:UPE. Those things are clearly problems that need to be sorted out regardless of what ultimately happens to the draft or article. Sometimes when someone posts a question at the Teahouse like WP:THQ#Unable to move page, they intentions are good and it's just their execution that is poor. Many editors trying to create articles about themselves don't realize that COI and AUTO apply to them as editors regardless of their choice of username; so, they simply create a new account on the mistaken assumption that doing so means they're in the clear. Innocent misunderstandings are OK, but multiple accounts being created out of the blue to try and create this article on multiple Wikipedia's raises a few red flags and seems to be something mroe than an innocent misundersanding. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Paging User:GPL93 and User:DuncanHill, thinking that all four of us are in basic agreement. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:DuncanHill, Marchjuly and Robert McClenon if it's not sockpuppetry then it is almost certainly a highly coordinated WP:MEAT effort. Also if you look at ZOE "Magazine" and scroll to the bottom of their website, it disclaims that it is owned and operated by Albamedia, an Italian web development/PR/Digital Marketing firm. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c)Thanks, I agree the article should be deleted. I see there's a German article, created today by another SPA. DuncanHill (talk) 23:06, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's actually a third account that has already been blocked today for username violations/promo editing on the article, User:ArtManagementZRH. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's the one that created the German article! DuncanHill (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:GPL93, User:DuncanHill, User:Marchjuly - Yuck. Since they are engaging in promotion on two language encyclopedias, I think that we should insert a comment in the SPI that a global lock may be in order. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:17, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, could you do that? DuncanHill (talk) 23:18, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a note to the SPI. By the way, the blocked account was not blocked for promotional editing but for having a promotional username. It can cure that block by changing its username, but the SPI and the G11s are also waiting for admin attention. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:44, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, one of the above-mentioned accounts has posted at Talk:Khalil Berro contesting the speedy deletion tags that were added. So, it might be better to specific discussion about the merits of the article to that talk page to make it easier for others to participate and keep Robert's user talk becoming a dramafest. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:20, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update on Khalil Berro

User:Marchjuly, User:DuncanHill, User:GPL93 - The sockpuppetry of the three accounts has been confirmed and those accounts were blocked. The G11 was declined but the administrator instead nominated the article for AFD, where it has several Delete !votes and no Keep !votes. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baba Buta Singh

Hi Robert,

I have edited the page as per suggestions. Can you please review and help to get rid off the messages on the top?

Thanks. Nogreat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nogreat (talk • contribs) 16:57, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jeffrey K. West

Hello! Thank you for kindly reviewing Draft:Jeffrey K. West. The ambiguity as to whether this is the same person as already exists on wikipedia has been resolved (they are 2 different people!), would you be able to revisit? Many thanks indeed if you can! KerstingFan (talk) 17:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion

Hello @Robert McClenon: Please kindly provide your opinion on the AfD of the Taingda Princess if you have free times. You have a very good understanding of Wikipedia policies and have great knowledge of the Wikipedia. Your are my respected editor on Wikipedia. Thanks 185.205.141.123 (talk) 08:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop declining notable films

Please stop declining notable films. It is obvious that you have zero understanding of how WP:GNG and WP:NFF works. I already replied to you on WT:NFF about it, but you appear to be pushing ahead with your incorrect beliefs. Your argument was the loser one at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dear Evan Hansen (film). Please learn from your mistaken assumptions. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:37, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication of Timothy Garrett

Hi Robert,

the Wikipedia page of the "Garrett relation" Wikipedia:Garrett_relation was recently deleted. C.f. also your recent essay:

User:Robert_McClenon/Garrett_relation

Userfication of Timothy Garrett was approved. Now Nosebagbear (talk) promised to help to set up that page, but so far unfortunately without success (ignoring my kind calls for help at any level). I'm likely to not have the required experience on Wikipedia to be allowed to create such a page myself, am I? If so, how should I proceed? Without any help, I'd likely be required to successfully help edit a certain number of pages first before being allowed to work on a userfication?

In any case, I'd welcome any kind of help. Best Gordonschuecker (talk) 23:35, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, another new design. Not sure how to edit my above post. The first link was supposed to be this one: Garrett relation Gordonschuecker (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do not feed the troll. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your administrative message

I did not try to edit any page, I tried to leave a comment because you have made a grave error on the President-Elect page. You must wait until the constitutional process finishes before placing anyone on that page. Biden has not completed the process to have that title. You need to go by facts on this site am I wrong, if you do not believe what I say is fact, read your constitution.

I had my doctor read my constitution the other day. He said I'm in good health but that I should cut back on cholesterol-laden foods. WaltCip-(talk) 13:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Moana (movie character)

Just letting you know that I removed your marking of Draft:Moana (movie character) as under-review since it's been more than 12 hours (about 16) since your last edit to the draft. Assuming you maybe forgot to remove the template or something along those lines after the submitter of said draft went on IRC asking about it. Chess (talk) (please use {{ping|Chess}} on reply) 00:11, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chess - I was interrupted, or I interrupted myself, but was planning to accept it. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Fluteforce/sandbox

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 06:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon&oldid=989304733"