User talk:Robert McClenon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Other archives
Personal Attacks and Other Deleted Nonsense
Famekeeper Archive
FuelWagon Archive
Jack User Archive
John Carter Archive
PhiladelphiaInjustice Archive
78 Archive


Francisco Morales Llerena[edit]

I just did a load of copy-editing on Draft:Francisco Morales Llerena. The notability is also sourced. The article still has issues (mostly a lack of sources for the various claims), but I don't actually understand Spanish so I can't fix those. I would propose to move the draft to article space (and probably call it "Juan Francisco Morales" instead of "Francisco Morales Llerena") to increase the odds other (Spanish speaking) editors will help improving it.

I'm not really familiar with policies and everything around this so I'm not just blindly hitting the "resubmit" button. (it's not my article anyway) Alexis Jazz (talk) 04:40, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Alexis Jazz - I would suggest asking for advice at the Teahouse. It appears that you and I are in agreement that the subject is notable but the draft needs a lot of work. In particular, if the draft is to be accepted based on military notability, his general's commission will need to be referenced. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
It mostly needs sourcing, but that will be much more likely to happen in main space. I don't understand the general's commission. Is File:LBNCCE-Alfaro-2313-PUBCOM (1).pdf not that? Alexis Jazz (talk) 08:05, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
I sourced the promotion more specifically. I also asked the Teahouse, it can't hurt, can it? Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:02, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
If you do not understand Spanish and the sources are in Spanish, you might do well to ask for a co-editor.
How/where can I do that? Wikipedia:Co-op says "This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference".. Alexis Jazz (talk) 15:17, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
User:Alexis Jazz - Try the Teahouse or the WT:Wikiproject Military History. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:23, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


Thank you for your contributions and respect your wonderful editing on the Wikipedia. By the way, want to be advised you about the article. Regarding 'TeRra' Magazine, it is not simply advertising article, but it seems has to be deleting. The magazine deals with important figures and their heritable works. hope you help to figure out what is standard and 'neutral' means. And the magazine has approved to publish materials as a media company, though. Would like to know and hear your opinion and be advised from you for the wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomashappyday (talkcontribs) 14:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Thomashappyday - The draft appears to be written in order to promote the magazine, and that is not permitted. I did not tag that draft for deletion as spam, but I did caution that, in article space, it will probably be deleted as spam. If you want advice from other experienced editors, you may ask at the Teahouse. I do not understand what you are saying about approval to publish as a media company. If the magazine is notable, then the draft needs a considerable reworking before it will be ready for article space. I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:01, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Kevin Wendell Jones[edit]

When I first submit the article an admin said it was ok. Then I find out a month later than it was tagged to be deleted. The article was restored to my box. I was told to submit the article differently but only did so to get feed back as to what was wrong and how to improve it. I didn't think someone would see it so soon. Next time I'll just ask the help desk, So Sorry Livinginthepink (talk) 22:39, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Livinginthepink - If you submit an article to AFC, you are requesting that it be reviewed for acceptance into article space. It should be ready for final review before you submit it. You are correct that asking for comments on the draft, while it is still in user space or draft space, would be a better idea. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

DRN closing note[edit]

I thing in case(s) like the one over here, phrases like the filing party is free to edit the article (whilst true technically) will only allow the warring-editor to utilize it as a blank-check to push rejected-changes and edit-war.Frankly, if I was a newbie (with questionable motives), I would have (probably) gladly taken the particular phrase whilst junking the advice to discuss on the article t/p, given there's no conditional clause, either.I am inclined to think that removing the phrase might be better:) WBGconverse 06:18, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


I was thinking maybe you could tell me where I'm supposed to ask this, because I honestly don't know.

Everipedia is written like an advertisement. I added a small bit to it, without any name-calling, trying to state nothing but facts. My edit was reverted with this edit summary: "Please provide independant WP:SECONDARY sources covering the topic. The tag at the very top of the article can be removed now. Thank you for your understanding.".

Can I call WP:BLUESKY on this? Literally anyone can go to Everipedia and verify for themselves that what I say is true. Do we really need completely silly citations from an expert like this? Should I ask an expert to say in public what anyone who has eyes can see? (and some blind people with good screen readers probably too..)

The tag at the very top of the article most certainly can't be removed. (but he tried it before, and was reverted in the next edit)

Officially I should probably talk to QuackGuru, but this seems completely futile already. Going to edit war is a bad idea and complaining about it on the talk page is unlikely to accomplish anything. I just don't know where to go. Alexis Jazz (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Alexis Jazz - What is the question? I agree that the article is written promotionally, and the reverting of your edit is characteristic of ownership behavior. Have you inquired as to COI? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I haven't, but I don't think they have a specific COI with Everipedia because they behave like this on other subjects as well. They may just be misinterpreting policy while being nearly deaf to all those who try to explain this is not how it works as they claim "I am restricted by Wikipedia policy.". The question was what to do because explaining doesn't seem to work, they probably don't break any rules badly enough to warrant a (topic)ban.. I'll probably just rewrite the article from scratch, boldly overwrite when done and let all hell break loose. Alexis Jazz (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes. My own opinion, and I would feel the same if I were well, is that the article doesnt provide enough information abput the profit model. I think it needs rework. I know that your issue is with QuackGuru, it is not COI; it is stubbornness. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Khalistan movement[edit]

Some DRN participants were making new reverts at Khalistan movement. I put full protection on the article, with a recommendation that it stay protected until the WP:DRN discussion is officially closed. Let me know if you have any other suggestions of what to do. I was already impressed by your patience in going through so many rounds. Still, it's not clear if there are better alternatives. Possibly an RfC, since that might lead to some of the alternatives being clearly voted up or down. At DRN, it seems that a supporter of a weak argument has the option of continuing the debate forever. Not saying that's what's happening here, though. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:59, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

It is true that too often DRN is used by an editor who is editing one-against-many. These disputes just go on longer and eventually either are failed by the moderator or are taken to RFC or both. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:15, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
User:EdJohnston - Thanks for intervening. Editing (edit-warring) the article while discussion is in progress is forbidden. I have failed the case and am recommending RFCs (but blocks might also be in order). I would recommend that the page stay protected until the set date to allow an RFC without edit-warring. Thanks. I am recovering from surgery and didn't see it. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:31, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Robert, Please take care of your health. Kindly accept my best wishes for your speedy recovery.
  • I am not totally sure if RfC is the right way forward as of now since there are multiple sources for this controversial dispute, We certainly made progress in past 25 days. But past 9 days we could not have any intervention from Robert due to his ill health. Can we re-open and reach a conclusion may be with a new moderator (since Robert is still recovering). In my opinion, we should salvage the takeaways from the long discussion at DRN instead of trashing the efforts of all three of us. User:EdJohnston your thoughts on re-opening ? --DBigXray 09:32, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
User:DBigXray - You may refile and request a new moderator, but I do not think that is likely to help. I don't know if another volunteer will want to take the case after it had dragged on 25 days, which is longer than the usual DRN case, and you didn't follow my instructions when I was still editing. I think that, with multiple sources and stubborn editors, RFC is more likely to resolve the matter than another round of DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:15, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


Hi Robert. Since you do lots of AfC reviews, I'm wondering why Draft:Edarem is even be considered for submission when Edarem already exists in the mainspace. This version appears to be something completely different than the latest version, which by the way appears to be a copy paste job from the existing article and is likely a copyvio per WP:PATT. All of this happended after the two previous AfC reviews, so I'm not faulting the reviewers. Can you decipher what has been done here? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of most-viewed YouTube videos[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of most-viewed YouTube videos. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Volunteer for content dispute[edit]

Hello. I saw the list of volunteers for dispute resolution and I need assistance. my request for My Korean Jagiya has yet to receive an opinion from any of the volunteers. Hotwiki (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018[edit]

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules
  • New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
  • Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
  • Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
  • Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
  • The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Iota Tau Kappa[edit]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Iota Tau Kappa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G13 -- only edit this year is a bot edit

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Dolotta (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on my article[edit]

Comment: Does the author have a connection or affiliation with the subject? Please read the conflict of interest policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Ref at the URL:

Thanks for your comment, Robert. Could you please guide me further? How do I confirm that there is no conflict of interest in this case? What is the basis of this derivation? I have read the CoI policy and do not see any issue in being able to edit the article, apart from the fact that I am just a novice.

Thanks in advance Pristinetulip (talk) 17:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Pristinetulip - You didn't answer the question. Do you have a connection with the subject of the article? Your only edits are to that draft, which makes you a single-purpose account, and so you appear to have a likely conflict of interest. If you do not have a conflict of interest, and are merely trying to contribute to Wikipedia by writing one article, you can help us with the five million articles that we already have as much as with one article that we do not yet have. I did not see evidence of biographical notability of the subject of that draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Answering your question, absolutely no. There is no conflict of interest here and i obviously do and intend to contribute to other articles as well. Thanks for your help.


I'm not sure what you are saying in your post. I was the filer. Your comments said "we can't say that there is strong evidence that the Russians did it" but that is exactly what I am trying to say. Did you mistake me for the editor that has the opposing view? I'm just trying to be clear what your opinion was. MartinezMD (talk) 18:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

User:MartinezMD -- My error, and I will revise slightly. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. MartinezMD (talk) 19:35, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

re: moderating un-opened cases[edit]

I feel that there can be a subtle cost to officially opening a case. When I'm asking questions in a mediator-ish way on a case I haven't opened, I'm totally fine with someone else coming along and deciding its best to close the case. I partly do it as an opportunity for other moderators to get involved.

Sorry this is so poorly intellectualized; I'm working on it. Xavexgoem (talk) 19:48, 2 August 2018 (UTC) The vagaries of our work here, etc, etc.

User:Xavexgoem - That makes sense. I think that particular case is going nowhere, but if you want to handle it, go ahead. I think that the discussion is too wordy and long-winded to be useful. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Monocrystalline silicon differential pressure transmitter[edit]

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

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hhkohh (talk) 08:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Theokarfak/sandbox[edit]

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

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

A tag has been placed on User:Theokarfak/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Hhkohh (talk) 06:10, 5 August 2018 (UTC)


Did you mean to post an article submission review notice to User talk:Example instead of User talk:Enterprisey? --Guy Macon (talk) 01:13, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Guy Macon - No, but that is what can be expected with Enterprisey testing his macro in live draft space playing whatever games he is playing. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:16, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for reviewing my submission for David Krain Can you tell me why it did not pass approval or what to do to improve it I looked at other people on wiki in a similar category and saw that it was similar to my submission. thanks for your help

Request on 15:28:39, 6 August 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Ddkeclipse[edit]

Ddkeclipse (talk) 15:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Ddkeclipse - Please ask for advice at the Teahouse. You did not include any independent references, and did not establish notability. You also provided a list that was too long. If other drafts that were also lacking in information have been accepted, please advise me where they are; I may tag them for deletion. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Testing AfC drafts in the New Pages Feed[edit]

Hi Robert McClenon -- I wanted to ping you because of some major progress on the effort to add AfC drafts to the New Pages Feed, a project that you weighed in on early on. The engineering work has come along enough that it's possible for community reviewers to test out the evolving New Pages Feed in the Test Wiki. Since you do a lot of AfC reviewing, I know that we would value your opinion. Thank you! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort closed[edit]

An arbitration case regarding German war effort articles has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. For engaging in harassment of other users, LargelyRecyclable is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia under any account.
  2. Cinderella157 is topic banned from the history of Germany from 1932 to 1945, broadly construed. This topic ban may be appealed after six months have elapsed and every six months thereafter.
  3. Auntieruth55 is reminded that project coordinators have no special roles in a content dispute, and that featured articles are not immune to sourcing problems.
  4. Editors are reminded that consensus-building is key to the purpose and development of Wikipedia. The most reliable sources should be used instead of questionable sourcing whenever possible, especially when dealing with sensitive topics. Long-term disagreement over local consensus in a topic area should be resolved through soliciting comments from the wider community, instead of being re-litigated persistently at the local level.
  5. While certain specific user-conduct issues have been identified in this decision, for the most part the underlying issue is a content dispute as to how, for example, the military records of World War II-era German military officers can be presented to the same extent as military records of officers from other periods, while placing their records and actions in the appropriate overall historical context. For better or worse, the Arbitration Committee is neither authorized nor qualified to resolve this content dispute, beyond enforcing general precepts such as those requiring reliable sourcing, due weighting, and avoidance of personal attacks. Nor does Wikipedia have any other editorial body authorized to dictate precisely how the articles should read outside the ordinary editing process. Knowledgeable editors who have not previously been involved in these disputes are urged to participate in helping to resolve them. Further instances of uncollegial behavior in this topic-area will not be tolerated and, if this occurs, may result in this Committee's accepting a request for clarification and amendment to consider imposition of further remedies, including topic-bans or discretionary sanctions.

For the Arbitration Committee,

-Cameron11598(Talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of 7400-series integrated circuits[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of 7400-series integrated circuits. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Zena Holloway draft[edit]

Hi Robert, I have gone over your comments on the original version of the page and tried my best to implement them. I'm not sure if it will be you reviewing the resubmitted draft or another editor? But thought I would let you know what is going on with the page anyway. I have corrected the issues around the inline citations, over-linking etc. I have also taken out most of the peacock statements and tried to rein in the reams and reams of celebrity names, concentrating only on the ones I can find references for. I have also taken out some of the most shameless promotional citations and although most of the sources carry weight in their field, there might still be some bad apples that have slipped through the net. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing any other comments or suggestions you may have. Best, Cr@Z Kit-Kat Lovert@lk 13:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Crazy Cat Person - I do not follow a draft through the review process. It will almost certainly be another reviewer. You did a good job with the references, and they are the tedious part. Thank you. Thank you also for opposing paid advertising and spam. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2018 (UTC)


Since you were involved there for AFC, I'd just like to note a possible conflict of interest issue I've noticed (I didn't raise my concerns yet but just noted it down for further checking): Username suggests "Roger's lab" (COI-username?) and sources added by them on various articles and drafts include some from Todd Rogers... —PaleoNeonate – 03:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Political userboxes and division[edit]

I'm curious about your comment re: political userboxes and the idea that expressing e.g. a Republican or Democratic leaning here might deepen divisions. I'd have thought if anything the opposite is true – isn't Wikipedia a good example of people of different political persuasions coming together to build something great regardless of their other differences? If a few editors of each kind flagged their allegiances, mightn't that just make the nature of that cooperation more visible? I don't mean to interrogate you and I respect your motivation to reduce divisions, I just found your comment interesting and wondered if you wouldn't mind expanding on it. All the best, › Mortee talk 12:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Mortee - I don't want to get into an invisible discussion on my talk page. The place to discuss is either at the RFC or somewhere else in the Village Pump. However, I am not nearly as optimistic as you that Wikipedia can be used to promote reconciliation in the body politic, or that editors who work together will continue to work together after they see the userboxes that characterterize their opponents as treasonous or demonic. I see political divisions as harmful to Wikipedia, rather than Wikipedia as an opportunity to heal political divisions. Wikipedia is not a social experiment. Further discussion can be at the RFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Sure, I only messaged you here because the RfC was closed. I would have followed up there otherwise. I think I understand your position, so thank you for explaining it. › Mortee talk 16:37, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:23:15, 21 August 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Kateryna1987[edit]

Hi Robert,

Thank you for providing your feedback on the article about Secure Swiss Data. I took Tutanota wikipedia page ( as an example to created a page about similar end-to-end encrypted email. I used as many citations as I could find about that software. Can you please let me know in more details what should I do in order to improve the article and make it valuable addition to Wikipedia? Kateryna1987 (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)Kateryna1987 Kateryna1987 (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Kateryna1987 - All of your edits in the past six months have been to that one draft. Are you associated with Secure Swiss Data? Do you have an affiliation with the company? Please read the conflict of interest policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:36, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon Hi Robert, I have been editing other articles previously and was looking for a topic to create an interesting article for some time. Considering that Wikipedia has so many articles it wasn't easy. Because I'm interested in encryption and data protection, I've found out that Secure Swiss Data launched their improved mobile apps, so I've taken that as an opportunity to create an article that will add value to wikipedia. As I've mentioned before, I looked into similar service Tutanota to create an article and follow wikipedia guidelines. As I've put so much effort in that article and I was so happy when I was able to complete it, I would highly appreciate if you will advise what can be done to publish the article. I really hope that my efforts wouldn't be wasted. P.S.: I don't have any conflict of interest Kateryna1987 (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Kateryna

User:Kateryna1987 - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Did you read my comments, or did you simply decide to ask what to do without trying to understand my comments? Your question seems to indicate that you want your hand held by a reviewer who will assist you in revising the draft. Most reviewers don't work that way. If you don't understand my comments, then it would be appropriate to ask for advice at the Teahouse. However, your question is so open-ended that I get the impression that you didn't try to understand my comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Basing a draft on an existing article is not always the best way to get a draft approved. In some cases, the existing article shouldn't be in article space and should be deleted. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Your draft doesn't make a solid case for corporate notability and reads like an information brochure. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
If your real objective is to contribute to Wikipedia, you can help us with any of the 5.6 million articles that we already have, which may be just as useful as providing one article that we don't yet have. Is there a reason why you want to contribute one article rather than to help us with the existing articles? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Sport Participation in Australia Dispute[edit]

Thanks for looking at the dispute on Australian Sport Participation.

I assumed it would add something automatically to other users who are mentioned.

At any rate I've requested HiLo48's response on his talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siento (talkcontribs) 21:34, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

The RFC has now disappeared from the RFC page and all the users who wish to vote on the RFC seem to have voted.

What is the next step?

The Survey is here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siento (talkcontribs) 01:12, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to do, any assistance would be much apprecated. Thanks Robert McClenon Siento (talk) 02:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Siento - The RFC has completed its 30-day comment period. A bot removed the RFC tag from the talk page because the RFC is no longer open for comments but is ready for closure (assessment). The next step is to list the RFC as being ready for closure, in the list of RFCs waiting for closure, at the administrator's noticeboard, WP:AN. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Robert McClenon Thanks heaps for your assistance. The dispute has now been listed as being ready for closure. Siento (talk) 10:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:CMTS[edit]

Information icon Hello, Robert McClenon. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:CMTS, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 20:01, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Bot0612 - It isn't my page. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Firefly - Maybe your bot makes the same mistakes as Twinkle in thinking that I originated a page when I moved it from a sandbox into draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:32, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:ZDHC[edit]

Robert McClenon Hello sir ,appreciate your observations, Allow me to add some more refs. ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 03:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
User:RAJIVVASUDEV - It will not help to reference-bomb the draft. Add references only if they will indicate what independent sources have said about the foundation. If you can demonstrate that the foundation has received attention from third parties, add the references and a description of what the third parties have said, and another reviewer will review the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Sir, thanks for your advice,I am taking utmost care and cited accordingly, please review and comment.ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 03:07, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
I thought you might want to know that this editor has been blocked for (minor I know) sock-puppetry. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 18:33, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Roxy the dog - Sockpuppetry going back to 2015 isn't minor. I think that minor sockpuppetry is a myth. On the one hand, it reveals something of the deepest hopes and fears of a culture or people, such as that Wikipedias want to believe that all long-time contributors are basically honest and are net positives to the project. On the other hand, it isn't true. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Phew. -Roxy, the dog. barcus 23:34, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PDFTron Systems[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:PDFTron Systems. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Not to misquote Seinfeld, but...[edit]

Extended discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:02, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

... what's the deal with User:Robert McClenon/sandbox#List of Users? I've mentioned other users in my sandbox in the past, but always either with the intention of opening a discussion in the immediate future or, in the current case, maintaining a discussion of an already-site-banned editor indefinitely as an accompaniment to an SPI no one seems willing to touch despite its being open-and-shut. Maintaining a "list" like that is a little ... weird.

Especially given that the list appears to combine folks who are there because they contribute to ANI discussions in which they are not involved a lot, and occasionally open ANI threads on issues in which they are involved (me), while others are on there because there's near-unanimous agreement they need to be site-banned (Film Fan), while others are on there because they have been site-banned forever (Catflap08). Your putting DF's name and Catflap08's name next to mine appears to have been deliberate, but my (direct) conflict with Catflap08 ended two years before I had any idea who DF was and, yes, keeping Catflap08's name there even though he's been site-banned for over a year comes across as a little weird (I'm not sure if you're aware of the block-evasion sockpuppetry, since it has not drawn a whole lot of attention outside of a few fairly "quiet" SPIs).

Also, you've got Francis Schonken on there twice.

Hijiri 88 (やや) 05:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Hijiri88 - The purpose of the list is only for me to check the block logs. That is what it is for. I'll delete one copy of FS. The list is used so that I can see which users should be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
What do you mean by "deleted"? Also, given how often blocks are issued in error, I'm not sure how useful block logs are when looking at how to address disputes involving long-term contributors. The best way to get blocked, for both new and long-term contributors, is to violate 3RR, so never editing the article space (which effectively guarantees never getting into an edit war) is probably the best way to avoid a block, but it's also a giveaway of a WP:NOTHERE user. Hijiri 88 (やや) 05:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Hijiri88 - You are correct that block logs need to be looked at in context. I was referring to deleting users with a dry humor that doesn't come through on the Internet to mean site-banning them. The block logs do normally indicate why they were blocked. I recognize that 3RR blocks are usually not as long as other blocks, and do not indicate the same problems as other blocks. That is what the list is for, just to view block logs. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, my block log includes more than a few errors for which the blocking admins have since apologized, in at least one case the block was clearly punitive (literally nothing I could have said or done would have resulted in an unblock -- this was maybe not technically the case for this one, but it damn-near was), in another was the result of a miscommunication in which I had already voluntarily withdrawn from a dispute but had not been careful enough in my wording and, once I reiterated as much in a clearer fashion was immediately unblocked, and in one was the result of a bizarre string of events that would not have resulted in me getting blocked had it not been for the fact that another editor was already blocked for a completely unrelated issue. The fact that not all of the subsequent apologies, etc. were explicitly marked in my block log should not be held against me or against any other editors who might have been in similar situations. (A number of my blocks are actually the result of me requesting mutual IBANs to protect myself from harassment and those IBANs later being gamed; in the past I have advised other editors in similar situations to make the same dumb move, which they occasionally did, and it wouldn't surprise me if there were similar instances that had nothing to do with me.)
I would appreciate my being taken off the list.
Hijiri 88 (やや) 05:53, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


Feedback on draft article on sandbox[edit]

hi Robert McLenon. Just saw your feedback on the draft article on Draft:David Patrikarakos. Can you clarify the part about the subject having to be in "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Im a bit confused as his work has been reviewed and referenced in reputable broadsheets and other media. As to it being a duplicate page, that then is my error - I was trying to correct the previous draft that had been rejected through getting feedback on another version of it through my personal sandbox. Im new to uploading work for wikipedia. I also do not have a conflict of interest with this subject. Your kind response is appreciated Le Bijoux (talk) 10:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

The best practice when addressing other editors is to spell their names correctly. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

My apologies Le Bijoux (talk) 12:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

I will ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Where does the dispute resolution process take place?[edit]

Hi Robert McClenon! Both positions have commented and are ready to resolve our dispute here. Where does the overseen discussion take place? On the board itself, in another area of Wikipedia? And will I be notified? Thanks! SprayCanToothpick (talk) 08:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

User:SprayCanToothpick - On the board itself, after a moderator volunteers to take the dispute. Keep discussion on the noticeboard to a minimum until a moderator volunteers. However, discussion at the article talk page is welcome. (When a moderator takes the case, they are likely to ask you to stop discussing at the article talk page, simply to keep discussion in one place.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


Since you appear to use Template:NSFW on user talk pages within {{Afc decline}}, just wanted to make sure you are aware of the recent page move, and to use {{UFW}}, which replaced NSFW. Best to you!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  14:34, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Paine Ellsworth - Yes. I noticed when previously declined drafts with NSFW started displaying that that form was deprecated. Okay. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:46, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Palais Kaunitz-Wittgenstein[edit]

Hi Robert McClenon, I just wanted to update you that I expanded the Draft:Palais Kaunitz-Wittgenstein, which you reviewed several days ago. While I assume this does not affect the notability of the discussed issue, I wanted to provide you with the opportunity to rethink your verdict concerning NPOV, as my changes might have affected the article in this regard. I am quite sure that it is still complying with NPOV but do not want to surprise you in any regard. --WiR IACA (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

User:WiR IACA - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Robert McClenon, I am aware that following a draft would not be the classical behavior, I just wanted to make sure that your remark does not seem to be improper due to a possible worsening of the draft through my continued editing. I am begging your pardon for any inconvenience and disruption --WiR IACA (talk) 06:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
User:WiR IACA - I don't think that I understand what the question is. Who are you saying may be making an improper remark or worsening the draft? I don't understand. Your draft is in the queue and will be reviewed sometime. Do you have a question that I can understand? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
You evaluated the draft, which I highly appreciate. I continued working on the draft after your evaluation and wanted to inform you about those updates. Didn't intend to cause any problem, just wanted to leave a friendly note, as people might assess X with A in time T, but might in time T+1 find A as an evaluation for the content that now changed to Y not fitting any longer. I just wanted to avoid causing a feeling of being tricked by a first draft that was afterwards significantly changed. --WiR IACA (talk) 07:57, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
User:WiR IACA - Maybe I still don't understand, or maybe I do. It is always assumed that a submitter will continue editing it after it is evaluated. The history of the article shows what version of the article was in effect when it was reviewed. That is the way Wikipedia works. If you knew that, then I don't understand what your concern is. Maybe you are spending too much time worrying about a reviewer being unreasonable that could be better applied elsewhere. I still don't understand. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Maybe the latter might be the case. Just tried to make sure that you don't feel tricked. But I am afraid it didn't work well. Sorry for the confusion --WiR IACA (talk) 08:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:59:22, 29 August 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Myringa[edit]

Hello I'd like to know what makes the page I created for an artist I admire, less elligible than this one: Could you help me please understand. Thank you in advance Best regards Morda

Myringa (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Uer:Myringa - See my reply at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Spectroscopy of Multiply Ionized Atoms[edit]

Hi Robert McClenon, thanks, but relating to your comment to the draft which you reviewed several days ago, it seems closer to WT:WikiProject Physics, not Chemistry. Koneya (talk) 11:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

The rejection of[edit]

As advised by the English Wikipedia chat volunteers, I'd like to ask for clarification regarding the rejection. You stated that "The sources do not appear to be independent." I actually put quite a lot of effort into referencing sources, and basically all of independent sources listed are very respectable national-level media. I'd say calling these media outlets non-independent would be quite outrageous where I live - or conspiracy-minded. I'd be happy to give some information on these titles, although I'm convinced that among the editors there should be ones familiar with those. Could you give some specific rationale for classifying these titles as non-independent? We're talking about "Gazeta Wyborcza" (, "Odra" (, "Ruch Muzyczny" ( ) and "Tygodnik Powszechny" ( BTW., the work on the draft is in progress, and there will be more sources referenced, of similar kind, I believe. Thanks for quick review, too. Baskak (talk) 17:15, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Baskak - First, I don't always know how to follow up when someone has been getting advice from chat, because I don't have a written record of what was actually said and don't know whether what the volunteer said and what the submitter thinks the volunteer said are the same. However, that is really a generalized gripe on my part. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Baskak - If you think that I made a mistake in declining the draft at this time, we can always ask for other reviewers at the Teahouse to take another look. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Robert McClenon Thank you for redirecting me. The chat (which I understand is the place for advice, at least that's what Wikipedia's suggestions after rejection made me believe) volunteer stated roughly "you can always ask the editor for clarification here" and gave your page address. I guess the exact wording is negligible. Baskak (talk) 08:42, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Baskak - I have asked for comments at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:14, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
A strange story. Both articles on Joseph K. Taussig Jr. were submitted by different sockpuppets for different banned or blocked paid editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

AfC unusual circumstances[edit]

Just pointing out that you rejected Draft:Joseph K. Taussig Jr. a few days ago for having a preexisting article. But the article has since been deleted as creation of a banned or blocked user. Maybe the draft should be reconsidered? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Bri - Yes. My original decline of the draft because there was already an article is as much of a no-brainer as a reviewer does. However, in this case, the original reason for my decline is no longer applicable. I have resubmitted the draft for another review based on notability, and will be entering comments on the draft talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:38, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joseph K. Taussig Jr. has been accepted[edit]

Joseph K. Taussig Jr., which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-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.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:00, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG kdnxcj Dickyell (talk) 22:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Q re: review of Ron Jarmin article[edit]

Hi - I have a question about your rejection of the article for Ron Jarmin based on reliable sources. I used the primary source in each case; would adding a secondary source, like a news article about the subject, help? I just don't consider news articles as reliable (or at least wouldn't use them in lieu of the primary source). ThanksShel5136 (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

You are asking about Draft:Ron S. Jarmin. First, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources to primary sources. Second, Wikipedia has a unique concept of notability, which has to do with whether independent sources have written about the person or company or concept or whatever. Maybe you either need the concept of notability explained to you again or disagree with it. If you disagree with it, it is still the policy. I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Shel5136 - Do you want me to ask at the Teahouse? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Robert McClenonI actually updated it using other sources already. The concept makes sense to me. I believe I resubmitted it for re-review. I can't tell if it's in a queue or what. Is it something you're able to take another look at? thanks. Shel5136 (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Nominating Unavowed for deletion[edit]

Hi there. I know you and I have widely different ideas when it comes to deletion but your rationale in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unavowed is so obviously incorrect that I have to wonder whether you are using Google settings that hide most or all hits. When I tried searching for "Unavowed" myself, the fifth link was a list of reviews and the third, sixth and eighth links were reviews in reliable sources, i.e. [1], [2] and [3]. If you truly could not find those, you really should consider no longer nominating articles for deletion. Regards SoWhy 10:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Since I don't know if you have pings enabled or have the AFD watchlisted, I hope you don't mind me leaving you another message regarding this AFD. Could you please consider withdrawing the nomination? I think it's sufficiently clear now that the subject is indeed notable, with 18 sources now in the article and I'd like to take it to DYK and GA then. Regards SoWhy 07:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Poeticwriter68/sandbox has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Poeticwriter68/sandbox. Thanks! Dan arndt (talk) 03:20, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Dan arndt - First, it isn't my submission, because I simply moved it to draft space and commented on it. We knew that. Second, it seems that for some reason the AFC script put your comment on the redirect page itself rather than on the draft page. I don't think that is what you intended, and I don't think the author will see that. Maybe you should put your comment on the draft page itself. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know what the bots were up to at the time. I think I was making a comment on the sandbox article at the same time as someone was moving the page to a draft. Given the lack of inline citations to reliable secondary sources it is not likely to supported to the mainspace any time soon. Any way its all good. Dan arndt (talk) 06:02, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:William Worsley (forester) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:William Worsley (forester). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:00, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Davidallitt - Thank you for you comments and help as a newbie all appreciated, hopefully my draft is now up to speed.

About Curtis Jones (footballer)[edit]

Hi Robert,

That article may well have been deleted by the time you read this, and I would be happy to WP:USERFY it. However it would appear to me there is little chance of the article about this young athlete meeting the criteria for mainspace until he has played a match for the Liverpool senior team. I agree with Szzuk's comment in the second AfD: "Delete. He will play professionally at some point in the near future in my opinion but until then it is a delete."
(This is a tricky bit: I could write "I'm not going to insult your intelligence by referring back to the policy and guidelines referred to in the two AfDs" but this would be insulting your intelligence by writing "I'm not going to insult your intelligence..." Oh crumbs. If there isn't a WP:ESSAY called WP:RECUSIVEARGUMENTSARERECUSRIVE there should be. Or should not be.)
Your thoughts about this? Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:24, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

About Draft:Youngjae (South Korean singer)[edit]

Thank you for the review of the draft:Youngjae (South Korean singer). I would like to ask you some points about the reasons of rejection.

You or the reviewer indicated "the notability." GOT7 has grown a popular music group that gains 9th concert income in the US this year. They had gained furthermore attendance through the world tour this summer as well. There had been biograghy lines about each of GOT7 members in GOT7 wiki page, but they were deleted on 2017-10-24 because of (→‎Members: removing irrelevant content per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea/Popular_culture#Members_sections) So we needed to prepare other pages to supplement the members' information.

As for "reliable sources", indeed there are less sources written in English, but that is because GOT7 is from Asia and is spreading to other areas. This Youngjae's draft is prepared by volunteers from multiple countries. We searched for reliable sources in several languages (Korean, Japanese, Chinese, and so on) and selected topics which have English sources as well. So please don't regard these sources as counterfeit even though we are from non English-speaking world. We already have Youngjae's wiki page in such languages or even in EU, you might think that is enough. But for other, non-native people, it is hard to read those pages even if they use Google Translation Function which is in progress. K-POP has been popular and spreading to the world recently, there is certainly the need for Youngjae's page from the English-speaking world as well as non English-speaking world. That is the reason why we need the Youngjae's English page. Please reveiw it again.Piano coffee (talk) 09:18, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Piano coffee - In reviewing the GOT7 article again, I see that the approach taken has been to give each of the members of the group an article, and that five of them do have articles. So I think that I agree that Youngjae should also have an article.
I don't understand the issue about counterfeit sources. I didn't state that concern. Where was it stated? If I didn't state it, discussing it with me seems like a straw man. I am aware that sources can be in any language if they are reliable. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, but I still don't understand which sentences or references you regard as the reason of decline from your answer. Not "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 music-related topics). ", or " I am aware that sources can be in any language if they are reliable. " = counterfeit , I thought so. A straw man? I don't know how come from the lines above, I don't want to mess your place with a word game. Actually which sentence should we modify or delete? Please indicate them if you are not a straw man.Piano coffee (talk) 08:13, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I still do not entirely understand your concerns. I declined the draft because I did not think that there was enough information about Youngjae to justify a stand-alone article. The templates state standard Wikipedia policy on sources. I did not have any specific concern about sources, but about the amount of coverage and the need for a separate article. Did you notice above that I then said that if five of the members of the group have their own articles, I agreed that it would be appropriate to have an article for Youngjae? I agreed that a separate article for Youngjae would be a good idea. Did you understand that? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I never referred to counterfeit sources. I don't know why you mentioned counterfeit sources. I did refer to reliable sources, and I said that reliable sources can be in English or in any language (which includes Korean, Chinese, and Japanese). Robert McClenon (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
If you still do not understand, maybe you should consider editing another language version of Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Once again, I agreed that a separate article for Youngjae would be a good idea. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, now I understand what you mean. I thought you were worrying about the sources as well, as it is written in the template. I had explained why we need English version already. Please let me know how to resubmit the draft, as there is such sentence "Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be rejected again." on the top part of the draft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piano coffee (talkcontribs) 03:30, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Do we have to wait about 2 months again? Piano coffee (talk) 03:35, 13 September 2018 (UTC) I really appreciate you accepted the draft. I am very glad and other volunteers would be happy to hear this news. Now that this page is in public, many other volunteers will come and help improving this article. Piano coffee (talk) 06:11, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


I’m Ronaldo 3455 and you accepted two of my drafts, but I created more drafts that maybe you must see. The drafts of Dillon Francis new album I created it about one month ago. Ronaldo3455 (talk) 22:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[edit]

I also created this draft: Ronaldo3455 (talk) 22:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Ronaldo3455 That points me to the mobile version, which is hard to read from a real computer, just as the regular version is hard to read from a smartphone. I went to the main version. Please resubmit it after the album is released, providing reviews and chart figures. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Charles Chupp[edit]

Hello Robert,

I read you comments and have made a few changes with some help from another editor on wikipedia-en-help discussion board. I am not exactly certain what you thought was unnecessary personal details. I got a few suggestions on the board, and have incorporated them. Please point me to the troublesome text if you still find it unsatisfactory.

Thanks, Steve — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swjewell (talkcontribs) 16:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Swjewell - The draft in question is Draft:Charles E. Chupp. The draft says more about his early life than about his works. Some of the discussion of his early life could be shortened. Also, there should be more coverage of the reception of his books, such as sales figures or reviews. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I said that I was leaving the draft for another reviewer. If you want to discuss it further, you may ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 13:12:36, 14 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Abhi301292[edit]

Abhi301292 (talk) 13:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi can you please let me know can if i can merge the content in shivoham shiva temple? as in old shivoham siva temple wiki very incomplete info is present on the wiki page.

User:Abhi301292 - I see that you replaced the stub with the information in your draft. While some of the draft is good, it also contains unacceptable language, such as "most powerful Shiva statue". Discuss your additions rather than just editing wildly. If you need help, ask for help. If you are having difficulty with English, ask for help or edit the Wikipedia in your first language. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:19:45, 14 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Car.cin[edit]

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for the time you spent in checking the Wikipedia article that I wrote. I would like to ask you some help to modify properly the article (I am new in Wikipedia).

I agree with you that the title has to be changed; indeed, the title I have chosen reads "Stochastic models for turbulent flow simulations". Because of a technical mistake, I did not change the title before the submission. Can I rename the article without exit from the review process already started?

User:Car.cin - You can rename the draft by moving it. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I tried to write in a neutral style and to give a short overview of a complex subject. I did not clearly understand your comment about the writing style: you notice that it is written in a style that tends to instruct rather than describe. In my point of view, the difference between describing and instructing is not so neat; what do you suggest to make it more descriptive and less instructive?

Thank you in advance for your help and time. Best,--Car.cin (talk) 14:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Compare to how other technical articles are written. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Car.cin (talk) 14:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)


Hi Robert, I've noticed that you've been tagging some user talk pages like User talk:TulipBlack for G11, presumably though inadvertent transclusion by a script copying from the actual promo page. Not a big deal, but if you could check for this it would avoid the talk page appearing at CSD. Keep up the good work Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Jimfbleak I see the mistake. It comes from using the AFCH script tool to enter the {{db-g11}} in the comments in a page. This causes that comment to be inserted both into the page and into the user talk page. I will avoid doing that in the future. I will separately tag the file using Twinkle, rather than using the AFCH tool to through-tag it. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 11:23:47, 15 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Abhi301292[edit]

Abhi301292 (talk) 11:23, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi please help me in getting the Wikipedia page done for the shivoham shiva temple i can give the the draft and you can change whatever you feel its wrong but please help me in getting wikipedia page created for Shivoham Shiva Temple. i am very new to on this platform. Please help

User:Abhi301292 - Are you in any way affiliated with the temple? If so, please read the conflict of interest policy. If you are having difficulty editing in English, you may edit the version of Wikipedia that is in your first language. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi I am not associated with this temple in any way. That's why I am trying to edit the wiki page of shivoham shiva temple beacuse the no information are there on that page only one sentence is there about the temple. my content is not getting approved someone is reviewing and removing that how can someone from outside the country can review it as he will not having enough info. we know better than the people who are not living. so i need to publish the correct info about any places so that the general public should not suffer due to lack of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi301292 (talkcontribs) 09:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Jon Doscher[edit]

Hi Robert

Thank you for the review. It is my intention to resubmit this article and I have taken your advice to remove the photo caption and the peacock terms. As you are not doubt already aware Jon Doscher is a filmmaker and had a Wikipedia article from April 2010 to its deletion in March of this year - [4]. He came seeking my help to have the article reinstated because his current article only redirects to 4Chosen: The Documentary. I have rewritten and re-referenced the present draft.

I would appreciate any further help you could offer with my re-submission of this article. Gibmul (talk) 15:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Gibmul - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process, and I am not inclined to make an exception for a paid editor. I have a very negative opinion of paid editing, and will avoid giving your draft a second review because I do not expect to be neutral. The deletion discussion said that he was only notable for the documentary, and it appears from the article that he is only notable for the documentary. If you think that the deletion discussion was improperly closed, you may request a review at deletion review. If you want to persuade me or another reviewer that your draft is better than the deleted article, you can request that the deleted article be restored to your user space with a Request for Undeletion. If you want other experienced editors to look at your draft, you may ask at the Teahouse. I have re-reviewed the draft once and do not intend to review it again, but am definitely not neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

A redirect recently created[edit]

Hello. I saw you accepted the submission Talk:Jeon_Jung-kook as a redirect for the moment, just yesterday I wrote to the creator because I also created a page for the same artist Draft:Jungkook and also submitted it so we were in discussion to work together to merge and improve the document just before hers was accepted. We both agree and also teahouse it's appropriate using his stage name instead of full name considering there's no other Jungkook on Wikipedia. I hope we can have some help in how to solve this. Have a nice day. ↳ GiovannaG . . . (My talk) 20:46, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding KAVV[edit]

The article was semi-protected after more users editing on behalf of the radio station owner tried to remove that section of the article. I also reported one of those editors for making legal threats, and he was blocked. Another editor claiming to edit on behalf of the owner just turned up on my talk page, and I have directed him to your post on the article's talk page. Just thought I should keep you in the loop. EclipseDude (talk) 22:44, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Quick Dispute Resolution Question[edit]

How do I notify other parties of the dispute, and who do I have to notify? The party I had the dispute with was simply the listed editor, as all other editors have been behaving reasonably. LarryBoy79 (talk) 12:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

User:LarryBoy79 - Notify them on their talk pages. See the header page for details. You may use the Twinkle 'tb' (talkback) function. You may put the {{drn-notice}} template on the talk page for the purpose. Notify all of the editors. They may agree or disagree with you. We want to let them know. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018[edit]

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news
As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.
Moving to Draft and Page Mover
  • Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
  • If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
  • Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
  • The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
  • The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.
List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

  • Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
  • In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions.
  • MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues.
  • User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
  • User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
  • User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you.
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
  • User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
  • User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 05:44:36, 18 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Malikofori[edit]

I am aspiring to become a top wiki editor, I have created some articles in the future and I had gain some type of reputation. I recently created a wiki article on an artiste from Ghana and it was reviewed by you and wasn't accepted. Please I will need your help on what to do as I can assure you he is a notable artiste in Ghana. I have included additional references eg MTV, MTN, Genius etc to prove his notability. Please, I will like to resubmit for your humble review. Thanks

malikofori 05:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

User:malikofori - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. However, I read the draft again. I asked which of the musical notability criteria are satisfied. If you resubmit, please answer that question, in a comment or on the talk page. The overall tone is non-neutral. It was written to praise its subject rather than describe him neutrally. If you have further questions, please ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:14:55, 19 September 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Necamswiki[edit]

Hi Robert - You reviewed an article for Mitchell Goldhar, your comment was "there is already a stub". I thought the stub will be replaced by the updated article. Can I go to the current page and replace the contents with the updated full bio. thx

Hi Robert - Yes I have an affiliation with Mitchell Goldhar and SmartCentres. I work for smartCentres and I am IT for Mitch Goldhar. The bio is written by Mr. Goldhar. I did replace the whole contents before but it was rejected, can I do it now? I added full citations. Thx Hi Robert - what do I have to do for the bio to be updated? Thx (Necamswiki (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2018 (UTC))

Necamswiki (talk) 14:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Necamswiki - You were mistaken in thinking that AFC can be used to replace an existing article. Existing articles should be edited, not replaced. If you go to the stub Mitchell Goldhar and replace it entirely with your draft, you are likely to be reverted, because you should discuss your improvements section by section. If you discuss section by section, you are more likely to get what you want. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Necamswiki - Do you have an affiliation with Mitchell Goldhar or with SmartCentres? Your only edits are to Mitchell Goldhar and to the talk pages of reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Robert: is this ok to add the following on the top page {Connected contributor | User1 = Necamwiki | U1-EH = yes | U1-declared = yes }? I work for smartcentres, I don't get paid to write the content. I am an IT at smartcentres. The content is written by Mr. Goldhar himself. Do I have to add the COI for paid?(Necamswiki (talk) 17:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC))
User:Necams2wiki - You are a paid editor if you are submitting this in the course of your employment. Yes, a properly completed COI template will satisfy the requirement. As I said, you should discuss your edits on the talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Robert McClenon#top - I start on talk page. (Necamswiki (talk) 19:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC))

Please comment on Template talk:Death year and age[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Death year and age. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Submission Draft: Jungkook[edit]

Hello, good afternoon. Thank you for reviewing draft:Jungkook, i read it was declined because of lack of activities outside the group. He has already participated in solo activities working on television as host, he participated in the presidential project for One Korea, song that has been center in the recent inter korean summit, besides he has credits as producer and co-directed a special show for the channel Mnet in Korea. He has plenty of activities solo, besides his recent song is the first solo korean song by a solo artist in charting in countries like Malaysia, UK and Japan.

There are important events happening with him, I wish I could have some guidance on how to make possible for him to have a wiki article were the general public can find about his activities because it's information the band's page doesn't have. I would really appreciate some advice because it's really frustrating as new creator, thank you so much. ↳ GiovannaG . . . (My talk) 21:09, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

User:GiovannaG - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. You may ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:35, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Clarification regarding Draft:Dgraph[edit]

Quote: "Your only edits have been about Dgraph. Are you affiliated with the vendor of the product? Please read the conflict of interest policy and make any required declarations. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)"

Answer: I've previously edited some articles, and created one in PT-BR called "Criptomoedas". But I used another name (old one, "kgbmichel"), I asked the Wikipedia staff to change my name. Maybe my records got lost with it.

I am not affiliated and do not provide the product. Dgraph is an Open Source project and it's free. To which I am part of the open source community. I see there are many proprietary software that has not been asked about it. I practically mimicked the others to not be too different. If I need to make any further enlightenment, let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichelDiz (talkcontribs) 04:39, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Supergirl (season 2)[edit]

NAC. Discuss the draft on the talk page for the parent article. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I've expanded the article somewhat since you last assessed. Can you please re-assess now? Besides, I'm not aiming for FL; but if it is in the mainspace, others will feel compelled to expand it further since drafts are not visible to all users. --Kailash29792 (talk) 16:29, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Kailash29792 - First, I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process, and I did not say that I would follow your draft through the approval process, and the banner at the top of this page says that I will not normally follow your draft through the approval process. Second, I didn't say to improve the draft and resubmit it for my review. I said that you were proposing to split Season 2 from the main article, and to discuss on the main article talk page. Did you do that? What did the other editors say at the main article talk page? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:11, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Okay, sorry for the misassumption. But can I try bringing Supergirl season 2 to the mainspace using G6? Because once the draft enters the mainspace, the episodes listed under List of Supergirl episodes will be cut-pasted rather than copied. In that way, chunks of data on List of Supergirl episodes will be reduced. --Kailash29792 (talk) 05:57, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Kailash29792 - If you are asking whether you can move the list of episodes from draft space into article space via a G6, which is for non-controversial moves and other housekeeping, then please re-read my advice a second and third time. This might be a non-controversial move, or it might be a contentious move. It should be discussed. Please stop asking me to help you game the system in order to split the article without discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:07, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
I've already posted a few comments at Talk:List of Supergirl episodes. I can only hope they are responded to, and agreed with. Matt14451 already agrees that it is worth entering the mainspace; he and I didn't conspire, I just asked him to help further expand, and he said it already looks good enough to go to mainspace. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:23, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
I approve of the Supergirl (season 2) draft because I compared it to similar articles within the Arrowverse and it has more content. I agree that many more editors will be likely to contribute once it enters the mainspace. Matt14451 (talk) 09:21, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
User:Kailash29792, User:Matt14451 - I didn't ask to have a discussion of whether to accept Season 2 on my talk page. I asked to have discussion on the article talk page. I am closing this thread. Go back to the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Please note that Kailash29792 is aware that there is disagreement between multiple editors on the article being moved to the mainspace; these unmentioned requests seem rather bad faith of them, and they need to learn from the editor agreement. -- AlexTW 4:09 pm, Today (UTC+9.5)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request on 17:28:19, 1 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Brianivie[edit]

Totally makes sense! Thank you for this. If you could please delete this submission asap that would be great. 

Brianivie (talk) 17:28, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:WMO Information System[edit]

There are some third party sources mentioning WIS, albeit quite briefly:

Josusky (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Josusky - If the WIS is mentioned only briefly, but the WMO, which is its parent, is discussed at length, then the conclusion is that the WIS is not independently notable and should be discussed in the article on the WMO. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:FL Technics[edit]

Hi. I had some questions on your recent review of the draft above that I left as a reply to the notification you left on my talk page. Kindly respond (feel free to answer here or directly on my talk page). Davykamanzitalkcontribsalter ego 09:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Davykamanzi - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process and do not normally re-review a draft for paid editors. If you think that I made a mistake in my review, you may ask other editors for their opinions at the Teahouse. However, some of the sources that you provided are in the nature of press releases, published by third parties but based on information provided by the company. If you think that I made a mistake in my review and that a stand-alone article is mandatory for the company (as opposed to mention in the article about the parent company), ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 20:42:12, 2 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Eileen Loveman Williams[edit]

Thank you for your review of my article for creation. I did not write this to praise myself, rather to bring attention to the books I've written, articles of interest from various newspapers and magazines across the country, just like any other author I've read about on Wikipedia. Did you read my last revision noting my books and their ISBN numbers? I can remove the more personal notes in my opening statement and write it in a more neutral matter. Thank you for your suggestions. Eileen Loveman Williams

Eileen Loveman Williams (talk) 20:42, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Eileen Loveman Williams - Did you read the autobiography policy? Did you read the conflict of interest policy? Wikipedia is not interested in being a medium for "bringing attention to the books" that you have written, but only in describing the attention that they have already received, and authors are very seldom able to assess neutrally whether what they are writing is neutral or is promotional. Most of the other articles about authors in Wikipedia were written by neutral volunteer editors, not by the authors or their agents or families, and articles that were written by persons with a conflict of interest are often deleted. If you want the advice of other experienced editors about using Wikipedia to bring attention to your books, you may ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:53, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Sandbox - submission for review[edit]

Dear Robert McClenon, As you have notified it, I have submitted twice the same article (Richard Castelli) for review. I did it by mistake. The reason is that my article being not in the Sandbox anymore, and nowhere else?, I thought it had been lost. So I published it again. I am a new user and I am not very familiar with Wikipedia procedures yet, sorry. You can proceed to delete the second one. Can you tell me where I can find the first again if I need to update it? Thank you, --Maclang99 (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)Maclang99

User:Maclang99 - There are two copies of your draft, at Draft:Richard Castelli and User:Maclang99/sandbox. In my opinion, neither of them is ready to go into article space. Do you have an affiliation with Richard Castelli? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for your fast and kind reply. Since you notified a possible COI, I would like to confirm that I have no affiliation with this personality, but having visited several of the exhibitions he curated and appreciating well the artists, he produces, I thought it would be interesting to find his biography on wikipedia as it does not exist yet. If my first article is approved this time, I would like to continue and propose a series dedicated to a number of living people from the arts and entertainment, especially those affiliated with science-art-technology. I would be grateful if you could give me your advices on what to modify so that the article could be admissible. Thank you in advance, --Maclang99 (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)Maclang99

Aubrey F Hess Submission tag[edit]

Robert you quickly responded to my submission of my article on Aubrey F. Hess with a comment that there were empty Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). tags. I found was only one empty open tag that appeared above the Edit Below this line. I removed this empty reference assuming it was an errant tag added during editing.


Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

User:UU Archivist - The draft in question is Draft:Aubrey Franklin Hess. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:27, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Imran Mehrban/sandbox?[edit]

When you reviewed User:Imran Mehrban/sandbox, you said this was a duplicate, but didn't say what it was a duplicate of :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

User:RoySmith - It is a duplicate of Draft:Mehrban Ali. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
I tried to indicate, but occasionally the tool drops data that I entered. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:43, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on my article[edit]

Ref at the URL:

Thanks for your comment, Robert. Could you please guide me further, let me know in more details what should I do in order to improve the article and make it valuable addition to Wikipedia?

Thanks --Vmaske (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:32, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Vmaske] - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process, and have not researched its subject in detail. As I said in my review, the article appears to have been written to praise its subject rather than to describe him neutrally. I do not have any specific suggestions, but would advise you to rework the article and write it in neutral rather than positive language. (I know that that is not easy, and that many new editors want to present as positive as possible a view of the subject.) If you want the suggestions of more experienced editors, you may ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:21, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Robert, i have revised the article as per the suggestions, requesting you to review and provide suggestions in order to improve the article.

Thanks --Vmaske (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Nigel Collins (musician)[edit]

thanks for the comment - yes I think he does qualify, under these music notability criteria:

1. he's played with Flight of the Conchords on tours of the USA/Canada (2009 & 2016), UK/Europe (2010 & 2018), Australia & New Zealand (2012). All of these were extensively covered by local press in each country, which often explicitly mentioned him as part of the show. Likewise for the Wellington International Ukulele Orchestra, which has played in the UK, China, USA, Australia, Japan. He's also been filmed this year in London with the Conchords for a forthcoming live concert special/doco by HBO

2. The Wellington International Ukulele Orchestra, his band, made the top 20 album charts in New Zealand in 2015

4. see the Conchords and Wellington International Ukulele Orchestra tours mentioned for criteria 1 above; and also note 4 in the article itself

6. band member of Flight of the Conchords, and the Wellington International Ukulele Orchestra, credited as a pivotal band in the recent international ukulele revival

12. he was interviewed by Eva Radich on Radio New Zealand in 2008 about his various bands and other music, including his international touring with the Flight of the Concords (talk) 06:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

The draft in question is Draft:Nigel Collins (musician). Please log in before editing. Please update the draft to reflect the musical notability criteria. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

hi Robert - new draft now up with more specific reference to the Wiki music notability guidelines, as suggested. Some of them are within the body of the article, and some additional citations. Thanks very much.

Tom Bennion (talk) 09:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Nigel Collins (musician) - revised version with suggested changes[edit]

hi Robert - new draft now up with more specific reference to the Wiki music notability guidelines, as suggested. Some of them are within the body of the article, and some additional citations. Thanks very much.

Tom Bennion (talk) 01:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Kumar.dpkkmr.dipak/sandbox[edit]

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

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

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Waggie (talk) 18:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Waggie - Twinkle strikes again. It isn't my draft, and I also tried to propose that it be deleted as spam. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry about that! I didn't even realize that Twinkle put this on your userpage. Waggie (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Waggie - Sometimes it does that. If I move a sandbox to draft space, sometimes it thinks that I am one of the creators of the draft. In this case, I was also trying to be one of the destroyers of the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
I'll try to keep an eye for this in the future. Thanks! Waggie (talk) 02:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Waggie - Yes, but don't erase the message just because it isn't meant for me. That just makes work for me, because I still get the email and still see the red alert, and have to look at the history to see that it was a good-faith effort to destroy the evidence. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Supergirl season 2 AfC[edit]

I have posted new comments at List of Supergirl episodes, regarding Draft:Supergirl (season 2). Please respond. --Kailash29792 (talk) 11:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 04:57:37, 10 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Hitithard100[edit]

Dear Team...I have been trying to sumit this article for Rakesh Khanna, MD & CEO, Orient Electric Limited. I have been working within the oprganisation for more than three years now. Also, I have included independent news sources to verify the person's profile and career. Please guide me as what additional information I should submit as this is important for a established and stock listed company like Orient Electric to have its MD & CEO profile on Wikipedia.

Hitithard100 (talk) 04:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Hitithard100 - First, it may be important to Orient Electric to have an article about Khanna. That doesn't make it important to Wikipedia. We have rules of notability and neutrality, and notability is based on independent coverage, not on what the company says about its CEO. Second, both another reviewer and I told you that you need to provide independent sources that are not affiliated with the company and that are not press releases. Third, I do not normally follow an article through the approval process, and I do not follow an article through the approval process for a paid editor, and I do not intend to guide you through providing the independent information that you need to provide. You may ask for advice at the Teahouse. Some of the editors there are more willing to assist paid editors than I am. Fourth, you have not made the required declarations based on the conflict of interest policy and the paid editing policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:37, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 14:18:06, 11 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by AK090170[edit]


Thank you for your reviewing. I understand the notes about footnotes and the length of publications list (how long it can be? it's supposed to be full). But what should I do with this note: "This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information." Thank you!

User:AK090170 - The draft in its current form is not suitable for Wikipedia because the list of publications is too long. Use Common Sense. The draft article in general is too long and difficult to read. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:19:42, 11 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Herrenna[edit]

Herrenna (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I am having issues with submitting my revised article that was declined. I had edited and published changes and it has yet to be reviewed. I feel it has not in an area to be reviewed.

User:Herrenna - You have not resubmitted the draft. I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. Can you please restate the question? Your statement seems to have been garbled. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:09, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 23:07:12, 11 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by DTHOMPSOWI[edit]

I am a volunteer and not an expert. I have offered to submit an article about Kriss Marion because she is a candidate for Wisconsin State Senate. People are trying to search for information on her background and Wikipedia is a major place they search. I'm not sure what I need to change to make the article acceptable. Thank you.

DTHOMPSOWI (talk) 23:07, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

User:DTHOMPSONWI - Before trying to submit a draft article to Wikipedia, it is a good idea to have a general understanding of what Wikipedia is and is not and what articles it has. You apparently came in to Wikipedia to try to do the hardest task that can be done in Wikipedia, to create a new article, complete with the references, and you don't understand the rules, which is not your fault, but is not our fault either. You may simply be trying to do something that isn't going to work, just like you can't drive a car at 600 miles per hour or fly a 747 to the moon. I suggest that you first read Your First Article and play The Wikipedia Adventure, and take your time reading the questions of other new editors at the Teahouse. After you know what questions to ask, ask them. It isn't clear to me that there is anything that you can do to change the draft to make it acceptable, but read what I advised. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:17, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

AFC chemistry[edit]

You might consider passing on AFC's for chemistry articles to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry or even to me. A lot of the articles are for homework and the kids would benefit from a chem editor's advice. If there were a way to sort AFCs by subject, I would. Thanks, --Smokefoot (talk) 15:23, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Smokefoot - Thanks. I can handle the chemistry AFCs myself. My degree in the subject is 49 years old, but is better than nothing and is more chemistry than most people know. I can pass the chemistry on to the project, as I do for some projects. If you want the chemistry AFCs, I can send them to you, but I can handle them myself. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. 49 years and the same periodic table and the same thermodynamics... So good luck. I had heard that AFCs were overwhelming those that tend to them, hence the gesture.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Smokefoot - Yes. They have added a few elements at the end of the periodic table, but they don't last long enough to have chemistry that can be tested experimentally, and the quantum-theoretical models of electron clouds break down, so that neither experiment nor theory can be used, so there isn't any chemistry. The inconsistency with the thermodynamics always was whether the positive sign meant enthalpy into the system or enthalpy out of the system. I read a few papers by Clausius, and he, Clausius, was inconsistent in his sign conventions, and that hasn't changed. As to the AFCs, the scientific drafts are not the overwhelming ones. I accept the chemistry and biology drafts if they look reasonable and have at least one reliable source. With the physics and mathematics drafts, it is a matter of using scientific common sense to determine whether they are science or some sort of some sort of woo. If a draft has to do with anything that happened more than a hundred years ago and has at least one reliable source, I accept it; it has aged out of conflict of interest into history. The ones that I have a hard time on are the small companies and the musicians. I usually get lazy and leave a note in them that I am leaving them for another reviewer. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker) I see very very few Chem articles at AfC but we could sure use help on the 3500 page backlog from experienced editors. Legacypac (talk) 00:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)


How do I put them in — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieryflames (talkcontribs) 16:58, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Fieryflames: See WP:REFB. Regards, GABgab 17:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
User:FieryFlames - The draft at present is about two subjects, Big Brother 19 and Josh Martinez. It will not be approved in its present form, as one article about two subjects, either without or with references. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for your feedback on my Article. This is 'Oita Natalie' I am an alumnus of Fort Street. I am also teaching translation at a university here in Sydney. I was trying to test out posting a translation of that article in Japanese (not Chinese, by the way). My internet has been very slow so it's been hard to try again from the Japanese version, but I have just made an attempt. If that page is approved, I will add a translation link.

Oita Natalie (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Oita Natalie - We already have an article on Fort Street Public School. We do not need a Japanese-language version in the English Wikipedia, and we do not need a new English-language version in the English Wikipedia. If the article needs improvement, you are welcome to edit it. The draft page that you submitted will not be approved either in Japanese or in English. If you have any more questions, you may ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:54, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Robert, I'm not trying to post a Japanese language version into the English Wikipedia. I am trying to put it in the Japanese one. I've followed the same procedure but there doesn't seem to be an option to submit it for review. Do you know what the process is for the non-English versions? My Japanese student wasn't able to find it either.

Oita Natalie (talk) 04:07, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Oita Natalie - I don't know anything about the Japanese Wikipedia, but I suggest that you ask someone at the Teahouse or the Help Desk to ask you whether they can provide you with help either posting the article or asking for help in Japanese. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Responding to your comment (ref: Boa Morte): "Does this group satisfy any of the musical notability criteria, or will it have to be evaluated based on general notability?"[edit]

Hi Robert,

This group satisfies the music notability criteria as follows: 1. The group has had their work reviewed by the following publications: Q Magazine, Mojo Magazine, Uncut Magazine, The Irish Times, The Irish Independent, The Metro-Herald, Hot Press Magazine, 4. Has toured the UK and Ireland on separate occasions, receiving coverage from several UK regional newspapers and radio stations, and national music publication Hit Press. Toured Ireland on their own and in support of noted Scottish band Teenage Fanclub. Toured the UK with other bands on their record label (Shoeshine Records) 5. Initially signed to US Indie label Moodfood Records, who went bankrupt. Then released debut album on Scottish indie label Shoeshine Records. This label is a long-standing label with a roster of bands and is owned by Teenage Fanclub member Francis MacDonald. Released second album on their own label. 9. Their debut album was placed at number 204 in the "250 Greatest Irish Albums of all Time" by a panel of national music journalists, published in Hot Press magazine, ahead of albums by U2, Van Morrison, Enya and other internationally-recognised Irish groups 11. Has not been placed on rotation, but their work has been played by the following broadcasters nationally: BBC (John Peel show, several occasions), RTE (several occasions), Today FM (Ireland - several occasions).

Thanks for your time reviewing my draft! Bill Billfromcork (talk) 10:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Billfromcork In the future, put any explanation of why a draft should be accepted on the draft's own talk page rather than a reviewer's talk page. That information needs to be kept with the draft or article. I have copied your statement to the draft talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:21, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Responding to your comment on "Chinese translation of Australian Defence Force Academy(ADFA)"[edit]

Hi Robert, This is James Li. Thank you for the review of my Chinese translation of Australian Defence Force Academy(ADFA). The reason why it was written in Chinese is because it was a translation of the original page. Links are as follows: I was interested in this original article and noticed that there was no Chinese version. Therefore, I translated it into Chinese. I am just wondering is there any chance that my Chinese translation can be attached to the original page as a Chinese version? And what should I do to make it happen if it is ok. Thanks for your time reviewing my draft! Regards, James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameswenlongli (talkcontribs) 09:02, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Jameswenlongli - This is the English Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia does not have foreign-language versions of articles. Have you looked at the Chinese Wikipedia? Does it have an article on the Australian Defence Force Academy, in Chinese? If not, I would assume that you can submit your version to the Chinese Wikipedia, although I am not familiar with the Chinese Wikipedia or its policies and guidelines (and cannot read Chinese). You may ask any more questions about translations of articles at the Teahouse, but the English Wikipedia does not have articles in languages other than English (and I assume that the Chinese Wikipedia does not have articles in languages other than Chinese). Robert McClenon (talk) 09:39, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Sport in Australia[edit]

User:Siento - I have replied to you, but my answer is more than halfway up in my talk page because your question was more than halfway up in my talk page. The next step is to list the RFC as ready for closure (where closure really means a formal assessment of consensus). This is done at WP:AN, the administrators' noticeboard. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

About Pragyesh Singh Draft[edit]

Dear Sir, you recently commented on the draft of Pragyesh Singh. Thanks for your comment on the draft of Pragyesh Singh. As you commented This draft still has a combination of unreliable and reliable sources. Can you please help me to remove unreliable sources as i am not very familiar with Wikipedia to understand reliable and unreliable resources. RonsI (talk) 06:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Did you read the comment of the previous reviewer, who said that IMDB is not a reliable source? Have you read the policy on reliable sources? If you are not familiar with Wikipedia, perhaps you should ask questions at the Teahouse rather than resubmitting your draft when it still uses IMDB as a reliable source. Ask any further questions at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018[edit]

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!


As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal
Project updates
  • ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
  • There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.
New scripts

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Mortal wound[edit]

Hello! I've recently completed a page Mortal wound that you recommended for speedy deletion. Looking at your recommendations, I've made some changes to the reference list, and am in the process of altering the page according to your concerns. I've removed the template for now, but was wondering whether there were any specific concerns of yours that I might address. Thanks so much! --MeerkatShadow (talk) 04:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Robert, Thank you for your reply and suggestions. I tried clicking on both the links but they both said I didn't have the required permission and need to be an established user. I was logged din when I tried so I can only assume that it's because I haven't had my articles published yet. Oita Natalie (talk) 10:13, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 16:05:09, 23 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Navysaylorgirl[edit]

Regarding the Matthew Proman page that you reviewed and rejected, I have a question. While I understand your comment about needing additional citations, I don't understand the issue with the references I did submit. The references I used were previously vetted by another Wiki editor. They were already reviewed and considered to have met both the reliable and independent criteria. So how are they not acceptable now? Thank you for explaining this, as I want to make the article suitable.

Navysaylorgirl (talk) 16:05, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Navysaylorgirl (talk) 16:05, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Navysaylorgirl - My own opinion is that he is entitled to a mention in Wikipedia, and that he is mentioned in the article on the organization that he founded. If you think that I should have accepted your draft, you may ask other editors at the Teahouse for their opinions.
Do you have any affiliation or connection with Matthew Proman? If so, please see the conflict of interest policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

There is no COI. I have not been paid to write this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navysaylorgirl (talkcontribs) 21:09, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Arjunanand1/sandbox has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Arjunanand1/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:04, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Allow me to create Nissan Terrano article like is on German Wikipedia:[edit]

Please allow me to create this page about Nissan Terrano mid-size SUV as like I told before, this SUV isn't related to Nissan Pathfinder as it has different engines and different designers were involved to make the vehicle customizations which aren't the same as Nissan Pathfinder. Nissan Terrano has three generations for now, currently the third generation only available in Asia for sale and I have made a main article category for the second generation of Nissan Terrano (Nissan Terrano II)

I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. The draft appears to be Draft:Nissan Terrano. I will address your request within 48 hours. Please sign your posts to talk pages. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Rejs12345 - Please see my comments on the draft. Please correct the reference error and remove the comment at the bottom of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Rejs12345 - I have created a special article about the first generation Nissan Terrano: which I would like from other Wikipedia users to give information and contribute to improve and expand it. Generally, the Nissan Terrano article should be available as an independent article because now it has two main articles, Nissan Terrano I (or Nissan Terrano WD21) and Nissan Terrano II
User:Rejs12345 - Please sign your posts at the end, not at the beginning. A username at the beginning of a post is not a signature but a salutation. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:D. H. Lawrence[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:D. H. Lawrence. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

On the article about Li Pei[edit]

Dear Robert, thank you for your guidance on the page Draft:Li Pei . I've added more content and references in Chinese into the article. Hope this will justify the notability of the subject. I would also draw your attention on the fact that this article exists in Chinese language as well at李佩 , but am not sure how to make the link between the two languages. Could you please help? Thanks again. Hongkongneteyes--Hongkongneteyes (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

How can I use the reject feature in AFCH?[edit]

Flooded with them hundreds 08:44, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Flooded with them hundreds - If you don't have the option of Reject when selecting the red Reject/Decline button, or if the red button is only a Decline button, then the version of the AFCH tool that you have installed doesn't handle Reject. How to install a more current version of the AFCH script is a question for another reviewer. Try the AFCH Help Desk. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 02:04:11, 30 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Before the Bang[edit]

Before the Bang (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Lin Shu-ling[edit]

Hello Robert, This is Before the Bang (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC) writing regarding the page Lin Shu-ling. The page has been tagged regarding neutrality and notability. I feel these issues have now been addressed and ask if you could please check the page again. Regarding notability, I have included over ten different media references referring to Lin Shu-ling as a leading activist in the Taitung Miramar Resort protest. This includes several published articles where Lin is either the sole subject of the article, or a main subject. I have also referenced interviews or observations from two different academic thesis, including Timothy Chen's Imaginative Geographies and State Reliance, 2015, and Glenn Smith 2015: Indigenous activists win legal battles.

Additionally, every other statement in the article has been referenced. If for some reason, this is still not enough according to Wikipedia regulations, or if there are any other problems with any of the sources, could you please let me know and i will immediately address it.

However, if, upon review, you feel that the article has now been adequately sourced and complies to neutrality standards, could you please remove the tags. Thanks for your attention to this matter, Before the Bang (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Before the Bang - This appears to be a case of a person who is notable for one event. Please ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Muzammil Desai[edit]

Help me to please make the page name Muzammil Desai Live. Help me to try with a new article with same content.

User:Sakshinavjeevan - Please sign your posts. Please provide a link to the article in question. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:42, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muzammil Desai. The actor is not notable. It is not useful to try to create an article about a person who is not notable. You may receive further advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Multiple copies[edit]

Good day

I'm sorry it was not done on purpose, I was not aware that the same name exist on Wikipedia and therefore I needed to change the name. My apologies

Barry Ne (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Editing News #2—2018[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this multilingual newsletterSubscription list on the English Wikipedia


Did you know?

Did you know that you can use the visual editor on a mobile device?

Screenshot showing the location of the pencil icon

Tap on the pencil icon to start editing. The page will probably open in the wikitext editor.

You will see another pencil icon in the toolbar. Tap on that pencil icon to the switch between visual editing and wikitext editing.

Toolbar with menu opened

Remember to publish your changes when you're done.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the Editing Team has wrapped up most of their work on the 2017 wikitext editor and the visual diff tool. The team has begun investigating the needs of editors who use mobile devices. Their work board is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are fixing bugs and improving mobile editing.

Recent changes[edit]

Let's work together[edit]

  • The Editing team wants to improve visual editing on the mobile website. Please read their ideas and tell the team what you think would help editors who use the mobile site.
  • The Community Wishlist Survey begins next week.
  • If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly. We will notify you when the next issue is ready for translation. Thank you!

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:12, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Re: Articles for creation: William Cash (journalist) (November 1)[edit]

Hi, Thank you for your recent review and comments you left.

1. Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: The subject appears to be best known for Spears Magazine, but Spears Magazine doesn't have an article of its own and so would not seem to be notable. Other than that, notability is not inherited from his father or anyone else.

2. Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: This draft appears to have been reference-bombed with non-independent and low-quality sources.

  • Some "low-quality sources" (less authoritative) can be removed in order to reduce the amount of citations used. The rest come from sources such as: The Guardian, The Independent, Financial Times and are there to prove and support the biography. BellaAw (talk) 14:43, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I've applied your comments into draft. Please have a look and let me know your thoughts. BellaAw (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

ACE 2018[edit]

Hi, Robert McClenon. Time flew by and Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2018 is here; if I remember correctly Deb was also a enthusiastic supporter on the idea of you running as well? Hopefully you are up for it this year. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 05:25, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, certainly I am. Deb (talk) 09:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Alex Shih, User:Deb - I think so. More within 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Alex Shih, User:Deb - I will file a statement within a few days. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Do you have any specific suggestions for what I should mention in the statement? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:03, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Maybe a shortened summary of your concession speech for last year's RfA? A lot of these are very relevant for ArbCom. I am definitely a strong support. Alex Shih (talk) 04:35, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
I can't get the thing that accepts the statements to work. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
It works, Robert. Worst case scenario I can set it up for you but then that's probably not the best look. Do let me know if I can help though! Alex Shih (talk) 06:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
"I can't get the thing ... to work." Welcome to my world! Deb (talk) 09:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Alex Shih, User:Deb - At this point, I am half inclined to trout both of you for getting me to go into this. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
In comparison to RfA, for some strange reason this makes so much more sense; I'll glad take my trout in either case. Alex Shih (talk) 06:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
"I can't get the thing ... to work"...surely Arbcom's motto, dat :)

Thanks. This is a first for me (although I've had bigger ones)!

Follow me to join the secret cabal!


Deb (talk) 08:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 08:47:38, 4 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Goraya2005[edit]

Dear Sir, Subject: Creation of page A Group of 87-ag-AGRI@UAF Thank you for your kind review on my article. I want t clear that the Group "A Group of 87-ag-AGRI@UAF" is a social club of the class. If I resubmit the article after changing the name as "Social Club 87-ag-AGRI UAF" (as a page in the same name is also exits on Facebook as Admin and moderator of "A Group of 87-ag-AGRI@UAF"), then will it be qualified to publish at Wikipedia. I also to clear that through this article we will enable to serve the fellows across the world. Please consider this effort as a beginning of the reunion of classmates. Further I do not understand that how the group credentials could not be verified as the record of the group is available on Facebook. I can add URL for reference as "" and and "" which is verifiable. I also see a similar page on Wikipedia which in the name of "Mocha Uson Blog" .

Goraya2005 (talk) 08:47, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Goraya2005 - Is the above post a question about Wikipedia policies, or a statement (that is incorrect) about Wikipedia policies? There are at least two problems with the draft. First, the draft has no references, and so lacks verifiability. Second, the group is not notable. I suggest that you re-read the verifiability policy and the organizational notability again, and that you read the section on significant organizational coverage two more times. I will note that Facebook is not considered a reliable source. ~~
You write that "through this article we will enable to serve the fellows across the world". Wikipedia is not the means to provide a service to a group, such as a group of alumni/alumnae, or to provide any service other than to Wikipedia's readers. Wikipedia is not a web host to assist in sponsoring reunions of classmates, or to provide any other service to groups other than its readers. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Any further comments can be made at the draft talk page, where they will be on record for other reviewers. If you have any further questions, you may ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Goraya2005 - The Facebook group described in your draft is not comparable to Mocha Uson Blog. Mocha Uson Blog has received significant attention in reliable sources, both because of controversies surrounding its founder, Mocha Uson, and because of its advocacy of Rodrigo Duterte. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:01, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of vegetarians[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of vegetarians. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Contains substantive errors. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

ANI Complaint[edit]

You are mistaken, or misinformed. I filed an ANI complaint against the arbitrary and uncivil behavior of Guy Macon yesterday, so your complaint today appears to be retaliation, or harassment. You might go back to the beginning of this to understand that I did NOT edit any article, but merely attempted to send a message to two other editors on their talk pages seeking comments on a proposal for a new project. Jimbo Wales talk page contains a permanent banner inviting such messages. Regardless what you may think about my proposal, Guy Macon was uncivil when he summarily deleted my message without discussion and proceeded to start insulting me. Since then he has followed me around Wikipedia and has posted derogatory comments at every location where I have left a message. That, I believe, constitutes stalking, or what others may call harassment. So, in effect, you are doing the dirty work for a stalker. I respectfully request you take another look at your role in this dispute please. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 19:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Some friendly advice. You will need a heck of a lot stronger evidence to get Admins to listen to a harassment story. That is just the aay it is. Legacypac (talk) 20:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Science Technician[edit]

Thanks for edits on Science Technician - they'll definitely make it better. I'm still learning the ropes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TechnicianJourney (talkcontribs) 06:52, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Kaihan Krippendorff article[edit]

Hello @Robert_McClenon, Thank you for your comments on the article I am working on creating - Kaihan Krippendorff. You asked if I have any financial ties or otherwise to Mr. Krippendorff. I do not. I heard him speak at Columbia Business School at an event and read his books. His contribution to management thinking is noteworthy. I worked to update the language to remove anything that seems promotional - my apologies as my writing style may have come across this way. I am a fairly new wikipedia contributor and believe dr. Krippendorff's work is noteworthy and belongs in the wiki lexicon. I would appreciate the opportunity to continue working on the page until it is fit to add. Would it be possible for you to take a look at the page again (since I have updated it) and let me know what your thoughts are on moving it into the main article space? Sincerely, Slotmachiner (talk) 15:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)Slotmachiner

The draft in question is Draft:Kaihan Krippendorff, and it has been nominated for deletion. At present, the question is whether to delete the draft, not whether to move it into article space. Please do not insult me by asking me to move it to article space while there is a deletion discussion. Any further discussion should be in the deletion discussion. If you do not understand, please ask for advice at the Teahouse rather than asking me to move it to article space. By the way, you did not remove the language that I had criticized. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Robert, Thank you for your feedback. I will work on fixing the issues before resubmitting. Thank you. Slotmachiner (talk) 00:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)Slotmachiner

Publish redirect[edit]

Hi! I've just noticed that you removed the AFC submission template from Draft:Cohen-Tannoudji. I'm kind of confused as I thought that was the way I was supposed to publish it, as I'm yet to be able to create and move articles in the English Wikipedia. Where/how should I ask for that Draft to be moved or for the redirect to be created? --Kakahuete (talk) 11:43, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

User:Kakahuete - AFC review is for article drafts, not for redirects. Your redirect, in draft space, is already pointing correctly at Claude Cohen-Tannoudji. However, now that I understand what you want, which is to have his surname redirect to his full name, I have moved the draft entry. Please check this and see if it is what you wanted. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:27, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, perfect. Thank you very much! --Kakahuete (talk) 15:10, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Peace Barnstar Hires.png The Barnstar of Diplomacy
I really don't think you get enough credit for keeping WP:DRN alive almost single-handedly. Thank you for your infinite patience and dedication to dispute resolution. Best, ProgrammingGeek talktome 20:09, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)