User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 19

Pillar Project Draft

Thank you Robert McClenon for the review. I will be working on revising the draft. Thank you allowing wider participation in the construction of the page. Feel free to comment on the talk page. Thank you again. Anic xx (talk) 04:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thomas Rhett

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thomas Rhett. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom

Another year is drawing to a close and Arbcom elections are around the corner. It would seem to be right down your alley and I hope you'll consider running. best, —tim /// Carrite (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Carrite - Hmmm. Are you suggesting that I run for ArbCom? It is worth considering. Interestingly, it only requires a plurality, as opposed to a vaguely defined consensus. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm actually surprised you haven't run sooner. best, —tim /// Carrite (talk) 20:44, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Robert, I know my credibility is no longer existent, but I'd like to second Carrite that you take a shot at running for ArbCom. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 09:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Carrite, User:Alex Shih - It looks as though you didn't tell me what the dates were and I missed the date. Hmmm. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry Robert, I sent the previous message during the self nomination period, so I guess it completely skipped my mind. Alex Shih (talk) 01:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

• Might wanna run for Administrator first. (I actually didn't realize that you weren't one...) Carrite (talk) 02:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I also thought he was one. Saw an early RfA failure, muttered a few encouragements, and was seriously disturbed by the opposition in the recent RfA2. Robert wrote an intelligent response somewhere. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia "experiments"

Hi Robert. A link from WP:COIN lead me to the discussion about this incredible incident at ANI, in which you were involved. I am horrified that unsuspecting editors are used as guinea pigs in others' experiments on human behaviour. Sadly, this is not the first time this has happened... see User talk:Dr.XXXX and User talk:Raineym13. I'm sure there are others.

I fully support a new amendment to WP:NOT along the lines of "Wikipedia is not a laboratory". If you know a way to initiate discussion and future action on such a policy change, I would be willing to help however I can. Enough is enough! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:27, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Drm310 - I will initiate discussion at Village pump before taking it to What Wikipedia is not. Yes. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, scribble up a rough draft in a sandbox or something and let us know, so the we can help dot all the i's and cross all the t's ready for submission to have it added to What WP is not. Going by the amount of verbiage and differing views brought up, the WP community needs a focal point in order to improve this part of WP policy. Aspro (talk) 10:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm down to try to work together a draft if you need a battle buddy. Just lemme know. GMG^talk 11:22, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo, User:Drm310 - The first draft is at User:Robert McClenon/NOTLAB. Comment on the talk page or edit it. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Volunteer Roll Call

This volunteer roll call is sent to you because you have listed yourself as a volunteer at dispute resolution noticeboard. If you are still interested in assisting at DRN and are willing to do so by either handling at least one case per month, or by helping at administrative and coordination tasks on monthly (at least) basis, please add your username here. Volunteers who do not add their username on the roll call list will be removed from the volunteers list after November 15, 2017 unless it is chosen to have them retained for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. In case you are removed from the volunteers list, you may re-add your username at any time. However please do so only if you can and are willing to participate as described above.
Either ways, I would like to thank you for your participation and assistance at DRN so far, and wish that you will continue contributing to the encyclopedia and assisting when available.
The DRN coordinator, Kostas20142 (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Kostas20142 - I am actively taking part in DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:38, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I know you are! Every volunteer received this message as part of a roll call. And to be honest I would not ever remove you from the list.--Kostas20142 (talk) 15:52, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Medo-Babylonian war against Assyrian Empire

Hi Robert and thanks for your message noticing me that the above article i created has been nominated for speedy deletion because this article is allegedly under section section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion. I would like to contest this nomination and followed the link you kindly posted on my page, but i have not found the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". Could you please guide me to do this ?

Thanks. Wikaviani (talk) 15:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Wikaviani - Your message is several weeks past due, but the issue has been taken care of. You created an empty placeholder. Please do not create empty placeholders. They do not serve any real purpose. I see many of them, and many of them are never filled in. I tagged it for speedy deletion as A3. You then added text to the article, all about three weeks ago. The speedy deletion was then declined by an administrator and the tag, which includes the button, were removed. The article is there, and has not been deleted. I suggest that you ask for advice as a new editor at the Teahouse; however, your effort at creating an article succeeded. I suggest that you edit Assyria and Neo-Assyrian Empire to provide links from these articles to your article on the war that ended the empire. Again, please do not create empty articles. If you want to build articles piece-by-piece, you may do so in draft space or user space; if you need advice on how to do that, just ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Also, if the article on Assyria is blanked again, it is more vandalism, and restoring the article, which is being vandalized, will be appreciated. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your explanations.

I apologize for the inconvenience I caused by my creation of an empty placeholder.

When I'll have a little time, i'll try to follow your advices and edit the above articles.

Wikaviani (talk) 17:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

ANI Seraphim System

Replying to question to question diff with question by Robert McClenon in closed ANI on Rfc by @Seraphim System:. I think a TBAN for Turkey related and ARBPIA is in order for multiple NPA against several editors (in the ANI itself!), attempted outing, and disruptive editing / refusing to drop the stick. Threats of retirement are not always carried out.Icewhiz (talk) 04:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Icewhiz - If you want to propose this, do it at WP:AN. I agree that threats of retirement by combative editors are usually really threats to disappear for a period of time and come back. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I think you mean ANI, but I will drop the stick for now (I dropped a line here due to the direct question right before closure of that really long winded thread). Thanks.Icewhiz (talk) 10:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Icewhiz - I meant WP:AN, which is used for, among other things, sanction discussions that are not in response to a particular incident. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

New DRN Volunteer

Do you find this new volunteer's (Abir Babu) participation in the process to seem provocative and not aimed at dispute resolution? Especially this edit. The user just registered yesterday and seems to have some vested interest in the topic. Thoughts? Nihlus 00:16, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Nihlus - Yes. We agree. You deleted the inappropriate volunteer note, and I changed the status of the editor to a participant. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Nihlus - It is even worse than it seems. That editor is asking a lot of questions, some of them stupid, some of them about how to right great wrongs, and has cleaned their talk page of admonitions. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, add onto that the already renaming and it just comes off as weird. I have a few admins watching, so I'm sure they will take action if they see something. Nihlus 22:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Nihlus - Yes. Some of the editors whom he dumped the list of stupid questions on are admins. He also seems to have a conspiratorial view about how particular admins have ownership of particular articles, and so he wants to know how to find out which admins own which articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Birth date and age

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Birth date and age. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Asking assistance for Wiki editing

Long list of questions that were asked in multiple places.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi, there, sorry about the DRN case. I though I could fix up the issue by giving a quick ruling. Usually, I don't like much waiting and time wasting. I thought I could give a ruling like a judge. Now it appears as I can't. Anyway, could you assist me with some information? 1. Since the parties are not obligated to comply with the advise of DRN moderator, what's the solution when someone is sure that the other parties are not going to agree with him anyway and a ruling from a judge is essential. I am sure DRN is not an option in this case. Could "Mediation" be an option? Is any user, even an administrator obligated to comply with the advise of Mediation Committee? If not, then is "Arbitration" an option? Is any user, even an administrator obligated to comply with the advise of Arbitration Committee? 2. What’s the difference between Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and a specialized noticeboard such as “Fringe theory noticeboard”? I know specialized noticeboards are subject specific. But my question is that whether the moderators in “Fringe theory noticeboard” are only administrators or general users as well? If there are general users as well, how can I become a fringe theory noticeboard volunteer? Do I need to list my username anywhere and/or add any template in my user page? 3. When I am in a dispute with a couple of admins in a Wikipedia page, what’s the process of reporting those abusive admins. Let’s say, the admins are reverting any edit that is against their personal views and beliefs. And those admins need to be removed from the page. The Wikipedia manual says as admins can be removed through a dispute resolution process. But it doesn’t explain how. Because DRN moderator or Mediation committee may not be able to remove an administrator. So, if an user is in dispute with administrators, should he directly file a case to Arbitration Committee? 4. How can I add a new section and subsection to a Wiki article and remove an existing section from a Wiki article in visual editor? 5. I found that some contributions are deleted from “History” page of an article. So how to delete a contribution and who can do it? 6. Wiki policy states as I should not copy contents from other websites and should rather write my own contents. But what if the contents are open source contents? Can I directly copy those in Wikipedia? Are online news posts open source, including the images in the news? Can I use these texts and images in Wikipedia without editing? Can I copy and paste statements of medical national and international organizations in Wikipedia without editing? 7. Where to find images for a Wikiedia article if the image is not already available in Wikimedia? Are the images collected from news posts open source? And many sites don't have their images copyrighted. Do those images qualify as open source? When I upload an image, Wikipedia asks for copyright information. I have no idea what information to provide? What info should I provide if the image is in open source? And if the image is owned by me? Wikipedia asks me to contact the copyright holder and ask them for copyright information for the image. But some websites don't have "Contact us" section, some other sites are unresponsive when they are contacted, and even when I contact a website owner, he may not be able to provide me copyright information as the images are not copyrighted. So what information to provide Wikipedia in such a case? How do Wikipedia verify if the images are already copyrighted or not. If I claim to be granted permission for reuse from the copyright holder, how does Wikipedia verify the copyright holder has actually granted me permission for reuse of the copyrighted content? 8. How to add videos to a Wikipedia article? Do I need to provide copyright information for a video available in Youtube? Are there other policies on videos such as policies for graphic videos? 9. When I create a new article, how do I save my private draft for the article. If I click on "Save", the draft will become public and will be accessible for anyone. But I like it to be private. Is it possible. Furthermore, when I edit on an existing article, is there a way I can save my edits as a draft before publishing? It is an essential function. Because some posts may be very long and will take a long time to write. So, my unsaved works can be lost if browser tab is closed or if the texts are accidentally selected and deleted. So saving draft is essential. 10. Where can I save the usernames of my co-writers in my Wikipedia account like a phone book? I can't memorize the usernames of every persons. Thus, I need to have a phone book when the usernames will be saved in the respective categories. 11. How can I be connected with the community to improve each Wikipedia article? I know each important article is being monitored by some administrators. But how do I know which administrators is monitoring a page so that I can discuss with them about improving the article? How to get connected with the community for editing articles? I heard that communication is important here. But how? Everyone is stranger here. Whom to contact among these random people? 12. What’s the use of pending changes reviewing by administrators and “pending change reviewers”? As much as I know anyone can revert another user’s edit. In that case, what will change if an edit is approved by an administrator or a “Pending changes reviewer”? Will other users be unable to revert the edit back then? If not, then what’s the use of pending changes reviewing? Furthermore, how do the users know an edit has been approved by a administrator or a pending changes reviewers? Will the approval appear anywhere such as in the “History” page? 13. What’s the requirement and process for becoming a pending changes reviewer? Can anyone become a pending changes reviewer? Abir Babu (talk) 09:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Reply to Long List of Questions

User:Abir Babu - I find your list of questions, as well as the matter that preceded it, to be troubling in a few ways. First, the original problem is that you, as a very new editor, came to a noticeboard that has its own rules, and went ahead and acted in a way that is contrary to those rulings. In particular, although our guidelines state that we do not act as judges, you decided to act as a judge. The most charitable explanation is that you are being impatient and want to accomplish things quickly. You are a new editor. Learn more about Wikipedia before getting involved in its disputes. In Wikipedia, there is no deadline. Second, you ask how to report abusive administrators. As a very new editor, you should not be concluding immediately that administrators are being abusive. Third, you ask how to become a pending changes reviewer. You aren't ready to become a pending changes reviewer. Fourth, some of your questions, such as about specialized noticeboards, can be answered by reading the guidelines at those noticeboards.

Some of your questions are reasonable questions for a new editor to ask of more experienced editors. I suggest that you ask this list, or a subset of it, at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:28, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, I have been learning Wikipedia now. And I will be researching on some topics. I do like to discuss with people. That's why I sent some questions to multiple users in their talk pages. As not all of them are expected to answer, I sent the questions to multiple users, and then stopped sending the questions. In some days, I will become more experienced. As you can't answer so many questions, can you just answer a few questions that will help me:

1. Where can I save the usernames of my co-writers in my Wikipedia account like a phone book? I can't memorize the usernames of every persons. Thus, I need to have a phone book when the usernames will be saved in the respective categories. User:Abir Babu - If you are planning to make insulting comments about them, don't do it in Wikipedia. You may use an ASCII file on the hard drive of your computer or a pad of paper. You have already seen one approach not to use. If you want to explain what you want, ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

2. How can I be connected with the community to improve each Wikipedia article? I know each important article is being monitored by some administrators. But how do I know which administrators is monitoring a page so that I can discuss with them about improving the article? How to get connected with the community for editing articles? I heard that communication is important here. But how? Everyone is stranger here. Whom to contact among these random people? User:Abir Babu - If you want to discuss improving an article, discuss it on the article talk page. That is what article talk pages are for. If you want to ask other experienced editors whether that is true, ask them at the Teahouse. Please do not continue asking me general questions on my talk page when they can be asked either in a public place such as the Teahouse or the Help Desk or at article talk pages. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

3. What’s the use of pending changes reviewing by administrators and “pending change reviewers”? As much as I know anyone can revert another user’s edit. In that case, what will change if an edit is approved by an administrator or a “Pending changes reviewer”? Will other users be unable to revert the edit back then? If not, then what’s the use of pending changes reviewing? Furthermore, how do the users know an edit has been approved by a administrator or a pending changes reviewers? Will the approval appear anywhere such as in the “History” page? User:Abir Babu - Only a very few pages have pending changes protection. Ask any questions about how pending changes protection works at the Teahouse or the Help Desk. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Abir Babu (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Do not continue asking questions at my talk page. Ask questions about articles at article talk pages, and general questions in a public forum such as the Teahouse or the Help Desk. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Sanity

Hi Robert. Thank you for taking the time to restore some sanity into the Ali Khamenei debacle. Your follow-up is right on the mark and your comments about the content are exemplary. Your content-related work at DRN is invaluable and very much underappreciated. Take care. Dr. K. 20:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Dr.K. - Although the other editor says that they do not have a language problem, it appears to me that their reply is somewhere between en-2 and en-3. Unfortunately, there isn't a noticeboard for discussing paragraphs that are incomprehensible. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Robert. I fully agree with both your comments. Thankfully, although, as you mentioned, there is no noticeboard specialising in handling incomprehensible sections, there are editors like you, who understand and care about content, and can take the time to render a professional opinion. In an imperfect world, your contribution to such cases is very valuable and very much appreciated. Thank you again. Dr. K. 21:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh well...

It was a nice try I guess, but it's starting to look like it might not survive 30 days. GMG^talk 13:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

This SPI may be of interest to you

The user ECarlisle opposed your request for adminship [[1]]. I know HughD (talk · contribs) interacted with you as part of my disputes with him related to the Ford Pinto page. I have filed an SPI [2]]. Just wanted to let you know.Springee (talk) 00:46, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Thomas Ewing French

A tag has been placed on Thomas Ewing French requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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 removed 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. Stefan2 (talk) 12:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Clarification

Hi Robert. I am not quite sure if you were replying to me there. But I left a clarification just in case. I used the ping template, not as a reply to you, but to alert you of my comment. I hope such use of the ping template did not give you the impression I was replying to you. Needless to say, I have already expressed my appreciation and regard for your efforts at DRN, and there is absolutely no reason to change my opinion on that. Thanks. Dr. K. 00:56, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Abir Babu

Sorry, I should have given you heads up in advance. I am sure this account will come back again soon at some point. Cheers, Alex Shih (talk) 04:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Alex Shih - I will add comments to the SPI listing some of the characteristics that are typical of this account, and therefore presumably the master account and the human. (In this case, as is usually but not always the case, I think that there is a human behind the account.) Robert McClenon (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Geeta Arti

Hi Robert McClenon, I have updated the references as per the comment. Skdwived (talk) 02:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

I came here to start yet another article about an author who has published multiple award-winning novels, but since you deleted the last one I put in (who has six different entire series of novels published and has been nominated for a few major awards, although he didn't get any yet), I guess I may as well not bother.

You win! No point in bothering with Wikipedia any more.

MJustice (talk) 10:35, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I have replied at User_talk:PamD#Congratulations.21 to a similar message. PamD 11:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Response to the baseless warning

Just leave my talkpage for ever. I have nothing to with those editors and they should leave me alone. Your warning was removed along with the sockpuppet's legal threats by the admin! I'll edit every article I like! Your warning is completely nonesense when I've already made no edit for plenty of days! --Mhhossein ^talk 06:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

No worries

I took care of that. Dr. K. 19:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Dr.K. I wasn't referring to the bad-faith filing against me that I have never seen. I was referring to the report that I filed against three accounts who warned Mhhossein that criticizing the leader of Iran could be punishable by prison. Those socks have been blocked, but I don't know who the master is. It appears that there may be two different unreasonable or disruptive "sides" with regard to Khamenei, one of which includes Mhhossein, and another one which is pro-government, or that one "side" is deliberately trying to cause confusion (a form of trolling, such as good hand-bad hand). Robert McClenon (talk) 19:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Robert. I saw the SPI you opened, involving the three socks. That was a bizarre incident, that's for sure. In any case, I added the SPI filed against you in the same thread on GW's talkpage, because I think it is part of the ongoing sock attack. Sorry if that caused a misunderstanding. Dr. K. 20:03, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Mhhossin filed an AE against a sockpuppet:[[3]] (not because he was a sockpuppet, on 1RR grounds - which Mhhossin broke himself, but AE found ARBPIA didn't apply). User:Psychonot was determined afterwards to be a sockpuppet of a long running sockmaster - so making guesses here isn't hard.Icewhiz (talk) 20:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if the sock was Psychonot. Psychonot wouldn't have copied Robert's comments, as the socks did. The newest sock also opened an SPI against Robert. I don't think Psychonot would've done that. Dr. K. 20:34, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

But Abir Babu did copy Robert's comments. I think it was Abir Babu/Thiscrund68. Dr. K. 11:58, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Mesquite NAPB team

Please undelete Mesquite NAPB team, the league will announce the full details for the team tomorrow, http://napbasketball.com/press-releases/napb-to-announce-new-team-in-mesquite-nv/ by mistake it was deleted. Syracusestorm (talk) 02:30, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Syracusestorm - You blanked it. Blanking a page that you created is assumed to be a request to delete it. Anyway, see sports notability guidelines as to whether it plays at a fully professional level and is considered notable. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

The league is notable, coaches are ex NBA players the commissioner is Dave Magley and players will be from all over the country. Mesquite will be in the Las Vegas market. Syracusestorm (talk) 02:43, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm unconvinced. Deb (talk) 21:39, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Robert McClenon:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Linguist^unEins^uno 20:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Draft:Shahbaz Ali Malik concern

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:37, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

	Patience
	Dear Robert, Thank you for your direct but patient approach with me during the course of writing my first Wikipedia article, and for ultimately approving my article with an open mind and in good faith. Yours truly, Roget's Minion Roget's Minion (talk) 03:25, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Elie Wiesel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Elie Wiesel. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute about move review tag

Hi Robert

It's not really a big deal, but I think you may have misunderstood what the dispute at WP:DRN#Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 November was really about. It wasn't directly about the MRV itself, but rather that Jax 0677 was apparently unhappy with this edit, which removed the move review notice from the top of the article page in question. This has now spawned a new discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Move_review#Move_Review_tag which seems to be erring towards concluding that we shouldn't use that tag on articles at all, so the action of Jenks24 was in line with that, and also what most people regarded as common sense. Either way, it was in my opinion quite a frivolous matter to raise a DRN issue about, and so you probably weren't wrong to close it anyway. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Award, Grade 4

		Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Award, Grade 4 (Highest)
		Hereby awarded to Robert McClenon for his extraordinary dedication and tireless contribution to DRN as a successful Coordinator from December 2016 to May 2017 and a ever helping volunteer since July 2014. Kostas20142 (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2017 (UTC) and Yashovardhan (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
		This award comes in five grades: Base Grade (no stars, awardable to DRN volunteers or to individuals involved in a dispute) and Grades 1-4 (1-4 stars, respectively, awardable only to DRN volunteers).

Disruptive editing

Your continued attempts to muzzle a discussion you don't like is becoming disruptive at this point. Please do not continue it. Nihlus 20:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Nihlus - Your efforts to continue a discussion that User:TransporterMan thought was not useful were disruptive. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:39, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

No, TM is not the judge and jury for that talk page. Nihlus 00:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello again

Robert –

I don’t know if you remember this incident back in July. [4] Anyway, User BeenAroundAwhile has returned to the Los Angeles pages of Wikipedia.

Can you please look over the Talk pages on Crenshaw, Los Angeles [5], Koreatown, Los Angeles [6], and Westlake, Los Angeles [7].

Perhaps I am seeing things wrong. I would greatly appreciate your input.

Yours, Phatblackmama (talk) 23:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Phatblackmama - The original issue was inserting economic qualifiers into articles, and this resulted in a short block. In looking briefly at this issue, it appears to be somewhat different, having to do with what neighborhood is in what neighborhood. I suggest that you read dispute resolution and follow one of the procedures while I research the matter further. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:37, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Phatblackmama - If the issue is between you and one other editor, I suggest asking for a Third Opinion. Another possibility would be moderated discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon - In the issue of Crenshaw, Los Angeles [8], he has gone against consensus - or what I thopught was consensus - as multiple users have opposed his changes. He just waits a period of time, then comes back, and re-does them. Isn't he supposed to stop? (I feel like this a game of whack-a-mole!)Phatblackmama (talk) 01:07, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon - Is it possible to have an (RfC) regarding what sources are acceptable for determining boundaries of Los Angeles neighborhoods? Phatblackmama (talk) 01:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Phatblackmama - I do see a pattern of continuing disagreement. It isn't clear to me whether there is consensus, but I am not sure who the other editors are. Yes, it is possible to have an RFC, either regarding sources for boundaries in general, or regarding the stated boundaries for any particular neighborhood. An RFC establishes consensus. I have asked for summaries of the issues. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Conduct at Reference Desks arbitration case request archived

Hi Robert McClenon. The Conduct at Reference Desks arbitration case request, submitted 30 October 2017, has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Editing Template:Deputy Chief Ministers in India

This page almost certainly should be either moved into template space or moved over an existing template. I don't think that you meant to put it in article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Editing Template:Deputy Chief Ministers in India This should be Removed since we have an alternate Template Template:Deputy Chief Ministers of Indian states. Vijeth N Bharadwaj 06:04, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Piero Operto

Hi, Piero Operto is actually dead almost 70 years ago, he's not a living person. By the way I'll try to add some reference. Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 18:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I added some references, could you please let me know if these are enough? The fact is that they didn't write much about him in english language, due to his young age when he's dead. Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 18:14, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Charlie Foxtrot66 - I am satisfied, and have removed the tag. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:27, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I'm glad that the issue is solved :-) By the way is my intention to improve the article, adding a picture, some more info and some more reference too, if I'll find them. Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 18:32, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Dispute resolution re: Unite The Right Rally

I really appreciate your input on the case.

Despite yourself and ProgrammingGeek attempting to resolve the issue, the user 'Nihlus' has chosen to close the board and exclusively reprimand me for supposedly not listening to others and not adhering to established consensus, when the entire drift of my filing was that the only apparent consensus in talk consisted of three users either refusing to respond or engaging in what would otherwise be clearly regarded as WP:TE.

I would ask what you would recommend as a next course of action. You mentioned formal mediation, others frequently mention RfC, but given my last attempt, I'm confused as to what form it would have to take to be clear and urgent, but not rejected for lack of precise protocol.

Otherwise I would just as soon give up on the site entirely if procedure like this is to be nakedly uncontroversial. Equilibrium103 (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Equilibrium103 - Under the circumstances, I think that a Request for Comments might be in order. RFC is the only dispute resolution procedure that is not voluntary. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

More later, maybe. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

@Equilibrium103: Perhaps you should have sought further clarification from me since I closed it, rather than bringing it to someone else's talk page. I greatly dislike "1 vs many" disputes appearing on the DRN, as the others are unlikely to change their mind. DRN isn't meant to be used to push your ideas onto the page without consensus; plus, RfC is more appropriate for these situations, as they allow outside voices in rather than in-fighting between the regulars of the page. Nihlus 17:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

However, I see that a previous posting of an RFC had to be deleted by an administrator because it was not worded as a proper neutral RFC. I am willing to help anyone formulate a neutrally worded RFC. Please don't try to propose an RFC in the form of a loaded question. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:32, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

If this will get nowhere, get it nowhere on the dispute resolution noticeboard talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

@Nihlus: That seems rather odd thing to say when you not only made your point overridingly final, but made it clear that you saw absolutely nothing of note whatsoever except for said point. It would seem an odd use of time to reject an accusation of "not listening to others" (when I exhaustively addressed every point brought to bear and was met largely with ad hominem, ad populum and ad baculum.) or continue to bring topically relevant concerns to such a person. But I'm definitely sorry if being the only one out of an extremely small sample size interested in pursuing Wikipedia policies other than WP:CON made you as pessimistic about voluntary mediation as I was. @Robert McClenon: I'm grateful for your help. Would specific reference to inclusion of the sources and text "should the following revision be included?" or a general reference to the paragraph "is the following passage acceptably NPOV?" be more likely to be received? Equilibrium103 (talk) 09:16, 10 November 2017 (UTC) But I'm definitely sorry if being the only one out of an extremely small sample size interested in pursuing Wikipedia policies other than WP:CON made you as pessimistic about voluntary mediation as I was. Comments like this reaffirm the decision I made. It is clear dispute resolution would not have worked; this is why I referred you to WP:RFC. Nihlus 14:26, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Took a break, ready to write that RFC however you see fit. Equilibrium103 (talk) 19:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Kashi Utkarsh

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Ed Brown (boxer) concern

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

BadComedian

I will supplement it, please do not remove it, and help improve it. DENAMAX (talk) 16:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Proposed deletion of John MacFarlane (philosopher) (JGM)

JGM meets the notability criterion for academics due to having a decent number of relatively high impact publications (ten articles with over 100 citations, which is high impact in philosophy, and one book with a reputable publisher). I contest the PROD. — Charles Stewart (talk) 14:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

His OUP book has been extensively and positively reviewed: I take it these reviews, as they occur in reputable journals, count as reliable sources. Thus I have removed the PROD notice. — Charles Stewart (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Chalst - A regular PROD does not have to be contested because it can simply be removed. This was a regular PROD, and you removed it properly, and besides addressed my reason by improving the article to establish his notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:KEN Holdings Berhad concern

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Introducing:Miistermagico

Dear Robert McClenon, Please examine my user page. I hope it meets your approval. If it does please include an entry there. Thank you, Miistermagico Miistermagico (talk) 18:04, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

20:12:04, 16 November 2017 review of submission by A.w.i.au

• A.w.i.au (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Health Ecosystem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! Thanking for reviewing. Would you please give me some feedbacks on how to write the article like a encyclopaedia entry.

User:A.w.i.au - I suggest that you ask for assistance in rewording the article at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:31, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Request on 05:27:50, 17 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Lfirster1

• Lfirster1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Revolutionary Mothering: Love on the Front Lines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello, I see that you declined my submission because the content reads as an advertisement. I understand the concerns and thought to tread lightly when considering the content I added to the page however this is a very contemporary literary source. I used the Wikipedia guidelines and the already existing Wikipedia page for This Bridge Called My Back as inspiration for the content that I included. Also because of this work's recent publication there are not many published scholarly reviews of the text

Lfirster1 (talk) 05:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

17:00:16, 17 November 2017 review of submission by C.E. Graves

• C.E. Graves (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jorge Piqueras (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Robert McClenon,

Thanks very much for the speedy review of my submission and for the comments you made. I have done as you suggested and have posted the revised submission on th existing Jorge Piqueras stub. Please let me know if I have shortened the lists enough. (I have cut them by about half.)

I decided to work first in English, but am also translating the submission into Spanish for posting on the existing Spanish page. Is there anything I should keep in mind before doing so?

Thanks for your help.C.E. Graves (talk) 17:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

User:C.E. Graves - You did a reasonable job of expanding the existing stub into a more nearly complete article. I don't have any advice about translating the article into Spanish for the Spanish Wikipedia, and don't know whether you should ask for help at the Teahouse, but you might do better to find the Help Desk or welcome center for the Spanish Wikipedia and ask them for advice. Any language version of Wikipedia has its own rules and practices that are not necessarily the same as those here in the English Wikipedia. Thank you for expanding a stub into a reasonable article. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:35, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Robert. We worked very hard to put together the information for this page. I worked with the Peruvian art critic Jorge Villacorta, who is writing a book on Jorge Piqueras. Could you let us know what would be needed to make the article complete - that is, of course, the goal. Meanwhile, we will work with the Spanish Wikipedia on posting the Spanish version. Thanks again.C.E. Graves (talk) 09:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

PS Shouldn't this notice be removed now from the top of the page? " This article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in Spanish. (February 2011) Click [show] for important translation instructions. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by C.E. Graves (talk • contribs) 11:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC) C.E. Graves (talk) 15:26, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

DRN Newsletter

News and updates from Dispute resolution noticeboard

•  volunteers: After the roll call that expired last week, the new list of volunteers is consisted of 12 editors. 10 inactive volunteers have been removed
• awards: On 5 November, 2017, Robert McClenon received the Template:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Award, Grade 4 by Kostas20142 and Yashovardhan Dhanania "for his extraordinary dedication and tireless contribution to DRN as a successful Coordinator from December 2016 to May 2017 and a ever helping volunteer since July 2014"
• Preceding coordinator: Nihlus will be the next coordinator, with term from December, 2017 to January, 2018
• Ongoing discussions: A discussion is currently ongoing regarding new volunteer awards system as proposed here. The proposal is still in brainstorming stage, and anyone may comment or add their ideas.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. All Wikipedia editors are welcome to opt in to the list, or to join DRN as a volunteer
Sent on behalf of Kostas20142 by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Please advise on improving a draft. Thanks!

Dear Robert,

Since I am new to creating contents on Wikipedia, I am not very well-versed as other users. Since the decline of the first draft, I have made some revisions on "Health Ecosystem". Would you please kindly give me some feedback on what to improve?

Here is the link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Health_Ecosystem

Thanks!

Yours sincerely, a.w.i.au — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.w.i.au (talk • contribs) 12:12, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

External link at Carleton Knights football

Hi Robert,

I wasn't trying to forum shop, I really don't know what to do and the system for resolving disputes is byzantine. The noticeboard says start here for any disputes. I hope your decision to close is not with prejudice. It was suggested to me to try dispute resolution and Beetstra agreed, so I filed it. There is no formal admin closure at the EL noticeboard, I requested a general admin closure, so I guess I'll have to wait on that. I will try the Village Pump on the overall policy. But for the specific dispute with Beetstra, would WP:3O be an option or are there too many people invovled? Thank you. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 15:06, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Mnnlaxer - There are definitely too many editors for Third Opinion. In general, if you file a dispute at a noticeboard, you are agreeing to have it decided there, and the external links noticeboard is a reasonable place, and it is where you filed it. I don't have a specific suggestion about the lack of closure; if all else fails, a bot will archive the thread. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:26, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 16:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

A very well deserved Barnstar for you!

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For being one of the top 10 reviewers of the last 12 months. Thank you very much for your service! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 21:05, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Deprod No Activity (U.S. TV Series)

Hi

I deprodded as it is a current series airing on CBS (notability and whatnot etc.).

Admittedly it is need of improvement, and if there is none over the next week ...

The info box is accurate and completed, and it really is barely a stub at present - but deletion seems a little much

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 13:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I forgot to say, you may have missed that the whole of the article is was plagiarised from the CBS page.

Literally the WHOLE of the article is just copy paste! This should have been blanked with a plagiarism notice on it, or instantly deleted

I have instead heavily reduced the text and removed ALL plagiarism :¬)

Chaosdruid (talk) 13:10, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

ssangeertha

hi i have two wiki accounts can i delete one account? i create a wiki article for an indian television actor puviarasu but its save as draft page so i create ones more time unfortunately there are five article save in same informations in that there are 3 draft article and 2 article include but i want delete 4 article what can i do for delete? can you help me to delete those article?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by SSangeertha (talk • contribs) 08:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC) 

Your draft article, User:Rocky1981/sandbox

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 19:29, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Tikuko - It wasn't my draft. Oh well. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:The Lawati Project/sandbox

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 23:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Robert McClenon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I have addressed your comment for the following article. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfvalente (talk • contribs) 21:42, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I have addressed your comment for the following article. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfvalente (talk • contribs) 21:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Linda Sarsour

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Linda Sarsour. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Request on 08:52:05, 11 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Human Right and Islam

• Human Right and Islam (talk · contribs)
  • User:Human Right and Islam/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Respected Sir/Madam,

  I want to put Article on my page but the problem is that i am worried if i put my article in the page than your team most of the time delete the page without telling the reason. As i am new user so i can't properly know about that how to maintain the wikipedia page active and make your page citable on google. Important thing the article which i worte have no plagiarism and my article falls in the boundries of Plagiarism standard. so Kindly guide me properly. Thanks  

Human Right and Islam (talk) 08:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The draft is empty. It has no content. Please ask for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Black Jaguar White Tiger Foundation Page

You need to put more information and complete the page of Black Jaguar White Tiger to improve, the page should not be deleted, but need to be improved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Antony (talk • contribs) 17:23, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Marcus Antony - That isn't my page. I may have moved it from a sandbox into draft space. If so, please provide your comments to the actual author, not to me. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:57, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Marcus Antony - In looking at the history of the page, your comment to me is puzzling. You created the page, although it was very incomplete, and I moved it from user space to draft space. It is your job to put more information in it, not mine. You put a page into article space that was a candidate for speedy deletion, and I preserved it from deletion. Please do not nag me to do your work for you. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Shahbaz Ali Malik

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 02:58, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

It isn't my draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Possible vandalism by user Wiki-Leader

Hey, Robert. I am wondering if you could help solve this sort of dispute I am having with Wiki-Leader. From his past edits, it seems obvious that he is only interested in disruptively editing articles about Penang, such as Penang and George Town, by removing sourced information and placing inappropriate templates.

He also insists on his own POV that Johor Bahru is the second largest city/metropolitan area in Malaysia, although his claims are unsupported by any substantive evidence or data, such as the National Census from Malaysia's Department of Statistics. He made several unverified statements to that effect in the Johor Bahru article in the past. We argued in my talk page regarding this as well.

From his most recent edit on Penang on 16 December, it can be inferred that he is only interested in continuing his disruptive editing behaviour towards any Penang-related articles.

Please advise on any further action to be taken. Thank you. Vnonymous (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Vnonymous - I see that he is currently blocked for personal attacks. I suggest that you edit boldly while he is blocked, and, when he comes off block, try to discuss. If he still doesn't discuss, he is likely to get blocked again. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Vnonymous - If you have been editing Wikipedia long enough to know what is vandalism, you have been editing long enough to know what is not vandalism. Do not yell "Vandalism" in order to "win" a dispute. Disruptive editing is not always vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Noted with thanks. Vnonymous (talk) 04:21, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

		The Happy Holiday Barnstar
		How about combining a Barnstar with a Christmas Card? That is why this message is appearing on your talk page. Simultaneously and at the same time, this barnstar is conferred upon you because during this past year you worked and contributed your time to improve the encyclopedia. You also have received far too little recognition for your contributions. In addition, this is a small attempt at spreading holiday cheer. I've appreciated all the things that you have done for me. The Best of Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐  ✉ and Merry Christmas 21:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Black Jaguar White Tiger informations

I was able to put more descriptions and information on the page of Black Jaguar White Tiger, the page is now perfect! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus Antony (talk • contribs) 14:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2018!
	Thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into Wikipedia. God bless! Onel5969 TT me 03:06, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi i would like to know

The reason behind the rejection of my artid of tpd e liquids i can fully underatand that an article exist of that nature but tpd e liquids is a new law which has been in uk from 20 may 2017 this page would be informative to anyone who is not aware of the e cigerrettes laws in uk plwaee reconsider the article and make it possible for publication Zuaibhmalik (talk) 08:57, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Zuaibhmalik - The draft in question is Draft: Tobacco Products Directive, and there is an article Tobacco Products Directive. If you want to add information to an existing article, just edit the article boldly. Articles for Creation is for new articles, not for additions to existing articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Zuaibhmalik - Also, your above message is in very bad textual condition. The problem doesn't seem to have to do with your knowledge of English. Please check whether your keyboard device needs to be replaced. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:19, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

COMMONNAME Question

Can you please help me for a moment I have a question for about this statement (Although official, scientific, birth, original, or trademarked names are often used for article titles, the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred. [Other encyclopedias are among the sources that may be helpful in deciding what titles are in an encyclopedic register, as well as what names are most frequently used].) mostly the section between the [ ]. I would just like to Know if this is the kinda source that can be used based off the section Inbetween the [ ]. [9] JMichael22 (talk) 22:59, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I assume that this has to do with your request to rename Edge (wrestler) to Adam Copeland, his real name. The Move Request is currently being discussed. Is there a problem? I don't see any reason why it can't simply run to completion. Is there a problem? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

I must say that I don't fully understand the intensity of arguments about renaming an article when the other name also exists as a redirect. Why hyperventilate about it when both forms work? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:01, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

No sorry User:Robert McClenon I honestly am coming to you as you are an administrator and I thought you could possibly help shine some light on this statement (Other encyclopedias are among the sources that may be helpful in deciding what titles are in an encyclopedic register, as well as what names are most frequently used) I'm just curious to know if other Wiki's like this are considered legitimate sources Haven Wiki truly this has nothing to do with the Edge (wrestler) page I'm just hoping to learn more and I expressed myself enough on the talk page about the issue. I'm just wanted to fully understand that statement. I apologize if you thought I was coming to you with the renaming issue JMichael22 (talk) 02:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Onward Manufacturing concern

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

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

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

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

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

It isn't my draft, and it has been abandoned for closer to 18 months than 6 months. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. About you-know-who Kleuske (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:37, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate error

Hi, Robert McClenon. I created the page User:Daniele Pugliesi/sandbox as a duplicate of the page Draft:Corrado Rizza for a test I was doing regarding html code, but I forgot to take off the AFC submission template by mystake. Now I deleted my sandbox, but I see that you discussed with User:Raricrod linking my sandbox, so now there is a little of confusion. Please correct or help me to correct the situation. Thank you in advance. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Onward Manufacturing

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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 21:11, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Legacypac - It isn't my draft. Go ahead and feed it to the goat. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:43, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. Darn Twinkle. Anyway, Merry Christmas. Legacypac (talk) 22:40, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Legacypac - Yes. Merry Christmas. It's still Christmas in Maryland, even if it is now 26 December in Bethlehem. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Forward on Talk:Cold War

Season's greetings. All the users for <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Cold_War#Secret_treaties,_#Russian_revolution_section> have now been notified. Apologies for the delay, I didn't realize the exact process and form. Yours, GPRamirez5 (talk) 16:51, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Origins of the Cold War

Hi Robert, thank you for looking over my filing on Dispute Resolution. I won't say I'm not disappointed by the outcome, but I can understand how you'd find the situation daunting given the complexity of the subject matter, and the workload of cases you have to attend to.

You made a comment that you closed my filing because its aspects were "unusual." That may be true, but that's a consequence of the situation being unusual. Over the past 48 hours, more than 20,000 bytes have been removed from an 80,000 byte article with minimum discussion on the Talk page—most of them were done with zero discussion. All of these bytes have been text, not graphics. This text was sourced to dozens of reliable secondary sources. There is genuine question as to how these editors have been able to read through all these sources in 48 hours...and if they have read through them. There have been questions raised about NPOV being upheld in my writing, but if that was the issue, the aggressive editors would be changing wording to make it more balanced. Instead they are suppressing entire subjects and eliminating sources en masse.

You said that you were impressed by the number of editors arrayed against me. That's understandable, but also understand that truth and logic can't merely be decided by the ad populum fallacy—there is also the quality of the argument being presented. In the case of User:Volunteer Marek and some other opponents, there initially was no argument whatsoever (only evasion of the Talk page). Then there was an argument where a university publication relating to the subject was characterized as a "trash" source. Understand, my usage of it was not just dismissed as trash, the source itself was. When anti-intellectualism appears to be guiding a large-scale edit, regardless of how many people are supporting it, this is not a situation that should be ignored. Indeed, the number of people supporting it makes it an even greater cause for concern.

I know we can't turn back time, but please take another look at what is happening on this page, and let me know if you have any guidance as to how it can be addressed.

Yours, GPRamirez5 (talk) 06:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - Are you asking me what you should do next, or are you asking me to justify my closure? I already have justified my closures. I am somewhat troubled by your suggestion that if so many editors disagree with you, you must be right. Consider that they may be right. I did advise you that the next steps might be either a Request for Comments or a Request for Mediation. The latter will require that the other editors agree to mediation. Do you have any more questions? I may expand on this answer,but I might not. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I actually don't understand the source of your disturbance. As I understood it, it isn't the role of Wikipedians to define reality. It's the role of of Reliable Sources. If a hundred WP editors say one thing, and one peer-reviewed academic publication says another, I ought to believe the accredited publication, is that not right?-GPRamirez5 (talk) 02:34, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - No. No. No. If a large number of Wikipedia editors take issue with your one peer-reviewed academic publication, they very likely have their reasons, such as their own reliable sources, or that they and you disagree as to how to interpret the publication. If a large number of Wikipedia editors say one thing, and your source says something else, you ought to consider that one of two situations is the case. First, they may right. Second, although they are wrong, it may not be worth arguing with the community. In any case, either request formal mediation (but that will require that the other editors agree to it), or publish a Request for Comments, or go back to the article talk pages. And please don't file multiple dispute resolution requests in 48 hours; that is bludgeoning the process. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:07, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - Okay. I have tried to caution you. I provided a reasonably worded admonition on your talk page. You removed it. You have the right to remove advice from your talk page, but that doesn't reflect well on your willingness to edit collaboratively. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:04, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

"You have the right to remove advice from your talk page"

Thanks for acknowledging that, Robert. I figured my doing that was in the same spirit as you moving the convo off your Talk page. We each have the prerogative to decide what's on our personal pages. If you remove this message I won't be the least bit offended, but as long as I'm here, I wanted to bring your attention to WP:TAG TEAM which is highly relevant to the Cold war/ Origins of Cold war articles right now. Happy New Year--GPRamirez5 (talk) 03:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - You say that there is tag team editing on the origins of the Cold War. That is a somewhat different argument than you were using a few days ago, when you were saying that with so many editors against you, you must be right. My advice continues to be either to request formal mediation or to use a Request for Comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - You say that you used the same spirit in deleting my caution as I did in moving a conversation off my talk page, but I didn't move a conversation off my talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:05, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

I think we both know that's not true, Robert.

"I came here to advise you (rather than on my Talk page)..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GPRamirez5&diff=817443800&oldid=817186426 GPRamirez5 (talk) 04:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

User:GPRamirez5 - I see. You are equating two different actions. I changed the place where further discussion was conducted, but left your original comments in place, and they are still here. You deleted my reply. That isn't the same. If you are trying to defend your action in deleting my admonition, then I strongly disagree. You have a right to delete my comments, but I do not see the wisdom in that action. Just erasing my advice doesn't accomplish anything for you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:34, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

NOTLAB

Don't know if you followed it, but I launched a new RfC and it was closed on the Dec 23rd as having consensus here, and is now implemented at WP:NOTLAB. Thanks for your work on that! Jytdog (talk) 00:32, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Jytdog - Thanks. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:21, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

20:26:15, 28 December 2017 review of submission by Vinhloc30796

• Vinhloc30796 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Republic (crowdfunding platform) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Robert. Thank you for your last review. I've improved the article since then. I've used WP:NPOV as my guidance. I think that this article is important to the discussion of the SAFE investment vehicle. The discussion is important since there are more studies on the vehicles being released with differing conclusions. I also think that the article is important as a major part of the equity crowdfunding climate, as per Crowdfund Insider and Venture Beats. I do understand that I may be subjected to unconscious bias in writing about my employer. Please do provide more guidance on how to make the article more neutral and thus compliant with Wikipedia's policies. Thank you. Vinhloc30796 (talk) 20:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

User:Vinhloc30796 - I will let you wait for another reviewer. I understand that you know that you may be biased in favor of your employer. I may be biased against paid editors, and will deal with that bias by letting another reviewer review your draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:50, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

New year's greetings

Hello Robert, wishing you here a happy new year! Since I have taken new responsibilities in unfamiliar areas, I hope I can come to you again for advice and guidance sometimes. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2017 (UTC)