User talk:Robert McClenon

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at User talk:Tinkaer1991&#32; on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Climate change DRN
So, the settings used by the archival bot on the DRN page are clearly overzealous, as it had somehow already archived our ongoing DRN! Can you please do something about that? InformationToKnowledge (talk) 09:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * User:InformationToKnowledge - I have unarchived it back to DRN. I will change the bot parameter from 48 hours to 72 hours, but the real problem is that the Do Not Archive Until date is being initialized to two weeks after start rather than three weeks after start, and I have requested technical advice on what to do about that.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Notably, the bot archive itself remains unchanged - does that mean you would be effectively forced to manually paste the discussion into the same archive once it actually is closed, to prevent the bot from archiving it twice? That, and I hope @Bogazicili saw that the discussion is back in its rightful place, so that we can move on to the next step ASAP. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 08:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll add my revised suggestion next week. Bogazicili (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I did not remove the case from the archive, so when the case is finished, it will be archived again by the bot. I am not concerned about the double archival.  This has occasionally happened before.  It should happen less often now that I have changed one of the bot parameters, so that it only archives after 72 hours of silence.  There is still something of a mystery about the Do Not Archive Until date.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello. For the RfC, there doesn't seem to be any new votes in awhile. Should we publicize it in several wiki projects, such as WikiProject Climate change? Bogazicili (talk) 16:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * and, I restarted the RFC since it wasn't properly closed. We can let it for a few more weeks I guess. Bogazicili (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's unfortunate that to date, virtually all the comments from outside editors (not already extensively involved with this page) have been on length, and not on any of the finer points. Granted, it was my own choice to switch to the four-paragraph format at the last minute which caused this. Arguably, it's better that the lack of community support for the large section size is revealed now than if we had attempted to expand on it later.
 * Still, I wish there was a way to at least get some input regarding our disagreements over the year 2050 projections out of this RFC. I am tempted to use this "restart" as an excuse to withdraw the four-paragraph wording in favour of something like my penultimate proposal (which would be close to Bogazicili's text outside of that area) but I doubt this would work.
 * Otherwise, would I be allowed to write such a proposal as "Option D" (or C3?) in the Survey, and perhaps attach a note to A informing editors it is being depreciated in favour of D/C3? I would just rather not see the RFC end with only one substantive question addressed. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Hunter Biden&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 11:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Proposed decision in the Venezuelan politics case posted
The proposed decision in the open Venezuelan politics arbitration case has been posted. Comments on the proposed decision may be brought to the attention of the committee at the talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 17:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Whadjuk&#32; on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 08:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Rafida
Hi! First, thanks for your patience with this case. I really appreciate your help. Second, I wonder if your decision to close the dispute can be appealed. I already admitted that my lengthy statement was an honest mistake; please see the addendum to my list statement. I simply missed the last paragraph of your statement that required us to comment only on the RFC. To close the case is perhaps an overreaction, even though you have every right to do so. With the moderated discussion now closed, I fear that Shadowwarrior8 has successfully bullied their way in this issue, removing and falsifying content with impunity. Should I open a new dispute? If not, where would it be possible to find justice in this case? Thank you for your advice. Albertatiran (talk) 06:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Albertatiran - You ask if you can open a new dispute at DRN. I will not prevent you from opening a new case.  I think it is very unlikely that a volunteer will accept it, but you can try.  I will not reopen it.  I have tried and not succeeded.  If a volunteer asked me for advice about whether to take the case, I would advise them not to take it, because both editors are discussing the other editor as much as they are discussing content.  I don't think that trying to restart this discussion at DRN is likely to be useful.  I think that Shadowwarrior8 has said much the same thing, and DRN is voluntary.  So I don't advise asking another volunteer to reopen the case at DRN.
 * You ask where would it be possible to find justice in this case? Wikipedia isn't about finding justice, but about building an encyclopedia.  If you think that the conduct of Shadowwarrior8 is interfering with building the encyclopedia, you can report SW at WP:ANI after reading the boomerang essay.  If you want to involve other editors who might have some knowledge and a different perspective, on the other hand, I would suggest that you ask for other editors at WikiProject Islam.  (Some of them might actually be either Shi'a Muslims or Sunni Muslims.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Climate Change RFC

 * Hello. For the RfC, there doesn't seem to be any new votes in awhile. Should we publicize it in several wiki projects, such as WikiProject Climate change? Bogazicili (talk) 16:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * and, I restarted the RFC since it wasn't properly closed. We can let it for a few more weeks I guess. Bogazicili (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's unfortunate that to date, virtually all the comments from outside editors (not already extensively involved with this page) have been on length, and not on any of the finer points. Granted, it was my own choice to switch to the four-paragraph format at the last minute which caused this. Arguably, it's better that the lack of community support for the large section size is revealed now than if we had attempted to expand on it later.
 * Still, I wish there was a way to at least get some input regarding our disagreements over the year 2050 projections out of this RFC. I am tempted to use this "restart" as an excuse to withdraw the four-paragraph wording in favour of something like my penultimate proposal (which would be close to Bogazicili's text outside of that area) but I doubt this would work.
 * Otherwise, would I be allowed to write such a proposal as "Option D" (or C3?) in the Survey, and perhaps attach a note to A informing editors it is being depreciated in favour of D/C3? I would just rather not see the RFC end with only one substantive question addressed. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Bogazicili - Why did you restart the RFC? What do you mean when you say that it wasn't properly closed?  Do you mean that there wasn't a formal closure?  If so, that is because we didn't request a formal closure.  Why did you restart it?  It was correctly stopped automatically by the bot.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , I restarted the RfC per Requests_for_comment and because there was no Closure requests request. You also didn't say anything about it here Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_245. You also hadn't responded to my question above about publicising it in WikiProject Climate change, so I didn't know you were paying attention. Discussions get archived quickly in Talk:Climate change, so I didn't want the RfC archived before someone can respond from Closure requests. Bogazicili (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh I see you said it will run for a month at the top here and mentioned what to do after the bot deactivates it. Do you want me to request formal closure now? Bogazicili (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Bogazicili - At this point, requesting formal closure would be a good idea. You can do that, or I can do that.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, but I think we could have gotten more responses and a more clear consensus if we had publicized it at WikiProject Climate change. You might see another version of this at DRN in the near future. I'll leave closure up to you unless objects? Thanks for the moderation of this topic by the way. Bogazicili (talk) 21:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Joe Biden&#32; on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Yasuke&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 00:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft review reminder
Hia @Robert McClenon. Noticed you've been reviewing Draft:Shop-Vac and Draft:Tenzing_Norgay_Trainor for three days now, thought I'd ping you to remind you in case you had forgotten (I do sometimes!).  Qcne  (talk)  08:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, User:Qcne - I remembered them at about the same time. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:SpaceX Starship flight tests&#32; on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 16:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

How to proceed
Thank you for your help. How would you recommend I proceed? You said to discuss changes on the talk page but given the earlier response and previous behaviour that is almost certainly not going to achieve anything. Would an RfC be the best option like you mentioned in that case? I've read through the page on RfCs and the only thing I'm unsure about is categories, would the category be 'animals' (which doesn't exist) because it's a breed of dog, or would it be something like 'regional' given it's about origin/nationality (loosely). Traumnovelle (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Traumnovelle - I am a little confused by your question about RFC categories, because I don't see a 'regional' category. If you mean the categories that are specified in the RFC tag, I would suggest using 'soc' and 'hist', but, in my experience, that doesn't make that much difference.  What is more important is to publicize the RFC on a WikiProject, which would be WikiProject Dogs  Do you want assistance with the RFC?  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've edited out the template because I believe it broke formatting and tried to insert the entire Wikiproject Talk page.
 * I didn't mean a specific category but more so given the dispute isn't solely about the dog whether a different category would be appropriate. If you wish to create it yourself I would appreciate it if you do help, but I do believe I am capable of creating with the correct categories now and with a neutral description thanks to your what you've written. Traumnovelle (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I suspect this was just a software glitch, but I got a ping about this talk section. If there's anything that anyone needs from me, please let me know. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Tryptofish - Not a software error, but typist error. I used curly braces when I should have used square brackets. This transcluded the project onto my talk page, and that did weird things until it was fixed.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've created the RfC, I have notified the previous two involved users and Wikiproject Dogs. I also gave my comment below the neutral statement (as a reply), which I believe is what you meant to do. If you could double check that I have followed the procedure correctly that would be helpful thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2024&#32; on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment, and &#32;at Talk:Casualties of the Israel–Hamas war&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 17:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Gigi Hadid&#32; on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Rejection of Vahika draft
I will add more information to the Vahika section based on your comments however it’s separate to the Bahlika wiki which you stated the information could have been merged with as Bahlika referred to Bactria whereas Vahika referred to central Punjab with a total different history and so for that reason I don’t think it should have been rejected. Maniacdude (talk) 11:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Maniacdude - I didn't reject the draft. I declined it.  There is a difference.  A declined draft can be edited and resubmitted.  It was not clear to me as a reviewer how and whether Vahika is the same as or largely overlaps with Bahlika, and so it would not be clear to a reader either.  If they are clearly different, please explain, in the draft, how they are different, so that it will be clear to a future reader, and resubmit.  I didn't understand whether they were the same or overlapped or were different, and I think that a future reader also would not have understood what the differences were.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the constructive criticism, I’ll be sure to add that in and make it clearer Maniacdude (talk) 16:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Maniacdude Please explain your use of alternate accounts. Generally, one does not tag team with one's self on the same article or draft. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Timtrent - They aren't trying to confuse, but they aren't trying to enlighten the other editors either, because they haven't declared what their use of the alternate accounts is. They are User:Zenithxxx on a real computer and User:Maniacdude on a mobile device.  If they are using a mobile app from the mobile device, they should scrap it and use a web browser.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you Robert. Somehow you always get to the root of the issue.  I have left firmly worded questions on each user talk page. 🇺🇦  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes as Robert said. My Zenith account is on my laptop and this account is on my mobile for whenever I’m away from my laptop Maniacdude (talk) 00:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment on draft
Hi @Robert McClenon. I’m responding to a comment you made on Draft:Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches introduced 1995–96. I’m a bit confused. Was the comment supposed to include suggestions on how to improve the draft? Because I don’t see any. Does it just mean it’s still waiting for a review? Thanks. Spectrallights (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Spectrallights - That comment is both for the information of other reviewers and is advice to the submitter to look for any previous advice by the reviewer who draftified it. I am not giving any new advice about improving the draft.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:James Francis Strange
Did you mean to leave this 'under review', Robert? 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Timtrent - No. Thank you.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Timtrent - I've implemented a flag on my machine to keep track of what is under review. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If it is something reviewers as whole might benefit from, (eg a gadget) please let us all know. Otherwise more power to your elbow 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Timtrent - It is about as far from being something that other reviewers could benefit from as you could imagine. It is a flag in an Access database.  The Access database keeps track of all of the pages that I have reviewed, and all of the AFDs I have participated in.  What do you expect a retired database engineer to do?  (It isn't done with my elbow so much as with my wrists and fingers, but that is a detail.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Now that used to be a skill I had, integrating Access databases with web sites, but I have let it fade! I am quite relieved about that 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:39, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Re: RfC
Just a note to say that the way you signed this RfC was highly unusual and out of the ordinary, making it look like you were responding neutrally to a "no" vote left unsigned by another editor. Not sure if you intended it to look that way, but normal, best practice is to sign immediately after your vote, not on a separate line and comment. Viriditas (talk) 03:09, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Viriditas - Signature added on the No vote, and left standing on the comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:2024 United States presidential election&#32; on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 00:30, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

"Sangerpedia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sangerpedia&redirect=no Sangerpedia] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. (Notification being sent to all who participated in the DRV.) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Climate change RFC
I think it's time to request closure for this. , can you confirm? I'd have normally requested closure by now, but I am being more cautious since it was part of the DRN process. Bogazicili (talk) 19:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * If there is no way to get feedback on the questions we care the most about out of it, then we might as well, I guess. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 10:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Greta Gerwig&#32; on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 21:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Denice Zamboanga
Hello, Robert,

I saw you nominated this article for deletion at Articles for deletion/Denice Zamboanga and it was deleted in a unanimous decision. But it has since been recreated by a sockmaster. I just came across it as I was handling one of their sockpuppets. Do you think this article has improved or does it warrant a second visit to AFD? Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Liz - The article does not differ enough from the deleted article to satisfy notability. I have sent it on a second visit to AFD.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

For handing out "low-quality prizes" ...

 * Thank you, User:Ravenswing. I hadn't seen that barnstar, or some of the related barnstars.  Interesting.  A trout is a low-quality prize, but lacks originality.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome!   Ravenswing     09:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Climate Change RfC Closure
and, FYI: I requested closure Bogazicili (talk) 18:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
Robert Schumann is up for FAC, perhaps take a look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

AfD
I saw the Matias Fernandez-Pardo AfD and just wanted to give you a heads up that the combativeness you're dealing with from EpicAdventurer is something I tried to help with awhile back that was summarized here. I still wonder how much a mentor type situation would help out with that editor, but the tone at that AfD doesn't look super promising either. In short, it's not just you, and you're being pretty even-handed with the draftify. KoA (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:KoA - It doesn't really matter whether they are angry at me or angry at everybody, and I agree that it is the latter. I thought of reporting them at WP:ANI for the personal attack and decided it was better to leave it alone.  Anyway, User:GiantSnowman is an admin, and will warn them if he thinks that they need warning.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was in the same boat about thinking about ANI for a time after seeing that, but moreso hoping someone could given them guidance to steer away from the cliff rather than trying to get them blocked. ToBeFree tried to give them some guidance after their last warning, so hopefully between the two of those admins things get turned around. KoA (talk) 03:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:KoA - I think that mentoring is very seldom useful for users who have a problem with anger. They are usually just angry people.  There is only so much that a mentor can do to tell them not to express their anger, and eventually they will be blocked.  There are two risks that I see.  First, when the angry user is taken to WP:ANI again, they may be given one more warning than is appropriate, because they have the mentor.  That is no big deal.  Second, they may burn out the mentor.  That may be a big deal, because the mentor is a valuable editor.  It is less bad to lose the angry user too soon than to lose the mentor.  So I think that we should either ignore angry users, warn them, or block them, but not mentor them.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with a lot of your sentiments about mentoring as you describe it actually. I was thinking in this case more of a one-time event of an editor they didn't view as being in dispute with walking through the behavior issues (and what to do instead) as a sort of last ditch effort. I guess when I say a bit of mentoring is needed, it's moreso someone like an admin going through the steps I just mentioned as a warning that is meant to guide rather than something that would cause them to just lash out. The latter might still happen regardless for a lot of editors in that situation too though. I guess I should have been clear I didn't mean full-blown mentorship as is sometimes used on-wiki. Either way, hopefully disruption is minimized. Not much else to done at this point at least. KoA (talk) 03:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Questionable drafts
Found a series of drafts by a user that are generally are junk, but a few which are unsettling, and would like your opinion on the series as a whole since you have more MFD experience than I and this isn't as clear cut as my other recent delnoms. Do you consider these to be (generally) mundane and not worthy of deletion, or is there enough of a pattern, especially with the pages WANNA F*** ME and SHOULD I KILL MYSELF that they are egregiously contrary to Wikipedia that this user is warn/ban worthy and this whole series is offensively deletable? U5 will not apply (user has edited in mainspace), so I was thinking G3s on most, and G10s on the offensive/problematic ones, but want a second opinion given the uncomfortable nature of these. Thanks for your thoughts, Zinnober9 (talk) 22:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Zinnober9 - I will comment more in a little while, but that user needs to be indeffed. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Zinnober9 - Thank you. I have reported the user at WP:ANI.  They haven't edited in two weeks, but I think that when they try to edit, they should be expected to explain, in their unblock request, what they were trying to do.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User is now blocked (with talk turned off) and the full set of drafts deleted. Thank you for your replies and taking this to ANI while I was eating dinner. I appreciate it! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, User:Zinnober9. I took it to WP:ANI while my dinner was cooking.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Grrr (2024 film)
Hello, Could you have a look at the Afd or the page and see if you don't wish to change your !vote, so that the page can be speedy-kept? Yours is currently the only !vote that's not a Keep and the nomination has been withdrawn. !Thank you. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  11:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ukrainian language/Names/Rsk6400


Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Names/Rsk6400".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Question about your comment.
How can I add a tag for a redirect to be deleted? Newtatoryd222 (talk) 13:08, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Newtatoryd222 - Do you have Twinkle? If so, from the CSD tab, select AFC move.  Then wait for an admin to delete the redirect.  If not, either get Twinkle, or put db-afc-move at the bottom of the redirect.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Did you mean Twinkl or Twinkle? Newtatoryd222 (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Newtatoryd222 - I was not familiar with Twinkl, which is not related to Wikipedia. I mean the Twinkle gadget.  Reviewers should be advised to install the Twinkle gadget.  If you don't have Twinkle, add db-afc-move to the bottom of the redirect, and then install Twinkle.  If you have Twinkle, use the CSD tab.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

DTParker1000
The discussion at AN/I seems to have been prematurely archived (to the second most recent archive) after being caught up in a preceding section missing its Archive bottom template. It might not be the only section, but I'm on mobile atm so its been tricky working out this much and I'm not going to attempt to fix it. Please could you take a look. Thanks Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 05:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, User:Awkward42, User:Thryduulf, the thread has been archived. Whether it was premature depends on how you define premature archiving.  The bot was working correctly, because there was no activity in that thread for 72 hours.  The archival wasn't early; the closure was late.  There were six editors supporting the topic-ban and the proposer, for seven supports and no opposition.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look, it really wasn't clear on mobile. Thryduulf (talk) 21:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Please do not prefix draft-protected category links with colon
Hi Robert. Thanks for your reviews, contributions, project comments, and everything else you do. One thing: few users who create drafts bother to nest their categories inside a Draft categories template, but it's wonderful when they do, and I wish everyone did. This guarantees that categories are handled properly both on the Draft page (that is, displayed, but not categorized), and, crucially, also in mainspace whenever the Draft is released there, with no update required. This is true even if they forget to remove the Draft categories template, which is the whole point of using it: it handles categories differently, but correctly, in each namespace.

When you precede draft-protected categories with a colon, as you did in this edit at Draft:French Pavilion of Versailles, it defeats the whole purpose of having the Draft categories template, and means that when someone releases the page to mainspace, the categories will still be links, not categories, requiring someone to edit the article again to enable the categories (if they remember that they're disabled). The whole beauty of Draft categories is that it works in both, and you don't have to remember anything. I hope I can persuade you to add the Draft categories template to Drafts that don't have them, if you happen to be reviewing an article and head down to the footers of the Draft to check them out. Once again, thanks for all you do. Mathglot (talk) 07:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Mathglot - I would like your permission to copy this to the Articles for Creation talk page. At this time I am asking User:Novem Linguae if she  he will take a look.  I almost never edit categories.  I know that I know little about categories.  The edit in question was a case where I pressed a button to invoke the AFCH script, and the rest of the editing was done by the script.  I think that this is an issue with the script.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, Robert; I suspected it may be something like that, because after I wrote you, I noticed similar edits to categories in other drafts up for Afc review. (I am not a habitué there, but am starting to learn a bit.) There is another angle to this, which is that there is a bot (DannyS712 bot 3) that adds colons to disable category links in drafts; that is being looked at right now with a view to a possible change to bot operation to use Draft categories instead—see this discussion. I have no idea if the bot and Afc are linked in any way, or if that is just coincidental and therefore o/t to the Afc aspect of this. You are of course welcome to copy any portion of this discussion or just take the central idea and rework it at Afc in your own way; I know I can be wordy sometimes, and I'm not particularly knowledgeable about Afc, so you may be able to distill the essential idea in a way that is clearer for folks there. Any way you want to do it, is fine with me. Mathglot (talk) 19:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Just reread the bot conversation, and it looks like the two are related somehow through the AFCH helper script, although I don't know how. Mathglot (talk) 21:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, User:Mathglot, that is what I was saying. The category edits were made by the AFCH helper script when I pushed a button.  I was inserting a comment into a draft.  The comment included a template that was expanded by a bot, but that is a detail.  It appears that the script also edited the categories.  I was aware that the helper script sometimes did various sorts of cleanup.  As I said, I very seldom edit categories.  Because I know that I know little of categories, when I accept a draft, I normally tag it as Improve categories so that gnomes will edit the categories.  I don't mess with categories, so I knew that it was the helper script.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You did say that, and I must've glossed right over it as it didn't ring a bell until I reread the bot discussion, so it sounds like you nailed it at the outset. Not sure where we go from here, but likely the outcome of that conversation will play a role, and if the bot is updated per the request, it sounds like the problem will go away on the Afc side, iiuc. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I have pinged you, User:Mathglot, at the AFC talk page. Some of them know more about how the script works than I do.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Psst, Novem Linguae has his preferred pronouns set and they are he/him. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Pro tip: if unsure, you can use any of the they-series of templates, like ;; ; ;; and so on. Mathglot (talk) 08:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh this is amazing. Thank you @Mathglot for sharing that. (Sorry for the clutter @Robert McClenon!) Star   Mississippi  17:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Please
Next time you think it important to be clever, could you please not perpetuate stereotypes of blended families? Floquenbeam (talk) 18:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Floquenbeam - Point made. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Beuys (disambiguation) (July 14)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TechnoSquirrel69 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Beuys (disambiguation) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:Beuys_(disambiguation) Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TechnoSquirrel69&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Beuys_(disambiguation) reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh ) 05:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Help with submitting a dispute resolution request
I need help with submitting a dispute resolution request. This is what I want to post in the request:-
 * is removing text from the Abdullah Azzam article. See this, this and this edit. He is just removing text because he doesn't like it! Some dispute resolution is needed here. He is even defending the removals here. He has even reverted sourced content with this edit. Then, when I propose what can be added here with sources, he doesn't bother to respond!-Ganeemath (talk) 17:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * @Ganeemath, you have pinged me more than ten times in many places including WP:3O and WP:DR about the same thing. Please keep it to a single discussion thread. IntGrah (talk) 17:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ￼I am sorry about that. I will wait for Robert to start the dispute resolution process now and not ping you again.-Ganeemath (talk) 17:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Ganeemath, User:IntGrah - Either of you can use the template at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard to start the dispute. If you try to use it and have difficulty, then please let me know to start the dispute myself.  However, the parties to the dispute normally file the dispute, after which point I can begin mediation.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Ricardians
Yes, that's right - people who insist that the half-Welsh, half-French Henry VII must have murdered the Princes in the Tower because he wasn't a true-blooded Englishman like Richard III. Some still complain about him being represented as a hunchback, even though the archaeologists recognised his bones by the very feature of a hunched back. Deb (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Deb - Thank you. Every country has its own historical villains, some of whom have been recognized longer than others.  That is interesting about the archaeologists.  I assume that you are referring to the recent discovery of his bones, which were then reburied with state honors, because a villain king is still a king.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. I wouldn't dream of suggesting he wasn't a king. Deb (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Deb - And Henry VII of England had a great fondness for gold and silver. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes - he left England in a great position financially, but then his son went and spent it all and had to ransack the monasteries for more! Deb (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Question about dispute resolution protocol
G'day, I would like to know about the DR protocol sequence. We have long term disput with lots of discussions in TP so I prepared DRN request upon agreement to come here, but we never formally went through any methods that precede DRN - we didn't request for third opinion, and we didn't request for comment. My question is, can we just skip procedures that precede the DRN, is that even OK, and if we fail here, can we go back to RfC, etc.? Also, if I post a request today, but am unable to participate from this Monday until next Sunday, is it possible to ask that the discussion be put on hold rather than closed? ౪ Santa ౪ 99°  15:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Hey Santasa99. There's no prescribed order for DR, and provided there's been thorough local discussion, no DRN volunteer would decline a case due to a lack of 3O or RfC. The RfC option will definitely still be available after a DRN case, and often the result of DRN is a well-crafted RfC. I would not recommend filing a case if you're not available to follow up for many days. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm moving, and my cable informed me just now to come on this Monday to cancel cable and Internet from the old address on this Monday and apply for connection at the new address. It usually takes 3-4 days, but to be on the safe side I would say all will be finished on Monday, July 29. If it's too long, I'll ask the other participants that we postpone, hopefully they won't mind. Anyhow, thank you very much, I really appreciate it. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  16:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:Santasa99 - The prerequisite for DRN is extensive article talk page discussion. The ability to take part in DRN discussions at least every 48 hours is also required.  If you will be off-grid for several days, I agree with User:Firefangledfeathers that you should wait to file the case until you have reliable connectivity again.  Far from preceding DRN, an RFC (as Firefangledfeathers says) may follow DRN, and I may decline DRN if there has been a recent RFC and it has established rough consensus.  DRN should not be used to override or change the result of an RFC.  (I will conduct DRN if there was an unsuccessful RFC, but not if the only problem was that someone didn't like the result.)  So I will be ready for a case to be filed in a few days or a week (but I am usually ready for a case to be filed).  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks Robert, I appreciate. I will ask the guys that we postpone for a week. We had extensive TP discussion, but we didn't have RfC or asked for 3O, I believe we are good to go with DRN next week. Thanks again and hopefully see you soon. ౪ Santa ౪  99°  19:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)