User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 10

Happy New Year Robert McClenon!


Happy New Year! Robert McClenon, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Poepkop (talk) 18:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages. .

Hi Robert,

As you advised, I requested the username change, but I am still awaiting for approval. It is Anna Lisa now (once it will be approved) As well I tried to edit the beginning of the text to be more encyclopedic, I hope it will be ok now. Romeomancini (talk) 19:36, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Menachem Mendel Schneerson
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Menachem Mendel Schneerson. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Recent Deletetion. Earlier you said that a autobiography was being wrote about me. The Austin Franklin page is not about me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin Franklin (Football) (talk • contribs) 18:23, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm a friend of his from college. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin Franklin (Football) (talk • contribs) 20:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok what about is is wrong? If I change the username how will the name of the page be searched? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin Franklin (Football) (talk • contribs) 20:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

About merging my article.
Hello, I may have a problem with merging the article into another because I attempted to a couple of times, but some wikipedia people, like Betty Logan had undone my edits because she thought what I was doing on their made it worse and it's unnecessary and some other wikipedia person called (this was while is wasn't logged on to my account) SchroCat said this about my edits: Bond, again[edit] You've been reminded of basic standards (in the thread above). There is an open thread about the awful idiot box; it is strongly recommended you join in that thread, rather than edit war to your own preference. - SchroCat (talk),

and Betty said on the List of James Bond films page:

Addition of the infobox[edit] I have reverted the addition of the infobox for several reasons:

The infobox looks like an incomprehensible mess with all those names and numbers. It is not clear which person worked on which films. This is even the wrong article for this information. This list just covers some statistical stuff. The production background for the series is at James Bond in film, and the management of the production crew data is far more effectively managed at James_Bond_in_film#Core_crew. When you are dealing with 26 films trying to stuff all that information into an infobox is diabolical. This list is Featured rated and major structural alterations should be discussed beforehand. Betty Logan (talk) 07:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree: an awful addition that is utterly confusing. IBs are not compulsory on articles, and are at their best when they help readers or add information. They are at their worst in cases like this - when more questions are raised than answered and when people are left bewildered and confused bu what was being considered. - SchroCat (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I was going to complete it and used another infobox as a template to complete the other one and not only that, they undid all the other info I had put on those pages too.

Can you do anything to let me put my draft info into James Bond filmography without anyone undoing my changes and what should I do? (Mi600740 (talk) 02:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC))


 * It appears that this is a content dispute that has been going on, and that other editors, including User:Betty Logan and User:SchroCat, disagree with your edits. In that case, they should be discussed on the article talk page, Talk: James Bond filmography.  Read the dispute resolution policy.  If discussion on the talk page is unsuccessful, try one of the procedures described in the policy, such as moderated discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard or a Request for Comments.  Creating a second article, known as a POV fork, as a way of providing your own version of an article is strongly discouraged.  You have also been making discussion more difficult by alternately editing with your registered account and editing logged out.  Maybe you need to take advantage of the option to stay logged in.  You have also been cautioned by administrator User:Cyphoidbomb for being combative with other editors.  So read the dispute resolution policy, discuss on the talk page, and, if that doesn't work, use one of the dispute resolution procedures.  The best way to get our changes put into the article without having them reverted is to get agreement from the other editors.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Can you please have a talk with them first and I join you too once I start the agreement? You are the first editor I've come across who has been nicer to me and more enthusiastic with my eagerness for my 007 article and with my ideas (only the times I didn't insult them and since I am a beginner) I thank you for that. I also tried to have an apology with the wikipedia administrator and Betty Logan, but they didn't reply back. Did my article at least have potential? (Mi600740 (talk) 03:16, 1 January 2016 (UTC))


 * I will give neutral advice at Talk: List of James Bond films, but if you are asking me to advocate for you, I am not ready to do that, only to give neutral advice. You say that I am the first editor who has been nice to you.  I will point out that there are at least two ways to have editors not be nice to you.  The first is to not try to be nice to them, and you were cautioned for being combative.  The second is by insisting on your own way with no respect for collaboration.  (A third way is to confuse them by being inconsistent as to logging in.)  Pause and reconsider.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I will stay logged on to this account from now on and also about the teahouse thing, I want to ask you if we can resume talking there on how I can improve my article so it can be accepted and be an actual wikipedia article. I don't want to be mean to those editors anymore and I wish they could be more nicer to me as I was trying to be nice towards them at the end of the dispute. So, can we resume our talks at the teahouse? I'll create a new section there called article advice or do you want to create it? Also, what is the wikipedia definition of a thread? (Mi600740 (talk) 03:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I put a new section into the talk page at teahouse. Please check it out and reply. Thanks :)' (Mi600740 (talk) 04:19, 1 January 2016 (UTC))


 * First, your section is on the Teahouse talk page and not at the Teahouse questions page itself. I won't answer it.  If you ask at the Teahouse questions page, I will answer it.  However, here is my answer.  You want to know how to improve your article to get it accepted.  The problem isn't that you need to improve the article.  You haven't made the case that a separate new article is needed.  Creating a separate new article, as a POV fork, is not a substitute for reaching consensus with the other editors.  I don't intend to advise you on how to improve your draft.  You need to work with the other editors to improve the existing article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Do I have to ask them permission first before I merge my info into the existing Bond article? (Mi600740 (talk) 04:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC))

Another reason why I can't merge because it talks about the film's themselves too like a user (not me) tried to edit in that article (James Bond Filmography):

(cur | prev) 11:57, 16 December 2015‎ Betty Logan (talk | contribs)‎. . (69,588 bytes) (-138)‎. . (Undid revision 695455002 by 122.107.216.220 (talk) This article is not about the quality of the individual films.) (undo | thank)

I also checked the info on the article itself and it made it impossible for me to put my info in. Is there a possible way because I can't seem to come up with one? (Mi600740 (talk) 04:57, 1 January 2016 (UTC))

Hi again, I wrote to Betty Logan on her talk page and give her the link to my draft article to see how she thinks of it. So, to see if she accepts it, agrees with your merging idea, or declines it and should not go on to other articles. (Mi600740 (talk) 05:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC))


 * Discuss at Talk: List of James Bond films. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Protecting unusual behaviour
Are you aware that you are supposedly protecting an internet psychopath unusual behaviour from a user called ? S/he has tagged loads of Wikipedians under some sort of fake contest, stating that you are "analysing" their page and that you will "block" people if they edit their user page. Just a bit disturbing if you ask me.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  02:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Calling another editor a "psychopath" is a really strong accusation unless you have powerful evidence, . Is The Wikipedia Adventure the "contest" you mentioned? If so, it is not fake. I do see something about ICC, but it looks like a new user experimenting with tables instead of something malicious. I do agree that the editor's behavior is a bit strange so far. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Did I use the words "psychopaty", or are did someone else use those words? Do you really want me to report you for personal attacks?  I am aware that yelling "psychopath" is a way to "win" a conduct dispute, but by this point, you are usually past where you can back off and the community can see that you are flaming.  Pause and reconsider.  Pause and reconsider.  Robert McClenon (talk) 07:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Using the term psychopath was probably a bit harsh and I have struck through those words. I just find the content rather unusual especially in linking the names to actual editors accounts in some sort of make-believe ICC contest without even gaining consent from those people. I was only recently made aware when another user contacted me asking why I was taking part and endorsing inappropriate web hosting behaviour. Tarkattack does state on their page that "admins must not cheat or they will be blocked", that Robert analyses the page on a regular basis (not sure if you do or not). Also they show signs of paid editing which I was always told is something that is a big no-no on Wikipedia. All this is rather troubling, especially if their activities are being endorsed by others.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  09:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Wesley Mouse - It is true that User:Tarkattack requested that I analyze their user page. I replied that I didn't understand how I was supposed to analyze it.  As far as blocking is considered, I am not an administrator.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If the user in question is engaged in what appears to be misconduct, you may go to WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , paid editing is strongly opposed by many editors, but it is not forbidden by policy. Our Terms of use require disclosure of paid editing, and requires that paid editors not edit articles for which they are paid directly. However, they can use Articles for Creation to write drafts, suggest changes on article talk pages, edit articles where they lack a conflict of interest, and participate as equals in community discussions. Please keep that in mind. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  07:03, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * - Which part of the terms of use specifically "... requires that paid editors not edit articles for which they are paid directly"? - David Biddulph (talk) 08:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I overstated the limitations of the terms of use,, and instead should have said that paid editors avoiding direct editing of articles they are paid to work on is widely seen as a "best practice". I apologize. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Question About Decline
{unblock|I have been unreasonably blocked. Please help.}}


 * What the editor who posted this comment, who is User:Seabelo Chabo John, probably means is that they think that their submission of an article Draft:Seabelo Chabo John, their autobiography, to AFC was unreasonably declined by me as containing too much peacock language. I will be taking the matter of to the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

list of fastest motorcycles

 * Can you look at this the talk page of the list of fastest motorcyles .Not sure who contact about dennis bratland. I think this guy is doing this because I spoke against him on the dodge tomahawk page and is now doing this. Or at least tell me who to contact sorry to post to you talk page I do not know how to just message someone. 72bikers (talk) 06:17, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not exactly sure what the issue is at Talk:List of fastest production motorcycles. The discussion there is lengthy.  I don't really think that I can help.  If you have a problem with User:Dennis Bratland, there is a discussion at WP:ANI, but I don't think it is likely to accomplish anything.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It has been resolved for now with some help. But thanks for the advice the people I contacted were from that discussion. 72bikers (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Carro Clark Decline
Hi Robert,

Thanks for the feedback on my Carro Clark article. She is a very distant cousin, though I am trying to write a book about her. Does that constitute conflict of interest? If I clear that hurdle, can you clarify third party sources? Do you mean secondary sources? I have quite a number of primary sources such as newspaper and journal articles from the period that attest to her ground-breaking work. Please let me know. Thanks. Kennethclark17 (talk) 14:50, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have questions about my decline of the article, we can ask the advice of other experienced editors at the Teahouse. Wikipedia's concept of primary and secondary sources is not quite the same as is used in some other places, in that newspaper articles are considered secondary sources.  See the reliable source policy.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:04, 4 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Can't believe a bio was started on Carro Morrell Clark just this week. I just stumbled across her in writing about Charles Felton Pidgin this week.--Milowent • hasspoken  23:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Art Funds has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Art Funds. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Art Funds has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Art Funds. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

DRN, Gog/Magog and Koka/Vikoka
Robert, I seem to have screwed up something when I opened the request for dispute resultion - the dispute isn't "clickable" on the table. Perhaps because I tried to include two articles, I don't know, but can you fix it for us? Thanks in advance.PiCo (talk) 00:47, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey Rob, just wanted to let you know that your v-note has been placed in the dispute overview. I'd move it for you, but people have gotten antsy about those kinds of things before and I figure you didn't mean to put it there anyway. If you did, then no worries just ignore this. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 03:50, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and move it.

04:29:59, 5 January 2016 review of submission by Aimankyuichi
Hello Robert, firstly, thank you for leaving a comment to clarify whether the article was about a league, or about a season in a league.

Secondly, there is already an existing article on the league itself here So I wrote the article meant to reflect the current season of the V-league (the 2015-2016 season) and would like to link it to the league page if my article was accepted. I'm sorry the title is confusing so I hope you can assist me to make the correction you see appropriate. Thank you ^.^Aimankyuichi (talk) 04:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Panagiotis Kone at WP:DRN
Hello Mr. McClenon, I have brought my thoughts at WP:DRN for Panagiotis Kone, which you may be interested in reviewing. Have a wonderful day! Regards! --MorenaReka (talk) 14:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

14:27:53, 5 January 2016 review of submission by Translator-reviser
Dear Robert, I am the author of the page dedicated to Liedewij Hawke, a Canadian literary translator. My draft was decline for the following reason: "This draft is unsourced. Please provide multiple independent reliable sources." I understand that the issue is that much of the biographical information is not cited. However, there are no independent public source of such information as Liedewij's birth town, schools that she had attended, diplomas that she received, year she moved to Canada from Netherlands, etc. All of this information comes from Liedewij herself (I personally got this information from her when working on this assignment for my theory of translation class at York University). I would hate to delete this information as doing so will rob the profile of depth and detail. I would appreciate if you could get back to me so that we could discuss what can be done to preserve this valuable information. Yours truly, Irina

15:06:29, 5 January 2016 review of submission by Jasonlmann
Hi - I created the page for a filmmaker named Jason Mann. I see that you pointed me to the Wikipedia page for a different Jason Mann. They are, indeed, two different American filmmakers. For evidence, here are their IMDb pages:

The existing Jason Mann: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2643355/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 The other Jason Mann (the page I am trying to create): http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1157607/?ref_=fn_al_nm_2

Also, please note that Google is also confused about this. Their Knowledge graph has a bunch of the biographical info for both men combined, but that is inaccurate.

The Last Four Posts
I will be commenting on the three declined drafts at the Teahouse. I hope that the DRN participant and the other editors can find a moderator, because I am moderating another thread. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Robert McClenon!


Happy New Year! Robert McClenon, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Peppy Paneer (talk) 13:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

23:00:14, 6 January 2016 review of submission by SylvianeB
Hi Robert, thank you for your review and suggestion.

When added "New Zealand" on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Switzerland#Rest_of_world I saw a few articles like : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93Switzerland_relations linked as "see..." Identical article could be created about New Zealand as I had all necessary information as listed on the Australian article, but of course, about New Zealand. There is the map indicating location of both countries that I would like to add (didn't find how so far...) and among other articles that are not ready at all yet, there is also a link about the Swiss Embassy in New Zealand history with names of all Ambassadors as soon as the article is approved. This article has been declined a few times and is now ready to be submitted again (I just need to be brave enough to click on the "submit" button as it's its the last chance (and mine probably too)...) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Embassy_of_Switzerland_in_New_Zealand.

I was wondering if I was doing the right thing at the right place ? or if these articles should go somewhere else on WP like a portal ? Robert, I would really appreciate if you could give me a hint here as I am a bit lost... Thanks in advance & kind regards, SylvianeB (talk) 23:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Undid your edit to Dispute resolution noticeboard
Hi, I'm explaining myself here so you don't see my edit summary as overly brusque.

In these sorts of discussions, it's all but impossible to separate behavior from content, because content is generated by user behavior. In this particular case, I took issue with two aspects of your edit:
 * 1) You collapsed a section in which I questions the other user's understanding, while leaving open the section it was in response to, which questioned my own understanding. That implies a double standard.
 * 2) You collapsed a section in which I explained that an important factor in my decision to seek mediation was another editor's behavior, which has played a major part in generating the content I object to. I did not call for censure in any way, and have no intention of doing so. As outlined in the initial request, I have asked for help trying to communicate WP policy to the other editor. Removing part of the complaint which illustrates the need for this is an unnecessarily strict interpretation of WP:NPA, as I'm not attacking, but simply explaining myself. MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  20:12, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edits are disruptive to the discussion, and have followed a double standard. I am politely asking that you either be consistent, or recuse yourself from the discussion. MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  20:27, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * If you do not like the way that Robert has redacted your posts — which he has the right to do under the mediation policy, I would suggest that you redact them yourself and remove all references to other editors' conduct. Such references and discussions are not acceptable at DRN. Only discuss edits and do not say a word about the other editor, himself. Not about his motives, his biases, his conflicts of interest, his skills, his habits, his competence, his POV, his POV-pushing, nothing at all, period. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 20:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC) (DRN coordinator)

Argument from authority
I understand the frustration, but I think closing that case at this point is too extreme. I was about to add a Coordinator's note chastising the conduct allegations and explaining volunteer's authority. I'm not going to revert your close, but I think that you should do so. Best regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 20:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay. I will revert the close.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

21:43:41, 7 January 2016 review of submission by Paul Glaister
Thanks for considering my submission. I have now added some more references. The JMC of the UK is the leading organization in the UK representing mathematics education and was established in 1963. It works closely with the Royal Society and set up the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education. This is a prestigious role held by a number of distinguished folk in the past, and comprises some 31 national organizations. If my page is published I can edit the Joint Mathematical Council to include me as Chair as with Robert Stephen John Sparks Chair of ACME and cross-reference the two.

22:51:59, 7 January 2016 review of submission by Serdar Bulun
Question regarding submission of article "Serdar Bulun"

Dear Mr. McClenon, I was recently notified that the Wikipedia article titled “Serdar Bulun” was declined for further publishing. Based on the comment you provided, you mentioned the lack of in-line citations after each paragraph as well as the general discouragement to submit autobiographies. As Dr. Bulun’s administrative assistant, I submitted this draft which was proposed and created by Dr. Hugh Taylor, also a physician-scientist and the chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Yale University. I believe my submission was misunderstood as an ‘autobiography’; however, Dr. Taylor’s intention was to submit this as a biography of Dr. Bulun. With that, would you kindly suggest the next best step to alleviate the issues associated with this submission? Would it be best to ask Dr. Taylor to directly create and submit a different draft? Thank you so much in advance. Best, Nadia Mahmood Executive Assistant to Serdar Bulun, MD Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Northwestern Medicine
 * See my comments at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

13:11:37, 9 January 2016 review of submission by 95.210.108.58
Please be so kind to be more specific on your objections and I'll be too willing to comply when you illuminate me more on what is missing, what is not good enough, etc.

Request on 21:21:49, 9 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Marcoartnyc
Hi Robert, this is Re: the draft titled: marcoart Thank you for your reply:

"This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Marcoart, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one."

As I am new to this process I apologize for the accidental duplicate submission and I hope that "the other" submission that you are currently considering is in fact a duplicate and the most up to date version in which I removed the peacock terms,including specifically deleting this phrase which was neiter encyclopedic or neutral: "It was not long before some major real estate developers got wind of what was happening on Orchard Street South of East Houston Street in New York City's Lower East Side and decided to cash in on the wave of gentrification Marco and other pioneering retailers had inadvertently ushered in."

I also re-checked and insured that the article referred to a range of independent, reliable, and published sources such as the New York Times, The New York Daily News, and made sure that those citings were relevant to, and justified whatever statement in the article they were referring to. made the tone of the article more neutral formal and encyclopedic.

Thank you very much for your assistance in helping me edit my submission. I really appreciate it.

Marcoartnyc (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

21:30:59, 9 January 2016 review of submission by Marcoartnyc
Hi Robert I just read your comment: Comment: This draft is an autobiography, and the submission of autobiographies is strongly discouraged due to conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC) what I don't understand is how this article differs from innumerable other Wikipedia Pages about individuals. So my question is what specific criteria does my article fail to meet, or said another way what attributes would my submission need to possess so that it would be, in form, structure, tone, and content equivalent to other neutral articles about notable individuals on Wikipedia, and as a part B to the question what specific types of corrections or modifications do I need to make to my submission in order to make it qualify as an acceptable article about an individual?
 * See my comments at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Maryse Warda has been accepted
 Maryse Warda, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Maryse_Warda help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

11:59:09, 10 January 2016 review of submission by 95.210.108.58
Dear Sir, I would be so grateful if you would give me more precise instructions on how to improve the layout of this article in accordance with your requirements.

Request on 12:30:44, 10 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Queensferry Tours
Hi,

I submitted this article and got this message: It appears that your submission is either an attempt to be humorous rather than factual, or is an obvious hoax. As Wikipedia strives to contain only factual entries, we can not accept your submission at this time.

This story is fact,

My colleague curated an exhibition on this historical event last year in Queensferry Museum (National Museums of Scotland). I filmed interviews with eye witness's to this event.

Below are links that verify that this event happened:

UK Government:

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/20thand21stcenturies/worldwarii/airattack/index.asp

BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/72/a1975872.shtml

Scottish Television:

http://edinburgh.stv.tv/articles/308482-ww2-forth-bridge-raid-exhibition-at-queensferry-museum/

Edinburgh Museums (Link to the exhibition last year):

http://www.edinburghmuseums.org.uk/Venues/Queensferry-Museum/Exhibitions/2014-15/Forth-Bridge-Raid---WWII-display

So I'm a bit unsure how to proceed on this.

Thanks

Queensferry Tours (talk) 12:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear Robert,

I carefully reviewed my draft Henri Hauser I made many corrections, added many precisions, references and links and then I submitted my version and it was declined once again by because a current article Henri Hauser was existing. But, this current one is full of mistakes such as Henri Hauser is an agrarian that he is not at all, this is Walter Hauser. Many great steps of his influential life are missing. I really don't understand that someone can write such a poor quality article and mine was made with a lot of research and readings, it took a huge time and someone can refuse just for this poor reason without any reading of my version. You refer keep an incorrect article and decline mine ? I could admit that my article could be still improved or request an assistance but declining without taking into account the quality of the contents is incredible...

At least, does someone read the draft article at the end ? I did an honest article and someone who obviously know nothing about HH can keep his article ?

Thank you beforehand for providing an understandable explanation. Atalante88Atalante88 (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Henri Hauser by atalante88
Dear Robert,

I confess I am lost with your comments. First of all, I am a French-speaker and not an English Native speaker. This is certainly where I need some help and certainly in others fields I admit this with no problem.

But, the situation is as follow : Henri Hauser was French as well and was a main Economist with a huge influence in France but widely above in UK, England, US, Germany etc.. just before WWI and between WW1 and WW2. I thought that it would bring some values to some English Wiki readers to have some pieces of knowledge about Henri Hauser even if he was a French Economist. He even brought a huge influence to famous English Economists as well such as Willam Beveridge, Edwin F. Gay wich was the Dean of HBS or R.H. Tawney from LSE. He had a long run friendship with those people. Then two researchers such as SA Marin and GH Soutou collects many testimonies from many personalities well known such as Natalie Zemon Davis who can speak and write in French, Paul Gerbod, Paul Claval, Laurent Vissière, Jean-Paul Poussou, Philip Benedict (it is in English in the book), Henri Heller, Herman Van der Wee, Jean-François Bergier, Jean-Marie Mayeur, Christian Morrisson, Eric Bussière, Isabelle Lescent-Giles, Claude Fohlen, John L. Harvey, François Chaubert, Luiz Felipe de Alencastro, Myriam Yardeni. A preface from Professor René Rémond from Académie française and put it in a book called Henri Hauser edited from Sorbon. In my article, I linked nearly all those names to external links to referencial French websites such Sorbon or CNRS in order to get to know those Professors or reseachers ...

The Sources as you require for, are mainly written in French but by researchers. The Sources and the link are the BNF (National French Library), (Sorbon edition), Gallica (for old newspapers or documents for France), Leonore database for Legion d'honneur etc...those institutions are Official and known everywhere in the World. So, what can I do if documents are mainly in French or in German and no many in English ? I tried the best I can to link to English link.

So, I don't know what to do more as this presentation took much time and if you are not interested by knowing better French Economists just let me know. I can't find all sources written in English if it does not exist.

I stay at your disposal in case you would be still interested to provide an overview on Henri Hauser's work as a unique Economist to your English readers. Best regards, Frederique Bailly


 * I am replying at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 17:11:50, 11 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Azeeq Mazlan
Azeeq Mazlan (talk) 17:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Request for clean up
Hi Robert McClenon,

Can you please look into the article National Herald Case, it requires urgent clean up, I had tried but it got reverted every time I did.

Thanks Work2win (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about it. It appears that it is an Indian case, and that it involves biographies of living persons policy implications, because it is not a biography but involves living persons.  There has not been much discussion on the talk page.  If discussion on the talk page fails, you could try the biographies of living persons noticeboard.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Work2win (talk) 17:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 22:32:34, 11 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by 679699sof
Robert--this is the first time I use wiki. I don't know how to add footnotes or an image. Is there someone that can assist with this part?

Thanks for your help.

679699sof (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Robert ---I just added another photo and emailed Permissions- Wikimedia Commons. They gave me a new ticket number [Ticket#: 2016012110003934]. Would you be able to help me with this new matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 679699sof (talk • contribs) 13:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

06:57:06, 12 January 2016 review of submission by LufferTracker
Hello Robert,

Thank you for reviewing my submission of the "Bo's Place" entry. I'm working on changes to the article draft. It may take a week or so to complete the edits so please bear with me. I appreciate your review and comments!

At a loss for what to do
Have been following your advice to "ignore non-constructive comments on talk pages." The unknown user or users is using that ignoring as a proxy for consensus: if no one immediately disagrees with the nonsense posted to the talk page then making nonsense changes to the article must be okay.

For example, the IRS labels the Foundation for Economic Education as an "Educational Organization," hence the 2015 citation of the Internal Revenue Service that includes the direct quote "Educational Organization." Ignoring that, the unknown user or users deleted "nonprofit educational organization" and replaced it with "think tank" with an edit summary of "Following talk page discussion."

This makes it seem like if I follow "ignore non-constructive comments on talk pages," I will be condoning the nonsense edits that follow the nonsense talk postings. When the foundation started it was certainly a think tank, but that was like 70 years ago, and is no longer the case today.

I am now at a loss for what to do. It seems like the unknown user or users just plans to keep wearing people down until they give up and let them add whatever nonsense they like. Abel (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

19:06:48, 12 January 2016 review of submission by GeneralGurko
Hi Robert, and thanks for the review. I am writing regarding your comment from December 20th: "Read Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The list of his publications is too long. It appears that he is notable, but the list should be shortened. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:46, 20 December 2015 (UTC)". I would just like to clarify that you are referring to the list of his major publications. Would you suggest making it half as long, for instance? Is that the only issue with the draft? I was speaking to someone Wikipedia's live chat area, and they suggested I cut back the citations for any given fact from six in some cases, down to two or three. This was first draft pretty much, and I can easily do that as well. Would love to make my draft article "live", so any further guidance is much appreciated.

Cheers, GeneralGurko (talk)

Closing on the campus sexual assault DR
I know this is probably a tough and thankless job, and I waited a while to cool down before complaining here. I would have appreciated a little bit more guidance -- and maybe a firmer hand -- in the mediation on this recent DR. I see from other discussions that mediators sometimes strike-through or hide off topic or uncivil statements, but that was never done in this case, and there was never even a direct warning issued about it, even though this sort of comment was going on before the DRN opened. Prohibiting threaded discussions is a good idea, in retrospect, but there really isn't much documentation for how DRN is supposed to work. I saw from looking at past disputes that parties aren't supported to engage in threaded discussions before the DRN opens, but you didn't comment on it even when it was happening before the DRN opened. I realize I shouldn't have taken the bait and reverted Mattnad's re-insertion of the disputed material, but I simply reverted the change and then tried to continue the discussion. I think the process may have been more useful if you took a more active role. Nblund (talk) 19:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not saying that my handling of that case was perfect. Maybe it wasn't.  I had instructed not to edit the article while discussion was in progress.  When edit-warring began, it was clear to me that moderated discussion was going nowhere.  If you think that I made a mistake, you may discuss it at the dispute resolution noticeboard talk page.  You may also refile at the dispute resolution noticeboard.  I will probably recuse and let another volunteer handle it, but you should be aware that it is likely to be moderated very tightly in view of its history.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Pak Mei
Hi Robert, the editor copied this into Chinese martial arts. I've reverted but am off to bed, maybe you could have a word with him? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 21:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC) ✅
 * Templated for disruptive editing. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Jarrod Moses
-Liancetalk/contribs 00:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

07:07:13, 13 January 2016 review of submission by Soc Editorial
Dear Robert:

Thank you for your suggestions on how to improve the Philip A. Salem's page. One of the issues is the references.

Dr. Salem has been interviewed on news stations to discuss cancer treatments and advancements in cancer research: CBS Chicago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmWD4Oe1-T8 Fox 26 News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2QQ7_H6CAs Fox 26 News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eE0tyGlte0k

There are others, too. Before making changes to the page, will you let me know if these are considered reliable, credible resources?

Thank you, Michelle Soc Editorial (talk) 07:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No. YouTube is not a reliable source.  If you want to ask questions about reliable sources, read the reliable source policy or ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Financial Social Work Draft
This is just to let you know that the draft now contains additional wikilinks and a reflist template.

Thanks!

Dorlee Michaeli (talk) 15:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
LUMMMMMMM.....

USA AE 21:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

David John Edward Ingram
Hi Robert

Thank you for your observations on my article about my father. I understand that you have to use caution because of my relationship with the subject. However surely the question of whether or not he was notable does not arise? He was the Vice-Chancellor of Kent University - translated to an American University it is the equivalent of the principal and in that position he was awarded the Commander of the British Empire (CBE) which is an honour just below knighthood! I provided a link to the Wikipedia entry for his honour, could you tell how I should deal with that if I have dealt with it wrongly please?

Many thanks

Jonathan Ingram Jon Ingram 33 (talk) 00:47, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * For what it is worth, "principal" in North American usage implies "headmaster of a secondary school." Only 7 of sixteen presidents of my own (fairly respectable) school are listed, at least three of which were notable otherwise.  (By contrast, all of MIT's are.) Emphasizing his career in physics, or as an author, might be more promising.  Looking at your draft, I'd suggest consolidating and paring down the family references.  There are some odd segues between professional and personal life.


 * But more than anything, I'd suggest moving the discussion to the draft's talk page. Anmccaff (talk) 02:07, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * In the United States, the headmistress of an elementary school also has the title of "principal".


 * The article in question is Draft: David John Edward Ingram. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:08, 14 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The references are not properly formatted. The author should fix the references, or ask for help in fixing them at the Teahouse.  Discussions on draft talk pages are very seldom watched.  I would suggest that discussions of drafts should be at the Teahouse, where other experienced editors will comment and are expected to be friendly.  If you are prepared for civil but not friendly discussion, try the Help Desk.  I am not saying that the subject is not notable.  I am saying that the author has not established notability.  This may be a matter of formatting of the references.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:13, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

08:24:24, 14 January 2016 review of submission by Joe Cabello
Hi Robert,

Ive been trying to dig up more references for our submission and have added a local newspaper article posting. But I'm not sure how to remove some of the other references that you find of little value. Our club is very similar to others in the region with similar coverage.

Daniel_Holtzclaw DRN
hello Robert McClenon, I am reaching out to you to see if we can work out some resolution with the Daniel Holtzclaw article dispute. I noticed from your talkpage that you have an extensive history with wikipedia, and it seems to me you take this project seriously and probably devote a considerable amount of time and energy to it. I also noticed you appear to be a programmer by trade. That is interesting to me because I am as well. From your talk page I gleaned that you have been involved with on-line communities since they were in their infancy (newsgroups?). That must give you quite a perspective.

In any case, the subject of the dispute you are helping us with is that of a former cop, now a convicted felon with multiple life sentences recommended by the jury in his trial. I don't normally pay much attention to such matters, but this one surprised and shocked me. I am attempting to convey to readers of and contributors to this article, some complexity and depth. It seems to me that in its current state, the article is mostly concerned with political objectives and/or activists and the blogosphere. It renders the subject in a flat cartoonish light - it boils down to, "Daniel Holtzclaw is an uber bad man, it is a wonder the media did not cover his sins in greater detail. Must be because he is a white cop and his victims are poor black women." Although I believe that is an important component of this story, I believe that like any other criminal tale, there is more than meets the eye. I take as examples the WP articles on infamous criminals and rapists like Charles Manson, Anthony Sowell, Altemio Sanchez, and others. Although their crimes shock and disgust us, we realize that they are human, had friends and families, and to some degree that there must be some explanation for why things turned out so bad for them and those who became involved with them in one way or another.

That is the story I am attempting to tell on this article that supposedly concerns itself with former OKC PD officer Daniel Holtzclaw. We don't even have a photo of the guy on the page. Maybe it should be renamed "the Trial of D.H." although even that is presented in a flat contrast. Every attempt I've made to add richness and depth to this article has been instantly and unapologetically shot down. I am becoming pessimistic and cynical about the integrity of Wikipedia, an amazing collaborative source for so much that I and so many others have enjoyed - a repository of human knowledge. Foregoing any more cheesy slogans, I am asking you, or anyone who has been around WP for a while to help us come to an agreement on how we can all contribute to the complexity and contradiction as it is rendered on this website instead of resorting to non sequiturs and straw man justifications for thinly-veiled censorship. I appreciate your time and concern.

Oiudfgogsdf (talk) 10:19, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia already contains the term "granatane"( ligands of sigma-2 receptor ) . But nothing is told about it. I simply tried to request a page on granatane.
Alkaloids are often classified according to their structure (backbone) or mother-alkaloids. Such as pyrrolidine group, pyrrole group, imidazole group, etc.

(Such as in Trease and Evans Pharmacognosy by W. C. Evans, Ed. 16, Chapter 26 (alkaloids))

When I came to know a stucture called "pseudopelletierine", then I tried to found-out what-group of alkaloid it is?.

In the internet, I found synonyms for "pseudopelletierine", and they were Granatonine, Granatan-3-one (in wikipedia). To found out their basis, I also found, record for that backbone-structure of exists in internet, & with a conventional name "granatane" (& granatanine, a similar search-result granatanine)

But I could not found further-details about anywhere in the Web. More surprisingly I did-not found granatane and granatanine and their hydrochloride, in CAS website!

I also found in Wikipedia, the term Granatane is mentioned (Tropane and granatane analogs BIMU-1, SW107, SW116, SW120 ligands bind with Sigma-2 receptor). but anything about granatane is not told.

So I just wanted to request a page on granatane (& related search result granatanine). Thank you.

17:23:51, 15 January 2016 review of submission by Jesus Rey-Joly
Hi, User:Jesus Rey-Joly. I just had a look at the draft. I clicked through on some of the references and there are some problems. If you haven't already done so, go read wp:rs which is the page about "reliable sources." You've used some sources that don't meet the criteria there. For example, the svrproducciones source is a sales site, and that is not a reliable source. I know that you were intending to link to proof that the album exists, but in this case it's best not. The "list of students by teacher" and the Zoominfo entry also should be removed. If you would like, I could go through and edit out the sources that shouldnt' be there, then we could see where the gaps are. I think we can make this work. LaMona (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, LaMona, I have deleted the references you mentioned and I'll be willing to do any more amendments as required. Please tell me if the draft still requires something and I'll be glad to comply.

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Warren
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth Warren. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Stevie Aiello article
Hi, sorry if I ask you but the article is constantly declined. I spent a lot of time on it and I don't want my work to be wasted. Could you help me understand what's wrong so that I can make it right? Thank you so much in advance StevieWorldwide (talk) 19:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I will be taking this discussion to the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes
There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox concerning what should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Re: Draft 'Sailor on the Seas of Fate'
Hi, thanks for the feedback. Based my draft article (on the 2nd book in the Elric series) on the existing published article (on the 1st book in the Elric series). Content could definitely be expanded on and citations found but problem has been finding enough of the reliable sources. So I guess I will shelve the article until its notability improves. Obvsly, had it saved in the wrong place too. Soz. Ah, well, you live & learn. Thanks for helping out anyway. Appreciated. Stinglehammer (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think it was in the wrong place. It was just in a less good place.  There is nothing wrong with building an article draft in a sandbox; it is just that draft space is better.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Energy (Rock Band) declined?
So I had made a minor change before resubmitting it, removing a videography section to the page as the sources were posted to YouTube by the band itself. That was the difference between the first time it was submitted and the time you reviewed it. But I'm still trying to understand how my sources aren't "reliable." I had this discussion with the previous reviewer and I got the impression that he was the wrong person for this particular type of artist, as he did not understand reputability within this genre. So my question is: how exactly can my sources not be reliable? They are all varied between multiple sites that are entirely independent of the artist (minus a couple that are there purely for referencing dates and proving existence.) One of them is Alternative Press, which is a well established and reliable print magazine and another is the very well known and reputable IGN. I have found many artists in similar genres with similar notability and they have Wikipedia pages with less sources from similar outlets. Just as well, they are listed or referenced on other pages here and the link redirects to the wrong artist (which I'm in the process of removing those links for accuracy.) I'd just really like to nail down this issue please. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thablaqkgoat (talk • contribs) 01:19, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

22:05:49, 18 January 2016 review of submission by Ted.gehring
The William H. Bell page you reviewed is the first Wikipedia page my students and I have ever created. I read the info on the lede sentence page and am still unsure how to add it to the article. If it is not added in the right place, could you please send me a couple of simple steps on how to add a lede sentence? I am a school teacher how has had little computer science training. I do not know java or html.

Thanks for your help.
 * It appears that you did succeed in adding the lede sentence. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

ACC Article declined
Hey Robert,

What specifically is triggering this response? This is NOT an advertisement. I don't work for the company nor do I have any affiliation with them. How can I get this through Wiki?

Thanks for your help, mate.

Sascha — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaschaIllyvich (talk • contribs) 22:59, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * See the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

DRN
Hello, Robert. For some background, this dispute has been going on for almost three weeks, and is more so a two-way dispute between myself and than the other two editors; it had originally started out on the verge of an edit war between us both. I apologise for poor conciseness on my part—it is a bad habit of mine to go on and on and on. I really want this dispute solved ASAP. I am happy to clearly answer any questions you have about this dispute. <span style="background-color:; color:;"> <span style="background-color:; color:;"> <span style="background-color:; color:;">  04:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Would it be wrong if I just made the change, and then resort to an RfC if reverted? The user Zoltan Bukovszky seems to be admitting defeat. <span style="background-color:; color:;"> <span style="background-color:; color:;"> <span style="background-color:; color:;">  22:42, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't be wrong to make the change once, and then use an RFC. Don't edit-war.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:15, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Neve-selbert, I have not said or written anything than can possibly be construed as "admitting defeat". I have no idea whether this is some sort of delusion on your part or merely a brazen fib to get your way without winning the debate. I remain convinced that your suggestion is not a good solution. Your above claim raises grave questions about the reliability of your statements and your conduct in this debate. ZBukov (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Last night you wrote here to Robert that I "seem to be admitting defeat", and a mere ten minutes later you left a message on my talk page (titled "Failure of DRN") stating "There were no winners or losers" and suggested an unspecified compromise (though you topped it off with an unintelligible ultimatum). Your conduct appears increasingly sinister and erratic. In light of all this I firmly oppose you implementing any changes. ZBukov (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox
Thanks for your comment. My editor suggested I experiment in my Sandbox. I was simply experimenting. Those particular ones I haven't followed through as the subject is not mentioned on them. He's only mentioned on Amazon listings of the CDs.

In relation to a different type of ref. Is it possible to have a ref/footnote that simply gives information - the name of a Festival or venue for example - where there is no website link available - so as to keep the text short?

e.g something like this to clarify concerts in Sweden:

Thanks Balquhidder2013 (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Do not submit test edits to AFC. A sandbox may be used for editing tests, but test edits should not be submitted to AFC.  For questions about references and footnotes, please ask at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:40, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

List of the oldest living state leaders
Howdy Robert. In Nov/Dec, you suggested at DRN that we could open up Wikipedia-wide Rfc on the presentation of Elizabeth II's realms. Just curious, where would be the best place for this? GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I would ask at the Help Desk where to open the RFC, but one possible place would be List of the oldest living state leaders and another might be Robert McClenon (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you suggest that? I recall no such thing, myself. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  20:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * One of the volunteers suggested it. What does it matter anyways? Atleast someone did & it was a great idea. GoodDay (talk) 20:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, I don't recall any such suggestion. Surely there's a diff or something.
 * Best of luck trying to get multiple people to decide on one rule to be applied to endlessly different scenarios. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  20:36, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well then, if you're only interested in this one particular article, then open up an Rfc there. You're the one who's kicking the ball further down the road, so it only makes sense that you're the one who should open up an Rfc. Anyways, waint until the past participants weigh in (if they will), as there's no need to panic. Who knows? they might support your proposals, this time. So have faith in yourself. GoodDay (talk) 20:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for guidance.

Balquhidder2013 (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

Did you notice
Earlier today you closed the Bach RfC and did you notice that there was an admin request that this RfC be closed by on adminstrator on the AN/RfC admin board? The items brought up on the DRN board were apparently made by one of the two editors who have been forum shopping and edit warring on the Bach page for several weeks. There is currently an admin Full Page Protect on the article from my request to protect the page from their edit warring here, and you can read the history. Another previous Full page protection by another admin the week before is also there which you can readily find on the Bach edit history page as well. The current summary is that there are 4-5 editors supporting the new edit with citations added, and two editors who Oppose it. The easier solution would seem to be to allow the admin request for an administrator close to stand since it is already over half way through the waiting list there, if you could to return the RfC status to its Open status pending the already requested admin close by an administrator. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:03, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The request from admin for the close on the admin page was here:, and I do not know if the warning by the same admin on the Talk page for User:Frances was known to you, due to his edit warring as part of the history. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That isn't a request for a close by an administrator. It is a request for a close by an experienced editor.  If you do not want to discuss at WP:DRN, you are not required to do so, and you may report edit-warring at WP:ANEW.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

02:03:57, 21 January 2016 review of submission by Zaostao
The other draft for Justin Gaethje is not at all worthy of consideration to be made an article, it is not formatted as all other MMA articles are, it only lists two references and is simply not ready to be an article. Just look at it again and see that there is no structure, no linking, no MMA record (which is very important for a MMA fighter's wiki), and then please consider removing it or denying it and then reviewing mine.
 * See the history of the other draft and your sandbox. The other draft has been speedy-deleted as abandoned.  Your sandbox has been moved to Draft:Justin Gaethje.  Please see my comments and put in any references that clearly address mixed martial arts notability.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

06:15:43, 21 January 2016 review of submission by Gmw4313
You declined my submission, but thank you for the speedy review. I have entered a lede statement, and adjusted the naming convention (though when the page referred to her husband, it became awkward.) I removed most of the peacock language. I am sure some remains.

I am not sure what to do about references. I believe an award winner in an entertainment field that just recently started presenting awards is worthy of a page. Some of the material I put on the draft page, I looked up her e-mail address and asked her. What specifically can I do to make the references stronger, yet maintain the interesting features of putting the page together at all? Gmw4313 (talk) 06:15, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

08:56:07, 21 January 2016 review of submission by 87.114.16.233
Hi Robert - thanks for reviewing the article I wrote on Just Bee Drinks. I wanted to write this page as the company is a supplier to my Deli and the first drinks company of its kind in the UK. I believe this makes it very notable and the background to Just Bee Drinks has been reported in many leading publications in the UK (The Daily Telegraph, the Manchester Evening News just to name a few). I have tried to write it in as neutral way as possible and certainly don't want it to appear as an advertisement.

Please can you suggest which parts you think makes it sound bias or like an advertisement so that I can amend and resubmit for review.

Thanks so much for your help!

David 87.114.16.233 (talk) 08:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 16:24:09, 21 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by 679699sof
Robert---One of the photos I uploaded was deleted. How do I find that photo on wiki so that I can email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org ? Is there a place on Wiki where I can see the images that I have uploaded and those that are being considered or were deleted?

Please advise.

Thanks.679699sof (talk) 16:24, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

679699sof (talk) 16:24, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I will be asking your question as the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:32, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

16:46:51, 21 January 2016 review of submission by Ddicksson
I believe I have the page properly constructed now. Please forgive me for prematurely submitting it the first time. Thank you for what you do. Donna Dicksson
 * Just wait for another reviewer to review it. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag!
Hi,

Thanks for the tag, and the "humor"! I hope You never have to experience the dilemma I faced at (Spanish Wiki, Commons, and English) by those two Users... Have a nice day, and good luck! (Mona778 (talk) 17:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC))

Request on 02:45:27, 22 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Owenave
I was not submitting an article. I thought I was submitting a description of who I was as a commentator and editor. Someone also flagged a picture that was NOT a violation of copyright. I am the owner of the picture and was taken with my camera by a friend. Thanks Larry Rust

Larry Rust Music Producer/Composer/Vocalist/ Keyboards/Arranger (talk) 02:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You did submit the page as an article draft. If you need assistance in providing a user page, without submitting it to AFC, ask for help at the Teahouse.  There may really be a problem in that is may be too easy for editors to submit draft user pages to AFC.  It does appear that a lot of editors submit drafts, not knowing that they are being submitted to the AFC review process.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:54, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Wilhering College
Thank you for reviewing Wilhering College. I forgot to mention, that my article is based on the German Version of "Stiftsgymnasium Wilhering". The notability has newer been doubted there. Unfortunately I technically cannot cite an article that would proof its notability very well. The archive of nachrichten.at, the website of the well-known (in Upper-Austria) OÖNachrichten, doesn't allow links. However, this site calls the school "renowned". What shall I do? --Jean Eti (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your help regarding the Mark Atkin (stuntman) draft. Really appreciated! Have a great day!

OMichiO (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 07:31:03, 23 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Palm Village
Robert, as this is my first Wikipedia article, I assumed after reading about best practices that I needed to cite where the information I used came from. But I am a professional magazine writer, and the entire article is original. So based on what I read now about what needs citing, would the best way to get this article about David Reimer be to simply remove the citations throughout the article and leave the external links at the end, which gives much fuller descriptions of his work?

Palm Village (talk) 07:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Recommend you self revert
Hi Robert, Thanks for this however I think you made a good faith oversight.... think of the DS rule about double alerting in a 12 month period...... I already did the same thing a few days ago. P deleted the DS warning but he did get it.

Appreciate your help with disruption-prevention. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Tublave/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Tublave/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

My Bad as a Noob!
Robert,

I thought I could do a complete rewrite in my sandbox and then replace the draft with the new version. I saved my sandbox then began formatting my references when you spotted the save.

Is there a better way for me to work with the sandbox? Tublave (talk) 01:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There is absolute no rule against doing a rewrite in your sandbox and then reformatting the references. However, there is no reason to do that.  Once a draft is moved out of the sandbox into draft space, it is better to work with the article in draft space.  Having multiple copies of a draft confuses and annoys the reviewers.  Is there a a reason why you think that that you need to start over into your sandbox?  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 13:14:59, 24 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by WRC3
Hi Robert, My article submission for my company was not approved citing my references do not adequately show the subject's notability. I am not sure I fully understand then what type of references are needed to provide significant coverage about the subject (HighVolMusic) in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I have looked at 3 of our competitors Wiki pages and essentially mirrored what they have done using our own data and press that is on the internet about it.

Are you able to assist me so that I can get our article approved? Thank you, Bill Chavis

WRC3 (talk) 13:14, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

21:50:18, 24 January 2016 review of submission by FranKSmithPortland
Hi Robert, I added some references. What do you think? Is it ok?

22:20:22, 24 January 2016 review of submission by FranKSmithPortland
Hi Robert i added a lot of citations. What do you think about? I'm sorry for my errors but i'm not expert... Thanks Frank

08:07:43, 25 January 2016 review of submission by FranKSmithPortland
Hi Robert can you help me? I wrote a lot of references. Can you tell me if i did a good work? Thank you! Warm regards Frank

Draft Henri Hauser stolen
«  Join this discussion Dear Robert,

I am very shocked and dispapointed as someone called "Voceditenore" took my article and improved her article without any permission Copy/Past from my own sandbox the draft-Henry-Hauser and to her last current crappy article and let all the mistakes such as Henri Hauser was an agragarian !

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Henri_Hauser&action=history

Then, she wrote this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Henry_Aron

"On the contary, Atalante88, this article had zero references. I have now re-written it and added three references which verify the material and establish his notability. Please do not add further material to this article unless you provide an inline citation to verify it and please do not include information from genealogy websites or similar self-published sources. Voceditenore (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)"

It appears that Voceditenore is the author of the last crappy article and what she could do is stealing articles from others and insulting people. And she left only three references and she erased the article from my own sandbox.

I don't understand that you declined a correct article honestly written and you prefer to let dishonest people stealing articles from the work of others. I accepted the rules of submission and anyone can do anything, do you accepted it ? Did you give this right ?

My feeling is that Voceditenore knows nothing about the work of Henry Hauser, in addition she knows nothing about Economy and she read practically nothing about or from HH. She displayed the picts from the book of Severine-Antigone Marin w/o any permission. I'm trying to contact Mrs Marin and Mr Soutou.

I hope you will be as severe as you previously were with me and the difference is I did the job by myself I did not steal work from anyone !

Please I request for Justice ! Thank you, Atalante88Atalante88 (talk) 21:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC) (talk) 20:53, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

[edit source]
 * You say that User:Voceditnore edited the article without your permission. You don't have a right to ask for permission to edit an article in article space.  See article ownership, which you seem to be claiming.  I was bold and inserted your article in place of the existing article.  You then come and demand that I do more.  I didn't have to do anything for you.  At this point, you are engaging in personal attacks about dishonesty.  At this point, it may be best that I just revert both articles to their state before I intervened, and let you argue your case, since you didn't listen before and still won't listen.  If you don't understand enough English to understand, ask someone to explain to you in French.  Alternatively, you should thank User:Voceditnore for improving your version of the article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Be aware that claiming that "your" article was "stolen" is article ownership behavior and will result in a block. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 06:13:44, 26 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by ZeroShadows
Regarding the rejection of my request to add to the Left 4 Dead 2 article. You recommended that I edit the page directly and add this information. I've done that previously and the changes were removed by another user, citing lack of references or poor quality references. That is why I created this draft for review, before including them again in the main article. Can I resubmit my draft for approval? ZeroShadows (talk) 06:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

ZeroShadows (talk) 06:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Sincere Thanks
I just wanted to reach out and thank you for your time and effort with my Gill Fielding draft. Sadly it seems as if this article is doomed for deletion and I made an error of judgement by not declaring a COI at the time. But of all the comments I found yours to be the most impartial and your help to be the most graciously offered. I can see you do a lot of editing work here and Wikipedia is a better place because of volunteers like you. Have a great day :) Neilho (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Poshter Girl (2016)
It took a while for me to get to addressing issues, but the film's production has lots of independent coverage and definitely meets WP:NFF (paragraph 3). I ask that you revisit Poshter Girl and consider a withdrawal. Thanks.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 15:49, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I see no need to withdraw my nomination. The relist has run seven days.  If the closer finds consensus to keep, the closer can keep.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

17:24:35, 27 January 2016 review of submission by Mwuestewald
Thank you for taking the time to review this page and recommend some solutions. I hope my rationale for the creation of this page will help clear up some of your concerns. Although University of Oklahoma Outreach is connected in name to the University of Oklahoma, it is a separate entity from the university itself. Outreach sponsors public service and community programs (like the annual Medieval Fair for Norman residents, for instance, or training for the U.S. postal service), has outside funding sources, and functions for a different purpose. Although Outreach does also provide learning opportunities for working adults, the academic focus is different from OU’s campus. OU provides on-campus education for students ages 18-22; Outreach provides online, distance, and flexible format courses to adult students and members of the military – and, in fact, does not typically consider students under the age of 22 for admission. This can be confusing for traditional OU students who are looking for online course options they think Outreach can provide, when that is not in fact the purpose of this entity. Having a separate Wikipedia page for Outreach will help clear up their confusion. I realize I did not provide sufficient content to explain this in my original submission, however, and have included additional sections in the entry. Please see the updated content of the page for further explanation.

Asking for help regarding GA worthy status for Michael Laucke article
Hello User:Robert_McClenon

My congratulations on your fantastic achievements here at Wikipedia! I have very much enjoyed your interesting collaborations. (I sent you a much deserved barnstar to add to your collection . has spoken highly of you.

I created the article Michael Laucke which received 10,000 visitors in 2 months and has been nominated for GA status; ...encouraging to be sure as I have been an active (and passionate) editor for only 1 year. I would be very eager to learn how to help this article achieve GA status and of course to learn of how to improve the article even further.

The article is about classical and flamenco guitar, atonal music in general and on internationally renowned Canadian guitarist Michael Laucke in particular. I very much enjoyed contributing several hundred hours of research and edits. We've made about 1500 careful edits, about half of which are the incredible work of, and over 40 other editors have also helped. We used neat LDR (List-defined references), and there are 120, all carefully researched for verifiability.

In the English version I strived for improved syntax and style, smoothness and readability. I am a proud "Polyglot" (multilingual person) and took the pleasure of making French and Spanish versions for now.

I know time is always too short on this our mortal orb. Could you take a moment to give me some feedback; even a quick glimpse would be appreciated. My goal is to make it better and GA worthy, and I love to learn. While we would like to strive for GA status, the "grade" is not so important to me, neither is credit in any way; creating the best an article can be is important. I am a perfectionist from birth, it would seem...

I do hope that this might interest you, that I have piqued your curiosity and that you can point us along the right path to make a GA worthy version.

Kindest regards, et Merci! Natalie --Natalie.Desautels (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

PS. (The barnstar is at the bottom of your talkpage and says: Congratulations on being chosen Editor of the Week and your amazing Wikipedia work, advancing on chaos and the dark toward "the sum of all human knowledge". Merci! Natalie)

Deleting my page
thanks dude

if i can do anything for ya.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basvossen (talk • contribs) 22:35, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What page do you want help in deleting? Robert McClenon (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

01:44:48, 28 January 2016 review of submission by 76.19.85.215
Page is now properly cited.

Article review Martynas Jasiunas
Hi Robert, I appreciate your comments and review on an article named: Zydrunas Jasiunas on January 23. Would you be so keen to review one of my other articles named Martynas Jasiunas? Would be deeply grateful.

Kind Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasiunas (talk • contribs) 15:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Omnitracs Article Creation
Can you please review my article creation submission on Omnitracs and let me know which areas come off as promotional/ advertising, Also can you give me an idea of which external links are unacceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickBell1080 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Omnitracs?veaction=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickBell1080 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Nilesh Wadekar


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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Request on 19:23:00, 29 January 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Dhuffiwala
Hi Robert Ji,

Greetings for the day.

I understand and agree also, that the details provided were not sufficient and very limited. With this trying to add more details and relevant information, which will be useful and informative for this page.

Requesting your guidance and countinue support.

Thanx and Rgds.

Dhuffiwala (talk) 19:23, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Nishagandhi Puraskaram
Sir, I have added more independent references to Draft:Nishagandhi Puraskaram as you suggested. I am not familiar with the AFC procedures. So please forgive me for enlarging this talk page. --- Arun Sunil Kollam (talk) 13:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad RFC
Robert, I'm trying to deal with a request for mediation and need to locate the RFC you mentioned in this edit, but can't pick it out. Could you give me a link to where it is (or was)? The request for mediation started with an unrelated topic (slavery), but has since been expanded — I think — to the same subject as was closed at DRN. If that RFC is still pending, then that point cannot go forward, but I can't find the RFC that you're referring to. Best regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 18:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

20:42:38, 31 January 2016 review of submission by Mother79
I got all of the info directly from the person involved by talking to him. He is not well known although he has been involved in a multitude of projects. I don't know how to cite sources when none exist.


 * Just FYI, I'm watching this talk page due to my last posting, just above. Robert and I work together in dispute resolution so I hope he will not mind me answering this on his behalf. Information about a person which has been obtained through interviews (whether with them or with third parties) is not acceptable in Wikipedia unless those interviews have bee published in a reliable source as defined by Wikipedia, as it is a form of prohibited original research. Wikipedia, per the Verifiability policy, requires third party sources with an established reputation for fact checking and reliability. When no such sources exist on which to base an article, Wikipedia takes the position that the subject matter of the article is not notable enough to justify an article here. To say it differently, Wikipedia judges the importance of article subjects on the amount of coverage which they have received in reliable sources. When that coverage does not exist, the subject matter is deemed to be too unimportant to be included here and an article about it is not justified. If you are correct that no such sources exist about Mr. Parsons, then no article can exist about him here. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 21:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC) PS: Please be sure to sign all your talk page postings with four tildes, like this: ~ . — TM 21:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Will mentor
I'll pop in to watch the Draft:Cerbat Mustang page. That said, we use google book urls all the time, even in featured articles, ;-)  Montanabw <sup style="color:purple;">(talk)  23:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Panagiotis Kone
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Panagiotis Kone. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

REEL CANADA
Hi Robert - thanks very much for your assistance in adhering to Wikipedia guidelines! My name is Jake; I'm the web/tech guy at our non-profit organization that I think has validity on Wikipedia, given the support of the Canadian federal government and the fact that our directives are on the ground in every Canadian province. If you notice anything glaring on our Draft:REEL CANADA page that could be fixed or added to while we fix our username issue, it would be extremely appreciated. Your hard work does not go unnoticed. Thanks again! REELCANADA (talk) 19:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Change your user name. It violates username policy to use the name of an organization as a user name.  User names represent people, not groups of people.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep - I just put it through the form, so we will see what happens. If you have any other suggestions, let me know. Thanks! REELCANADA (talk) 19:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * hi Robert, changed! Jake at REELCANADA (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Robert McClenon, Thanks for your intervention of Feb. 3rd, and your suggestions for my entry "Nikos Mourkogiannis". I have already written another entry in 2014 about the Greek stage director Fotos Politis, but the rules were much simpler then. I also contribute to the Greek Wikipedia since 2012, because I live in Greece. However, I grew up in Manhattan, where I attended the Irish Catholic High School "Power Memorial Academy" on Columbus Avenue (no longer in existence)and I graduated from Columbia University. I would now like to ask for some assistance for my entry which you examined. The text I submitted is just the opening of a much longer article, with information from books and business and economic journals predominantly from the U.S. and the U.K. I will include many citations to support the verifiability of my sources, and thus I included one footnote in my short text as an example. Unfortunately, this example did not follow the Wikipedia formula and constituted one more reason my text was up for deletion. I checked another footnote in "Wikipedia:Citing sources", which had the following form: "Ritter, Ron (2002). The Oxford Style Manual. Oxford University Press. p. 1" and noticed that in fact my footnote had one more piece of information than Wikipedia's, and that was the place of publication. Of course, my form did not follow the same sequence as did Wikipedia's. But this can be easily corrected. However, my footnote is a different kind of citation than Ritter's. Mine does not refer to a book, but to a foreword in a book so that I have to cite first the author of the foreword and then the author of the book and its title. I would surely like to have your opinion on my footnote.

If you have no objection, I will continue working on the entry in the sandbox and when I feel it's practically finished I will again ask for your opinion. All my best --Bastias (talk) 15:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate drafts
Hi, I saw you declined the userspace copies of the drafts on Marathon Artists and Max Jury because they duplicated the draftspace drafts. They indeed did (so much so that I merged the page histories to credit the original authors), but that decline reason is meant only for duplicate submitted drafts (to save us from fully reviewing multiple copies of the same draft). In this case the draftspace drafts were not submitted. Huon (talk) 19:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that this only applies to submitted drafts? What can be done if the sandbox duplicates a declined non-submitted draft?  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my slow response. It says so right in the "Submission declined" message box, compare for example Draft:Marathon Artists: "This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Marathon Artists, which is also waiting to be reviewed." If the other page is not "a submission waiting to be reviewed" (ie is not submitted), that's not applicable. If the sandbox is on the same topic, but the draftspace draft is not submitted, I'd treat the two as if they were one draft (and merging the page histories may indeed be necessary): Review the submitted one, if necessary decline for the same reason the other was declined for before, and if there is no change whatsoever, comment that the author (who in this case was not the author of the other draft) should not submit the same content again without improvement. Huon (talk) 20:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

19:58:22, 6 February 2016 review of submission by Cmallia
Dear Robert, is it possible to reconsider the declination of the page "Valletta Film Festival"? I form part of the organising team of the Valletta Film Festival and the information submitted is accurate and approved by the organisers of the festival.
 * No. I had originally said that your draft could replace the existing draft, and I would help you to move it in place of the existing draft.  However, you have just admitted to a conflict of interest.  You should not be editing an article about the film festival if you work for the film festival.  If you need that explained by other editors, go to the Teahouse.  I will be tagging your sandbox as a conflict of interest draft.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. How can this be solved? I said that the information included in the article is accurate, but not necessarily carrying any bias. The article is factual. Whenever possible, all information included in the article is backed up by citations coming from objective news portals (local and foreign newspapers). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmallia (talk • contribs) 20:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have two pieces of advice. First, ask for help at the Teahouse.  Second, go to the existing Draft:Valletta Film Festival and request that other editors improve the draft.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:18, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 06:54:08, 8 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Robert McClenon
Ashwinbhajan (talk) 06:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 17:37:27, 9 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by MichaelVJBeattie
When reviewing this article please take the time to read the citations. Mr. Klauck is notable because he has competed with Andrew Wyeth (notable artist) and taken first place. Also, and more importantly, Mr. Klauck was chosen by the US Postal Department to design a stamp for 100th anniversary of John Ringling (father of the American Circus). This fact makes this article important to philatelists. See citation number 4.

MichaelVJBeattie (talk) 17:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Rather than posting this to my talk page, put your comments as AFC comments in the draft. I will note that, when I reviewed the draft, the citations were not in the draft and it had no citations.  I will also note that another reviewer has subsequently also declined the draft.  My original decline was correct.  Please put your explanations in the article itself.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Zionism DRN
Hello, you closed the DRN about Zionism without giving me a change to comment (seriously, 4 days that included a weekend? What's the rush?). Also, on the talk page there were at least 3 other editors who objected to the change which Makeandtoss neglected to invite to the DRN. So basically, you just overruled an explicit talk page consensus with the participation of only two editors? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 00:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I expect editors to check on dispute status every 48 hours. You didn't.  As I said in the close, if you disagree, you are welcome to file a Request for Comments.  If you are dissatisfied with my handling of a case in which you didn't participate, in which participation is voluntary, you may also discuss at the dispute resolution noticeboard talk page, but I think that an RFC is a better option, because it really does establish consensus.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well it's nice that you expect editors to check on disputes every 48 hours, but I did not edit for several days. We have already reliably established consensus on the talk page and I think it's ridiculous to overrule that multi-editor consensus in a discussion with only 2 editors over 4 days. I reopened the DRN discussion. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If there already is consensus on the talk page, then go back to the talk page or use an RFC. I will look at the talk page.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Ongoing ref desk stuff
Do you agree that more admin attention would be good for resolving our current ref desk disputes? I know you don't agree with me on all these issues, but that's actually a positive in some sense: you're smart, fair and civil, and so I thought maybe you'd like to participate in crafting a post for AN with me and perhaps a few others. I've considered posting something there several times, but 1)It takes time to link and address everything, and I fear that if I post too little, it won't get much respect/attention. 2) I fear even unintentionally giving too biased of an account, and coming across as recruiting for my cause. My actual main goals would be to point out 1) the current state is not good (I think you agree with that, at least insofar as it's causing lots of disagreement and disruption. Lots of words being spent on the ref desk talk page that could be better spent almost anywhere else) 2) nothing can move forward without some guidelines being clarified and at least an attempt at consensus among admins. This is because protection status is admin only. Even if you're right, and consensus seems to be against long-term semi-protection, I don't think it will matter, all that matters is who has the power to make change, and in this case, that's admins.

I don't even really care if things don't work out the way I want them to. If the ref desks end up permanently closed, I won't like it, but I'd be happier knowing it was part of a consensus process, and not the whim of just a few users. What's really bugging me is that it really seems one or two users are effectively getting to have their way and not participate in the consensus process. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:54, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. If you create a draft in your user space, I will be glad to look at it and help edit it.  Then we can move it to AN.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll let you know when it's ready. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, we agree that the Reference Desks are not in good shape. We disagree about medium-term semi-protection, but I think that we agree that there are two problems.  The first problem is trolls (and an occasional vandal).  The second is regular editors who push particular approaches to dealing with trolls aggressively, either by being too quick to delete and hat stuff, or by being too willing to criticize other regulars.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Aye, the conflation of problems is itself a problem! It's become very hard to even discuss just one issue, with out lots of other, sometimes ancient, sometimes personal stuff being brought up. Like some dated sitcom stereotype of an old married couple. Anyway, I just threw this together, happy to see what you might add. I really have no experience with this sort of thing, until now I was mostly happy to ignore most policy stuff. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I assume that the last section is intended to be removed before posting it to WP:AN. I suggest that it be posted using the first person singular and that other editors can comment.  I do think that a formal RFC is then in order at the Reference Desk talk page itself.  I may be making a few edits to the draft, but mostly it looks good.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that there also should be some mention of an admin who uses the issue of semi-protection to snipe at another admin. Both of them were recently admonished by the ArbCom.  By the way, are you aware that the ArbCom did ask the WMF to consider legal action against the trolls?  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Two other admins who have been involved in the discussion, besides FPAS and Jayron32, whom you mentioned, are Ian Thomson, who semi-protected the talk page, and The Rambling Man, although The Rambling Man has not had any positive involvement, and has just been coming in to snipe at FPAS. (The ArbCom admonished him, but he seems to be ignoring the admonition.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You also might want to mention, although the admins probably know this, that the disruption caused by the troll resulted in ArbCom motions. If you need the diff, I will provide it.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Here is the diff from ArbCom: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=701799634

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

You (SM) wrote:

Issues that are perhaps not best discussed here now (too big, affect all of WP, not ref desk specific)
Disagreement as to whether anything was "broken" before
 * We always had trolls, but it is getting worse. Should be mentioned.

Disagreement over how to deal with trolling in general
 * This is very relevant, because one of the problems is that some of the Help Desk regulars argue about how to deal with trolls, and occasionally become uncivil in those argument.

Disagreement over whether IPs should have full user rights
 * This is a mistake that was made 15 years ago, in my opinion, that will probably never be corrected and so should not be mentioned. The reason why other Reference Desks deal more effectively with trolls probably isn't that they don't have  unregistered editors.  We don't need to argue in general, but the extent to which the Reference Desk is meant to be a service to unregistered editors is a difference between the idealists and the pragmatists.

Disagreement over when and how to apply WP:AGF
 * I agree that, at this time, we have discussed this enough.

Disagreement over whether banned user posts may or must be removed
 * Policy is very clear, which is that they may be removed, but one admin is on a campaign of requiring that they be removed from user talk pages. I don't think that there is any disagreement that banned user posts may be removed from the Reference Desks and their talk page, except that that leaves the problem that replies to them by registered editors then have to be removed.  It is probably better to leave this out for now.

Any specific behavior of any specific user. This is about policy and consensus, not airing of grievances.
 * Agree. There is too much existing airing of grievances.

Other potential solutions e.g. pending post approval, etc.
 * What is pending post approval? Is that PC1?

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Specifically, you were mentioned at WP:ANI.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 00:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for trying to help with the dispute at Zionism. This is a long-running dispute, it was unlikely than an unofficial process would resolve it. RfC sounds like the best option. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 08:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

15:10:16, 11 February 2016 review of submission by Jarostij
Hi,

I recently created the page "Cristina Lafont", and had saved it before I was done to have a first cursory look to check whether my grasp of the code was sufficient to warrant going on as before. Naturally, and correctly, the saved fragment was rejected because the page was missing references to education and publications of Cristina Lafont at that point. In the meantime (in fact, immediately afterwards), I added these and was wondering whether you could give me an update on whether the page is now acceptable. I consulted the referencing and other sources about how to write an article, but nonetheless, this being my first time, I am unsure whether I did everything correctly. Thank you very much for your help! Best Jarostij

30/500
Hi Robert. Thank you for closing the discussion at Village pump (proposals). However, it may be a good idea to sign your closing statement, so that other users may know who closed it and when. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with my first article!
Robert --

Thank you for doing the moving and publishing for the Dwayne Perkins article. It's my first contribution to Wikipedia, and hopefully it (and I) will improve with time.

Best Regards! Marknashtx (talk) 15:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

About my DR request
Oh boy I can't believe I forgot to include myself as one of the involved parties. Is it okay to just put my username in the edit window under the Users involved section of the edit window? (I don't want to make things any worse than they are.) If that isn't okay, how do I fix it? Also, I can't find the template that I'm supposed to use to notify the other people on their Talk pages - could you please clue me in? Thanks! __209.179.22.107 (talk) 03:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The template is .  Just edit the Users Involved list and send the template.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:08, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Okay, it's done. The DRN notice seems to be more of a "if you're in the neighborhood stop by" kind of notice instead of an expected notice telling him he's directly involved. I hope he shows. Thanks again! __209.179.22.107 (talk) 03:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It is written that way because DRN, unlike ANI, is voluntary. If the editors don't choose to participate, there is no discussion, and then you have to go to Requests for Comments.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Publicizing the RfC
I'm concerned that the reference desk RfC which you wisely started will not be taken to be legit unless it is publicized: at the Village Pump's policy page and at Administrators' noticeboard as is suggested by the RfC instructions here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Publicizing_an_RfC At the moment I'm engaged with other things and my health isn't great, but I think this is the best course of action to be taken by either you or by any of the other editors that are interested in seeing it through. I haven't weighed in at the RfC yet but will soon and would I would like this step to be done before I do. Thanks.
 * Thanks for the speedy action.. all the best. --Modocc (talk) 16:29, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference problem in Beg's LDDMM
I think I fixed it. Mim.cis (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Good day!!! I understand the reason why you decline the "Philippine naming customs" template you have been reviewed. However, I ask you for your assistance on how to improve this template in order to them understand and not also to make confussion which is the maiden or maternal family name and also the surname or paternal family name, as they do to Eastern Slavic, Portuguese and Spanish naming customs. I hope you may accept my new template request as soon as possible. Thank you and God Bless. Have a blessed Valentine Sunday morning to you!!!RenRen070193 02:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Philippine naming customs template
Good day!!! I understand the reason why you decline my requested template. But as I've seen the other templates such as Eastern Slavic, Portuguese and Spanish naming customs, among others, I also have an idea on how to make Philippine naming customs template that is why I ask you for your assistance in order to understand and not make a confussion which is the maiden name or maternal family name and which is also the surname or paternal family name. I hope you accept my request you declined. Thank you and Happy Valentines Day! God Bless.RenRen070193 03:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please explain your question. Do you want me to address Phillipine naming, or are you asking to have an article accepted into  article space?  I don't mean to be difficult.  However, can you please explain what the question really is?  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I just want you to address you to create separate Philippine naming customs template different from the first one (which is the Philippine name template), as they did to Eastern Slavic, Portuguese, and Spanish naming customs templates. RenRen070193 02:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It appears that you were either trying to create an alternate Philippine naming template or to modify the Philippine naming template. Is that correct?  You submitted your sandbox to Articles for Creation.  Articles for Creation, as its name implies, is for articles, not for templates.  If you were trying to create an alternate template, why do we need two Philippine naming templates?   If you were trying to modify the existing template, just modify it, or ask for help in modifying it at the Help Desk.  If you have any more questions, I will try to answer them, but I do not have enough knowledge of templates to be able to help you, so please ask for advice at the Help Desk.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Muhammad
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Muhammad. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Taiwan-China issue - Requesting input
Not sure where to go about this so thought I'd ask someone: got an IP editor who seems to be pushing their POV regarding Taiwan being a part of China. Not sure if it counts as vandalism (so no AVI), but wasn't sure what else to do. This something for ANI? NPOVN? Just a plain ol' dispute that needs a 3O? What's the appropriate venue?

See Talk:List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita and especially these edits. Please ping me in reply if possible. [| Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 00:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * User:EvergreenFir - Content dispute. If there are only two editors, a third opinion is in order, although not binding.  If the third opinion is against the other editor, and they persist, the next step is a Request for Comments.  Editing against consensus, and an RFC establishes consensus, is disruptive editing and can be taken to WP:ANI.  However, first consensus needs to be established.  At this point it looks like a content dispute.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * We just got a third opinion of sorts. I'll go to RfC if it continues. Likely will wait a day to see if others who follow the page comment. Rather local consensus than going through the pain of an RfC. Appreciate your reply. Cheers.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 00:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 01:43:11, 18 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by DASI100
DASI100 (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 04:27:17, 18 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Libertybison
In regards to your message on my Talk Page about my article submission of Nicolo Schiro. I created the Nicolo Schiro (gangster) title from my sandbox. This is my first article submission. After I submitted it, I saw that it was only one of a couple of the articles for creation on the list from the user sandbox out of a few hundred. So I thought I had to create a draft article name from my sandbox. I gave it the name Nicolo Schiro (gangster) because there already is an article with that name about an Italian race car driver. Libertybison (talk) 04:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * He is spelled differently, so disambiguation is not necessary, unless the two spellings are considered equivalent in Italian, and I do not know Italian. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:03, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * They are variations in spelling of the same name, like Catherine and Katherine or Steven and Stephen in English. But since the gangster never went by the spelling Niccolo, I would say they are not equivalent. But if there is no disambiguation, then a hatnote would be needed at the top for people trying to locate the race car driver's page. I didn't think of it while drafting but Schiro, the gangster, sometimes went by the first name variation Nicola instead, hence the nickname "Cola". I've made a note about that to the draft. The Nicolo Schiro spelling was what he used in official documents and is the spelling used in the sources I cited with the most information about him (Critchley and Warner). But some other sources (and articles on Wikipedia that mention him) use the Nicola spelling. Libertybison (talk) 18:56, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Since they are spelled differently, they don't need to be disambiguated, only hatnoted. Katherine is an extreme case because there are 24 possible ways to spell it, although some of the possible spellings are rare.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Removal of speedy deletion category
I notice that in you removed User:WFFund/sandbox/Worldwide Fistula Fund from Category:Candidates for speedy deletion and Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as copyright violations, into which the db-g12 tag puts any page tagged. It is presumably the removal from those categories that explains why the page has not been speedy deleted by an admin (as the admins won't have seen the page listed). I hope that this removal was not intended? --David Biddulph (talk) 07:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I did not mean to remove a speedy deletion notice due to copyright, for which I rebuked the author in respond to an inquiry. I agree that copyright violation should be speedy deleted.  If I removed it, that was an accident.  Robert McClenon (talk) 09:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My intention was to say that the article also qualified for speedy deletion as unamibigous promotion because it used the first person plural pronoun "we". Robert McClenon (talk) 10:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you may have been trying to change at least one other category entry to a link because it was a draft rather than an article, but presumably did a global change rather than a specific one. Anyway, it's gone now. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't trying to change a category link. I very seldom work with categories.  Whatever it was, it was an accident.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edit inserted colon characters at the start of a number of category links, including the relevant ones. I can't see your edit now, but I guess that you may have been using AFCH?  My guess is that AFCH may be trying to remove the draft from article categories, but it presumably relies on the reviewer to ensure that relevant categories remain.  Usual problem with powerful tools; they need using with care. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:27, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. I was using AFCH.  Maybe it did something that it wasn't supposed to do.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Name of business for Draft:Carolyn Pollack Jewelry
Hi Robert, I'm not sure which is the proper way to respond to the comment (please correct me if this is not the correct way), but I wanted to clarify that the business is Relios, Inc. and that's what I'd like the article title to be as well. It started off as a page for CPJ but it made more sense for the entry to be for Relios, Inc. so I checked with chat about restructuring the page and edited it to be about Relios, Inc. I tried to look up how to change the article name but it looked like that was something that was done after submitting (once again, please correct me if this is not correct and I'll change it).

Thanks!

Shenlyism (talk) 21:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 14:06:30, 19 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Boop2016
Boop2016 (talk) 14:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I am replying at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Am I out of line?
Geez, now I've got relatively uninvolved users making what seems like block threats against me on my talk page. Or maybe not, hard to say what's a veiled threat and what's a good faith warning. I've never seen the user before he showed up at the RFC, and never spoken to him. Can you check out my talk page (top boxes and recent changes) and tell me what you think? Am I right that it is a little strange for other people to stalk my talk page, hunting for IP/banned users, and then accusing me of SOAP when I noted my wishes and disagreement? I just thought you might be able to give me a quick sanity check. I was planning on staying out of the ref desk talk page for a while, but maybe I should plan on staying away from my talk page too? SemanticMantis (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have looked at your talk page and at its archive. I don't see any warnings or block threats.  Please tell me when they were made and whether you deleted them.  I agree that you have a right to ask other editors not to edit your talk page, and that FPAS, Elockid, and Johnuniq are wasting their time in tracking down the troll posts and deleting them from talk pages.  First, I don't think that you need to stay away from your own talk page.  Of the editors in question, the only administrator with whom you have tangled is FPAS.  If FPAS blocks you because of anything at your talk page, short of actual personal attacks, FPAS will be desysopped.  They have already been warned.  (Never mind the fact that The Rambling Man thinks that FPAS is ArbCom-favored.  That is nonsense.  Both TRM and FPAS were warned.)  Second, I see no need to stay away from the Reference Desk talk page.  Just don't use it as a soapbox, and you haven't.  I will add that, in my opinion, no one has been stalking your talk page.  They have stalking the troll, and it took them to your talk page.  They didn't help by removing troll posts.  I would advise you to keep a log of any hostile behavior by FPAS.  At some point, conduct at the Reference Desks will go to the ArbCom.  You don't need to worry about that.  FPAS and TRM, who have both been warned, do need to worry about that.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that Elockid is an administrator, but he seems to be more reasonable than FPAS, and I wouldn't worry about being blocked by him. I think that the aggressiveness with which a few editors are pursuing the banned user is both encouraging the banned user to continue socking to annoy them and is making you unnecessarily fearful.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Ollo Kambou Autobiography (Biography)
You just declined our new page - understandable as I'm new at this and not sure how to link webpages, which is the reason you gave for rejecting our submission. I did however cite as many webpages as possible and many of those include rosters for the teams on which he played. Could you give me more feedback as to what we did wrong and how to correct it?

Thanks. Ollo Kambou 18:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC) Ollo Kambou 18:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs)


 * Please visit the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 22:21:51, 19 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Boop2016
Thank you for your help, Robert. I'm having a difficult time navigating this site - but I'd like to thank everyone else who helped with my question as well. I will work on finding other sources for the article. I've also written one about Donna Drake, but I can't figure out how to submit it! I probably have not cited it properly anyway....Thanks again.22:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)Boop2016

Boop2016 (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 22:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Viviana_Mazza hi robert. i'm replying to your message about the viviana mazza article. is there anything in particular you think we could do in draft to avoid a deletion? i'm only too happy to follow your advice. Legs of man (talk) 13:22, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Refdesk troll
I don't think there's really much point in formally reporting all of them at SPI. The identity is obvious; a rangeblock is apparently not possible, and he doesn't seem to be storing sleeper socks either. If somebody feels we ought to keep track, maybe the easiest way would be just to keep a chronological list on the LTA page, without the bureaucratic overhead of having to re-open and re-close SPI pages all the time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, as you request. We don't know without pro-active involvement by Checkuser, and they don't work that way, whether he is storing sleeper socks.  (Are sleeper socks what one puts on one's feet at 2300 local time in the northern winter?)  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

21:47:49, 20 February 2016 review of submission by Hvdc news
Dear Mr. McClenon, Thank you for the review. However, I am trying to put up an English page for one in German is already existing. You mention more references: I included them. The link to English references is difficult since it is a German project. Wikipedia will be the reference at the end for the English speaking community. Please check the German wikipedia site to verify the need.

Thanks again.
 * See discussion at the Teahouse. The German Wikipedia may not be used as a reference.  The German-language references listed in the German Wikipedia may be copied to the English article.  A cross-link may be included in the English article so that German-literate readers can go to the German article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I was wondering about what the difference is between my draft any many other already published contents about similar or worse HVDC projects on wikipedia. To give examples: Please compare my draft to HVDC BorWin1HVDC DolWin1HVDC HelWin1 etc. Please help me. Hvdc news (talk) 18:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I took the discussion of your draft to the Teahouse. If you have any further questions, please take them back to the Teahouse.  I am aware that the previous Teahouse discussion has been archived, but you may always start a new one.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

WP:BEANS
Koala Tea Of Mercy ( KTOM's Articulations &amp; Invigilations ) 23:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

The Reptilian Agenda
Hi! I am responding to your message to me in regards to the reasons my page has so far been declined. Whilst i appreciate your concerns that you think i am trying to create the page for promotional purposes due the the fact that my username is the same as the page title, i can assure you this is not the case. This is my first account with Wikipedia, i have only ever used Wikipedia before as a reader. The reason i made this account in this name is because as a new user that has never done an article before, i did not know how things work here, and i chose a username the same as the article i intended to make the title, simply because i thought that was what you did. I am in no way affiliated with the people i am researching, have no financial interests, ect. If you can then advise me how i can solve this problem or change my username without having to close the account, create another one and then start the article all over again, i would be obliged, as i have no reason to be particular whatever my username is. It is not in anyway important to me that i call myself "the reptilian agenda". I simply did not want anything else other than "the reptilian agenda" displayed at the top of the article. I however after exploring the site now realise that your username does not have to be the same as the article you wish to submit.

Regarding the lack of written sourcing, i feel i have sources for all other claims except from those claims that are spoken about in the video under the heading "criminal confessions". Obviously the claims were made, however the claims were made as verbal confessions and stories spoken. I am actually surprised that i cannot find anything in writing on the internet regarding most of those confessions, i can only suggest that this is due to the fact that the video has been viewed only really by fellow followers of David Icke and Credo Mutwa, who rate their guru's extremely highly and dont really wish to make articles that dont do their gurus any favours. This was actually one of the reasons i wanted to get something up on the internet and bring some light to those confessions. If Credo Mutwa were a British citizen living in the western world then this would certainly be something would have been picked up on and i imagine would have been publically scrutinised in the papers. There are however plenty mentions of his confessions on youtube videos, internet forums ect, but i know those are not adequate sources. So can you please advise me how if possible i can get sourced what Credo Mutwa verbally confesses to during the documentary with David Icke without infringing on copyright grounds and legally put into written words what he confessed in the video?

Many thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Reptilian Agenda (talk • contribs) 04:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

RE: The Emily Dickinson RfC
Hi Robert McClenon. Thank you for your formal closure of the Emily Dickinson RfC. However I thought you'd want to know there is a slight formatting error in the wiki code that is causing it to display incorrectly. Richard27182 (talk) 08:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Robert McClenon (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Guidelines or example
Hello, Can you please provide an example which will help me edit the content.

thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajtress (talk • contribs) 16:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I am answering at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

draft declined
Hi Robert McClenon, I wrote a draft on my sandbox and submitted for a review, but it was declined because it reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Should I erase everything I did or is there a way I can keep my information. I'm so used to writing in an essay format. I don't know exactly what kind of information goes into an encyclopedia article. My topic is after-school programs and its effect on children. This is my first time working on wikipedia; I would appreciate it if you could help me. Thanks.Alma760 (talk) 18:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

ResellerRatings
The DRN topic on ResellerRatings should not have been closed yet. Techimo went and edited the article despite being instructed not to by the moderator. The article reads even more like company PR now than it did previously. What am I supposed to do now? ZeroShadows (talk) 23:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Here are my thoughts, very briefly. I didn't moderate or close the case.  It does appear that User:Techimo did go ahead and revert other edits in spite of instructions not to do so.  I don't want to give biased advice, so I will suggest either of two approaches.  The first, that I would prefer, is that you treat the closure as a good-faith error by an inexperienced volunteer moderator.  I think that the moderator made mistakes, but was really trying to help.  If so, you can request request help at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard talk page.   You could, alternatively, report him for editing against consensus to WP:ANI or WP:ANEW.  I hope that you don't, or at least that you first read the boomerang essay.  At this point, I think that the best options are to discuss how the DRN case was handled at the DRN talk page, but also to discuss the original issue via a Request for Comments.  Those are my comments.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I did not revert ZeroShadows "POV edits", which was the moderator's instruction. The page in question hadn't been edited in a long time. The moderator suggested that the article be revised to achieve NPOV, so I attempted to do that. The moderator didn't instruct User:ZeroShadows to make the edits, as doing so would be illogical. No conclusion was drawn that he was right and I was wrong: therefore why would he be tasked with the NPOV edit? We were both parties to the dispute and no conclusion was drawn. Any editor should be able to do that edit, and I undertook it. No consensus was reached: the moderator just asked for an NPOV rewrite. The moderator wrote, "I think before anyone adds a section, criticism or otherwise, the article should be rewritten to comply with wikipedia NPOV policy. I would suggest that the the section above be rewritten." The moderator also instructed me not to revert POV edits. I did not. The moderator did not instruct me not to do an NPOV rewrite. I'd also add that I attempted to compromise here by adding details to the article that ZeroShadows wanted to add: that it's neutral / balanced and doesn't contain a negative spin, does not seem to meet his approval. Techimo (talk) 04:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * You weren't supposed to make the edits and you've quoted out of context what the moderator stated. He said, " I very much believe that the claims by Techimo that he is not affiliated with ResellerRatings are suspect at best. Please fix the POV issues and then consider expanding the article. Techimo, do not revert any edits that ZeroShadows makes regarding POV. ZeroShadows: please make your edits constructive." To me, that means since the moderator suspects you of COI, I'm supposed to edit the article, and you're supposed to leave my edits alone, and we'll allow the moderator to further comment. Instead, you've gone and made edits and the article is, in my opinion, even more biased than it was previously. You've also added sections to the article, which the moderator specifically said not to do, before your POV was removed from the article. ZeroShadows (talk) 14:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Since it appears that this discussion will go on, please take it to the dispute resolution noticeboard talk page. I will be closing this discussion.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

06:49:01, 23 February 2016 review of submission by Laurent Demailly
I added a reference/citation to facebook's internal use - does that help? (there were also citation from venturebeat, ycombinator, github etc...)

Follow up
Follow up question there - thanks Laurent Demailly (talk) 03:45, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Elvis's question
Hi Robert, I am new to creating a Wikipedia article and my first draft was recently rejected. Please could you give me some feedback on how I could create a successful article. I am a university student hoping to create a Wikipedia page for the brand I am studying 'Allumer'. Thank you. Elvislondon (talk) 11:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Assistance with an Rfc
Hi, Robert. Per this request for closure, the user still refuses to consider closing the Rfc, concluding his decision having only skimmed through the discussion. Administrators seem uninterested in closing (or moving the discussion to the more suitable Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Leaders by year page, as the Rfc does not only apply to the article-in-question). The fact is that refused to gauge local consensus before launching the Rfc, contrary to Section 1 of WP:RFC; and refuses to correct the misleading title of the Rfc, so editors landing on the survey still seem to believe that the status quo is in fact not the status quo and vice versa, hence all the confusion and commotion. He has also confused the State of Palestine with the Palestinian National Authority, erroneously treating the two as the same thing. At the very least, the Rfc should be rebooted & neutrally-worded. Thanks.--Neve–selbert 19:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

FYI
Just FYI, Adriana Sanford, an article which you accepted at AfC is now been discussed for deletion at Articles for deletion/Adriana Sanford. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Mohammad Taqi Khalili article
Mr. McClenon, in reference to the wiki page for Ambassador Mohammad Taqi Khalili, you said that no independent reliable sources were used. I understand why a UN or an embassy source would be regarded as compromised, but why do you consider an Azerbaijani news source to be not reliable (i.e., I also cited azerbaijani.az website)? (Afgemb (talk) 01:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC))

04:07:23, 24 February 2016 review of submission by Robertpschneider
Dear reviewer, Thank you for taking time to look over my submission. This is a page for Frank Garvan, mathematician, who is a prominent figure in modern number theory. Most famously, Garvan is responsible for co-discovering the crank function in partition theory, which is a big deal and a widely praised discovery made with George Andrews (the preeminent number theorist of our era), who was Garvan's PhD advisor.

Note that "crank of a partition" has its own Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_of_a_partition) and Garvan is credited on that page.

I added a reference from an article by Richard Askey, another towering figure in modern mathematics, detailing Garvan's role in the discovery of the crank function. I do not know Garvan personally, and provided the best references I could to show his importance. I hope this is adequate; I believe it is vital that Garvan should have his own Wiki as he is an important figure in recent mathematics history, whose work is the subject of great interest for other researchers in the field.

Sincerely, Robert Schneider
 * I will be taking this to the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Chariot Rider/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Chariot Rider/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Request on 21:36:46, 24 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Natsats
Dear Robert McClenon - Thank you for your clarification.

Please refer to the news media articles about reference to North America Telugu Society NATS

http://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad/indian-americans-mourn-death-of-former-president-apj-abdul-kalam-1201234

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Vijayawada/nats-vows-to-nurture-telugu-children-in-us-into-world-leaders/article5779985.ece

http://www.greatandhra.com/articles/special-articles/nats-tax-seminar-became-a-big-success-in-new-jersey-72423.html

http://www.telugupeople.com/news/article_00101713_NATS_Columbus_Chapter_Kicks_off.asp

I have also added another link to certify that NATS is a non-profit organization.

Natsats (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

03:21:24, 25 February 2016 review of submission by Asoundtech
Curious as to why this article was rejected. The reason given is because it reads like a promotional piece, however I don't see (line by line) how it is different from other business entries here. Do you not readily accept entries from small businesses? Is it because there are links to the corporate website included in the copy (a common practice with many entries I see here). Can you please give me an example from the copy, of what you mean when you say that it reads like a promotional piece?

Please advise.

Request on 13:02:53, 25 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Jitso Keizer
Jitso Keizer (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC) Mr McClenon maintains that there is proven evidence of black holes. Such is not true, but very concentrated big masses obviously do exist. Note that near a black hole time stops, which contradicts fast processes around the Big Bang. The origin of the latter is not understood: a point does not exist in physics because it has no dimensions. Mr McClenon should read Yanchilin's book instead of adhering to a proven wrong theory, namely the general theory of relativity on which black holes, negative energy, accellerated expansion of the universe, inflation rest. Remark that potential is a scalar and adds, thus causing its delta positive in the denominator of the formula for an interval.

VisualEditor News #1—2016
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Did you know?

Among experienced editors, the visual editor's table editing is one of the most popular features. If you select the top of a column or the end of a row, you can quickly insert and remove columns and rows.

Now, you can also rearrange columns and rows. Click "Move before" or "Move after" to swap the column or row with its neighbor.

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

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has fixed many bugs. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are improving support for Japanese, Korean, Arabic, Indic, and Han scripts, and improving the single edit tab interface.

Recent changes
You can switch from the wikitext editor to the visual editor after you start editing. This function is available to nearly all editors at most wikis except the Wiktionaries and Wikisources.

Many local feedback pages for the visual editor have been redirected to mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.

You can now re-arrange columns and rows in tables, as well as copying a row, column or any other selection of cells and pasting it in a new location.

The formula editor has two options: you can choose "Quick edit" to see and change only the LaTeX code, or "Edit" to use the full tool. The full tool offers immediate preview and an extensive list of symbols.

Future changes
The single edit tab project will combine the "" and "" tabs into a single "" tab. This is similar to the system already used on the mobile website. (T102398) Initially, the "" tab will open whichever editing environment you used last time. Your last editing choice will be stored as an account preference for logged-in editors, and as a cookie for logged-out users. Logged-in editors will have these options in the tab of Special:Preferences: The visual editor uses the same search engine as Special:Search to find links and files. This search will get better at detecting typos and spelling mistakes soon. These improvements to search will appear in the visual editor as well.
 * , and
 * .  (This is the state for people using the visual editor now.)
 * , and
 * .  (This is the state for people using the visual editor now.)

The visual editor will be offered to all editors at most "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next few months. The developers would like to know how well the visual editor works in your language. They particularly want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect the following languages: Japanese, Korean, Urdu, Persian, Arabic, Tamil, Marathi, Malayalam, Hindi, Bengali, Assamese, Thai, Aramaic and others.

Let's work together
If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thanks!
 * Please try out the newest version of the single edit tab on test2.wikipedia.org. You may need to restore the default preferences (at the bottom of test2wiki:Special:Preferences) to see the initial prompt for options. Were you able to find a preference setting that will work for your own editing? Did you see the large preferences dialog box when you started editing an article there?
 * Can you read and type in Korean, Arabic, Japanese, Indic, or Han scripts? Language engineer David Chan needs help from people who often type in these languages. Please see the instructions at mw:VisualEditor/IME Testing if you can help. Report your results on wiki (Korean – Japanese – all languages).
 * Learn how to improve the "automagical" citoid referencing system in the visual editor, by creating Zotero translators for popular sources in your language! Join the Tech Talk about "Automated citations in Wikipedia: Citoid and the technology behind it" with Sebastian Karcher on 29 February 2016.

– Whatamidoing (WMF) 17:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Kundan Srivastava
Hi,

I created Article about Kundan Srivastava (http://www.kundansrivastava.com/news/) in sandbox here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Techguy91/sandbox Robert McClenon tried to move this sandbox to Draft: Kundan Srivastava, and was unable to do so. There have been two Miscellany for Deletion drafts of biographies of this individual, both of which resulted in deletion, and the title is now salted against re-creation. Please discuss this with the salting administrator, He Said.

May Draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kundan_Srivastava was deleted many times but i believe this article reliable sources are enough to publish.

IMP Sources - http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Scary-video-Indian-woman-beats-chokes-mother-in-6758996.php http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Shocking-video-of-woman-assaulting-mother-in-law-emerges-online/articleshow/50537993.cms

Google News Source - https://www.google.co.in/search?q=kundan+srivastava&rlz=1C1CHWA_enIN677IN677&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjboeLPvZPLAhUIGo4KHR_VDTgQ_AUIBygB

Please resolve the issue.

Thanks

Techguy91 (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You also posted this to the Teahouse, and it will be addressed there. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:00, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Jock McKay
Hi Mr McClenon. Regarding your concerns of my article not being clear as to whether i am writing about the expression or a possible person. As a Scotsman i have known Jock McKay all my life. "Och aye Jock Mckay" is a real expression. I have only just thought to find out what the roots for this expression is, and i came across a Comedian called 'Jock McKay' from the 1930's. It would appear then that "Jock McKay" probably was infact a real historical person lost in time, and is a good candidate for where the expression originated. I guess this is what my article is about. Many thanks(Nevets20 (talk) 23:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC))


 * I've CU blocked this editor, Nevets3 and Nevets4 as socks of User:The Reptilian Agenda. Doug Weller  talk 11:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I declined the article Draft: The Reptilian Agenda as purely promotional.  I declined Jock McKay for unrelated reasons.  They didn't quack the same, so it was necessary for CheckUser to confirm that they were coming from the same ISP.  I will nominate Jock McKay for MFD.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The Jock McKay article was in user space, and has been blanked. I don't need to MFD anything.  Thank you for taking action.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Gilbride
Hello Mr McClenon, thank you for your comments with regard to 'cleaning up' my references on Draft:Rick Gorne. I have now done this and would appreciate your review. Thank you. Gilbride (talk) 10:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)User talk:GilbrideGilbride (talk) 10:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Registration
Yes, it's true that anyone can register to use WP. It's also true that any adult citizen can register to vote in TX, and anyone in TX can get a photo ID. However, because of a history of systemic racism in the USA in general and TX in particular, the law in TX has been widely regarded as  racist in effect. I personally believe that was also the intent of these laws, but the defense is that the letter of the law is not racist.

Now, I'm not saying that this is completely analogous to WP registration, but I do believe that effectively banning IP users from the reference desks will end up discriminating against the young, the old, the less computer literate, and all the other "public library computer user" types of people. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:07, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Close of the ADCC DRN
Hi, you closed the DRN for Avoiding dangerous climate change. No one is at the talk. In fact if there is anyone it's the changer. An RfC will take months and months and will result in nothing as in my experience with other similar RfCs. You effectively killed a good article, along with Sandstein (AfD is typically one of the most effective cogs of Wikipedia, getting results in a week). Wikipedia absolutely malfunctions in the case of an exception. There's no return from this. Everyone will forget about this. At best in another 5 years some Redirect taskforce will take notice and merge to Climate change mitigation without noticing it used to be about the conference. Great job everybody. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 18:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The only thing I can do is put a mention of the origin of the article at the talk. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Pætur O. Berg/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Pætur O. Berg/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Pætur O. Berg/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Pætur O. Berg/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks Robert! But how can I fix format of references? Please help!

Jenny.

Jenny Patranella (talk) 10:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

Speedy deletion nomination of User:KingRXD/sandbox


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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Denniss (talk) 13:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

19:19:49, 29 February 2016 review of submission by Anarejo
Re: Sindhi Association of North America (SANA),

Sir this is the largest community organization of Sindhi Diaspora in the world. It is 32 years old. It is a grass roots, membership based organization. It has been regularly holding largely attended conventions every year in US or Canadian cities plus numerous regional & chapter meetings. It has held several conventions & conferences in Sindh, Pakistan too.

SANA is a vastly respected organization. It has played important role in human rights, democracy, women & minority rights, education, health & other fields. It is followed by thousands of followers on Facebook. One can easily search it on internet & check its credentials.

References: All the references in media section (18 links) are from outside, independent sources. Most are from Pakistan's largest English language newspapers & some independent papers & blogs. There is a large reference material in Urdu & Sindhi media too that is not included here.

The youtube channel link carrying hundreds of SANA videos does not belong to SANA. It is an independent channel.

There are also two book references where SANA has been mentioned.

Pl reconsider your decision. You may ask for any information.

Thanks

Anarejo (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Aziz Narejo


 * See my comments at the Teahouse to the effect that you need to rearrange the references. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 23:20:15, 29 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Phambric
Hi Robert, I wanted to follow back up on this. I fixed the problem and resubmitted the article a little over a week ago. Would you please be able to look at the requested change and let me know if it is good to go? Thank you in advance!

Phambric (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested
Thank you for your note about my entry regarding Max Weber's essay "Bureaucracy." Your comments are helpful, and I will respond to them within a couple of weeks. There are plenty of prominent sources referring to this article by Weber. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyWaters (talk • contribs) 01:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Чашка чая для вас!
46.138.53.23 (talk) 16:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)I have the opportunity to correct the text and to fulfill your requirements. On what page it can be done and in what time frame to the page is not removed?46.138.53.23 (talk) 16:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)== Request on 16:33:12, 2 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by 46.138.53.23 ==

Hello Robert, I have modified my article about Wes Ives. Can you review it for independent reliable sources and tell me if it's ok? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Wes_Ives Cheers, Dom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Doom (talk • contribs) 17:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Request for Intervention
First, I wish you'd replied to my reply @ my talk page. I sincerely believe that you misconstrued my position at the article talk page. Second. I've made my first reply to the other editors at the noticeboard, waiting until the moderator(?title) requested my input. I'm not familiar with the format, but I think the process is now "going off the rails." Could you please, at least, look in. Thanks. Tapered (talk) 07:32, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Karl-Hermann Geib
Hi Robert, I have changed my article, Karl-Hermann Geib taking into account all your remarks should. What shall I do more? Nordosm (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)--Nordosm (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 19:51:34, 4 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Promosis
Hi, many people have been asking for wiki information about Promosis, so I thought it would be helpful to add a page. However, you rejected it stating the author and topic are a conflict of interest. So am I expected to get a complete stranger to submit a page?

Promosis (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see my comments at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Courtesy
Due to your ruling on Talk:Uechi-ryū you have been identified as one of the participants in the next stage of the dispute resolution.98.227.140.14 (talk) 03:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Absent further involvement from editors or anyone else, I consider the current order accepted and will revert edits to it unless otherwise instructed or a person gives an objective reason for changing it. Thank you for your attention.98.227.140.14 (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Marie Banu
This was moved to article space immediately after you had declined it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Finnusertop. I didn't see your section when I added another one below on the same subject. The upshot is I've posted on Administrators' noticeboard to see if an admin can sort this out. It should never have been accepted in my view. Voceditenore (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * there is a response to this issue from Robert on my talk page. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

12:31:12, 5 March 2016 review of submission by 182.65.82.206
Hi Robert,

Can you guide me on how i can fulfill the obligations set by wiki to upload my page?

All errors checked can you please clear the error box that appears on top of page
Hi, I am john and an independant webmaster. i have created a userpage in the name of marie banu and uploaded content. All errors checked can you please clear the error box that appears on top of page. I am no way related to her but observe her work and impressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariebanu (talk • contribs) 08:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Canadian Plasma Resources, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Plasma and Stakeholders. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Marie Banu (2)
Hi Robert. Regarding the bizarre glitch at what is now Marie Banu, I have commented at Talk:Marie Banu and posted at Administrators' noticeboard to see if an admin can move it to draft space. Voceditenore (talk) 15:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. As I said at WP:AN, I don't think that an admin may move it to draft space unilaterally.  I have gone ahead and nominated it at Articles for Deletion, which on my reading of policy is the only approach to use for it.  Also, I have reported the user account at WP:UAA as a misleading username because it is the name of a real person and says that they are not her.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:51, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 16:18:50, 6 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Ibnwaqas
Hey Robert, This article is not a crystal ball, you can see List of Mahdi claimants, each claimant of Mahdi has a wikipage. We found that Muhammad Shakeel bin Hanif of India has claimed to be Mahdi. Whatever articles we found of him online, many of them were in Urdu, tried to get as many information about him from these articles. His teaching basically revolved around condition on his arrival this is what we found, hence that was detailed in the wiki, from his book (ISLAMIAT SCIENCE AUR... NAZARAYAT) published locally. Soon we will include his name in List of Mahdi claimants page when a wiki article on his name is launched. The article has been written with neutral approach, any word or sentence which affects the neutrality can be edited or removed. The purpose of article creation is to let people know about this new mahdi claimant along with other mahdi claimants(each one of them has wiki article already created).

Ibnwaqas (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * See my comments at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Enkhuizen
Hello Robert McClenon,

You've declined my article about the coat of arms of Enkhuizen. One of your reasons was the rarity of having just one supporter. As you know it is a Dutch coat of arms, and in the Netherlands having one supporter isn't that rare. There are litteraly hundreds of coats of arms of both former and current municipalities with just one supporter. I'll try to ad at least one more source (a book: De gemeentewapens van Nederland, 1968, by Kl. Sierksma), and maybe I'll ad Heraldry of the World as well. Would that be sufficient enough?

Oh and about English being my second language... that's right. If you could give me some more feedback, it would help me realy much. Thank you in advance, Dqfn13 (talk) 21:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I declined the article because I thought it needed another independent reliable source. My comment about having one supporter was to the effect that you might mention that having only one supporter, while unusual in European heraldry in general, is common in Dutch heraldry.  (For that matter, the coat of arms of the United States is unusual in not having any supporters.  This was a deliberate statement that a nation should rely on itself and not on other nations.)  Adding the book as a source would be good.  As to the quality of the English, I suggested that you ask for copy-editing at WP:WikiProject Netherlands. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I'll do my best to correct my English (I must admit, I'm a better reader than writer), and I'll ad more sources. Dqfn13 (talk) 11:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Possible vandalism on your User Talk page
Hello Robert,

I was just tidying up the Neil Shen bio article that you reviewed in AfC. It still has issues, but that is not why I visited, nor am I complaining about it. Afterward, I glanced at your user talk page, and the first thing I saw, prior to the enumerated headings, was this:

"Thanks for being so rude and harsh. I am surprised how could you be so adamant with a person like me who is not visually competent. I just wanted the world to know that my book is a result of endless hardwork. I am not trying to advertise my book in any way. Neighter i am looking up any kind of sympathy. I gave up my government job because i couldnt see. I am not begging for anything. I dont understand why you are not able to understand my feeling. Once again thanks..."

Perhaps you intended to leave that there, but just in case you didn't, I wanted to let you know about it. It is so petulant that I laughed a little. Keep up the good work as an editor here!

--FeralOink (talk) 05:27, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:32, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

War of the Pacific
Hi Robert,

Can an editor refuse to substantiate his claims, refuse a formal mediation about an article section and continue to tag the section?. I think that is disruptive editing. What do you think?. -- Keysanger (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * P.S: However, editors who refuse to take part in mediation and refuse to properly discuss their position on content may be edit warring or disruptively editing, to which the response is usually blocking by an administrator or sanctioning by the community. WP:MC/P

Jack Vees page
Hi Robert,

I hope this is the right way to reply to your comment.

I don't believe that I have a conflict of interest. I know a bit about Jack Vees' work from my time at Yale University, but I am not personally incentivized in any way to create this page. I noticed that many of his colleagues (Martin Bresnick, David Lang) who also teach in the Yale School of Music have wiki pages and thought I would make a wiki contribution.

Thank you for your question, and please let me know if there's anything else I should include on this page!

Best, ChezVees (talk) 19:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The Vees in your username made me wonder whether you were related to him.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:02, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 16:44:06, 9 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by KatieTakacs
Hi! I appreciate you reviewing our page. Could you give me a little more information about what other sources I need to show notability? I have submitted my article a few times with a variety of third party sources, but I don't understand why that don't count as "significant coverage." "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it need not be the main topic of the source material. "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent. We have listed sources that meet these requirements. Please identify those that do not meet these requirements. And please let me know which types of articles I can include that will boost Highfive's notability. Thanks!

KatieTakacs (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mhenni nesrine/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

21:23:54, 9 March 2016 review of submission by Liljtrbug
Dear Robert, thank you for your notification, I have never used this before and im trying to figure it out. I do have more to say on the post I submitted prematurely in not understanding how to save what was written. I have since added the bulk of it to the title as mentioned. Its a theory I came up with on how to Help the process of Terra-forming through core creation/re-ignition/re-animation. I resubmitted it, I think. But, I see where I might need to do more..such as a signature. Thanks for your help.Liljtrbug (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Has this been published in reliable sources? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:45, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

00:31:33, 10 March 2016 review of submission by Maysip
The guy is not a "McMoron or a Clown", he stumped the reviewers around.

Die Geister, die ich rief ...
Hello Robert,

In many discussions there is sometimes the belief that the more participants the more secured are the conclusions. On the other hand some people says The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Wikipedia has chose a middle way, all are invited to discuss, but at the end there is no voting.

I have worked in the article for years, and there is no deficit of editors. Take the case of editor (if words could kill I were dead!), it was a WP:SPA or editor, who tried to introduce a psychology magazine as reliable source to prove the date of the beginning of the war. There are a lot of editors like Arafael, Rasdar, and other scientists and historians who have tried to rewrite the history of the war. I think you don't need them. What we need are good Wikipedia editors ready to investigate, understand and to describe the war according reliable sources and with a NPOV. Ask yourself: why do fear two academic editors to represent their knowledge before the mediation committee? I don't believe that my poor English proficiency is their reason to fear the questions of the tribunal.

The true reason, IMHO, is that they have nothing to say. They have an ideology, they believe that the war MUST be explained in a way concordant with their views. But they don't find the sources to support the ideology in the current world, Sater, Pike, Basadre and all the others say another things. Therefore they protest against the English literature but they have never offered a explanation or a alternative text. They don't have reliable sources. Their only message is "the war wasn't so, it was different", but they are unable to say how. As replacement they have many personal attacks (you know now what I mean).

If you have time, you will find Sater's work in Andean Tragedy. From page 37 to 43 (of the book, internet page 53) you will find the section Seeking the Origin of the War. They are 7 interesting pages. Read it and compare what I wrote in the article. Is W. Sater an authority in the issue? Yes, he is. He has wrote many books about the War of the Pacific. It is interesting that he don't have his own opinion, he revisited the opinion of multiple books and primary sources and relates the multiple causes of the war, what I have tried to reproduce in the article.

So, the title of the section is an reflection of Goethe's Der Zaubelehrling (The Sorcerer's Apprentice). The lines in which the apprentice implores the returning sorcerer to help him with the mess he has created have turned into a cliché, especially the line Die Geister, die ich rief ("The spirits that I called"), a garbled version of one of Goethe's lines, which is often used to describe a situation where somebody summons help or uses allies that he cannot control, especially in politics. -- Keysanger (talk) 00:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiLove
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks"> Hello Robert McClenon, Peter SamFan has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Request on 23:49:10, 10 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Brady Blair
I added references and want to come back and create this article over the course of a day or so. I am surprised at how fast these are being reviewed and denied despite my efforts to provide information requested. How an association that directly impacts over 8.9 million people is irrelevant is beyond me - and since I included the links I cannot understand how I didn't meet the one requirement that was asked of me.

I understand I am an inexperienced user but I would appreciate some guidance aside from a canned message of denial.

Brady Blair (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I will reply at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Amway - NPOV dispute
Not sure where I should put this so I am copying it to your Talk page as well:


 * I have previously notified the editors on the article's talk page - FTC in lead. Then I have noticed that the discussion is taking place below, under the NPOV dispute section and a new user was commenting there. Thank you Robert for pointing out that the notification must take place on the users' talk pages. I have corrected it - the users were notified on their talk pages. But I still don't know how to add Grayfell into the dispute resolution process.--Historik75 (talk) 00:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I added the new editor into the dispute by editing the source code of the dispute resolution process. I hope I have done it correctly.--Historik75 (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I got the message, thanks. As a heads up, Template:DRN-notice should always be substituted (Help:Substitution). I almost accidentally edited the template itself when trying to respond (which, looking at the template's history, appears to be a common mistake). Grayfell (talk) 02:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Oops. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:48, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

14:30:04, 11 March 2016 review of submission by Yoon circle1
Hello Robert McClenon. My name is Yoon Hee Kim, working at CIRCLE1 gallery. I made another version of text after declination from you on my first draft, because it was copied from our website. And than now you said that you will consider the second draft but it has been already more than a week. I was wondering how is it going and what should i edit more if it's not acceptable. Thank you very much! Looking forward to hearing from you. Best Regards, Yoon Hee Kim


 * I will reply at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Review process error fixed
Hi Robert,

The reference error mentioned by you in our article "Prince Sultan Advanced Technology Research Institute" has been corrected. Request you to please proceed with the review.

Thanks,

Hnhusain (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Elizabeth A Spencer
Hello Robert

I started a page for Elizabeth Spencer (who is unknown to me) because she was listed as a woman scientist who lacked an entry in WIkipedia. I decided to create an article about her and what you see is the totality of her biography that I could gather. She is evidently an established academic but not famous enough to have multiple independent sources about her professional biography. You see I have been able to find three sources about her and her professional work. I think it would be difficult to find any more. On this basis her entry should be allowed or she should be removed from the list of women scientists needing an article about them in wikipedia. (Healthps (talk) 04:24, 12 March 2016 (UTC))

09:14:42, 12 March 2016 review of submission by Riverlogsoftware
Please take a look at the links to the IBM page and Apple's "Think Different" Page. Those are real advertisements. What I am quoting is a thought. The "Think Big" wiki page is only an economic strategy. When that has not relevance to the real meaning, why is that page being refereed ? Give it a broader thinking. "Think Big." Let there be light among the society. Let these small sparks bring more light to the world. All news, images and other links that was provided as a part of the review process has nothing to do with the concept "Think Big" that THIS page is trying to bring out. While I have stated about this and also about wiki and the reviews, I like to request you to reconsider this again. The page is NOT SOUNDING LIKE AN AD ANYMORE. However, the company name is very much relevant. I have not given any links to the company name but given links to the similar thinking. I like to look at this "Think Big" as a thought and so "Think Big (Thought)" page. None exist on that. Please also consider the importance given to the subject matter and its dimension where a motivation and/or encouragement is intended for the young. Let there be light! Let us all "Think Big"

Request on 20:55:11, 12 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Mikewick2
Hi, I'm seeking to disambiguate one Wikipedia entry from another. The already existing Wikipedia page for Quinn Walker is for a musician born in Oakland, CA and is a different person than the entry I created for Quinn Walker born in New Haven, CT. I'm not sure how to create a disambiguation page though as I found the help page confusing.

Mikewick2 (talk) 20:55, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Victor Griffin (Quapaw)
Hi Robert, not sure if you will review the Draft:Victor Griffin (Quapaw) article again, but I helped the author in finding citations, and Griffin's article is far better sourced than those of most contemporaneous Native political or religious leaders. Yuchitown (talk) 21:16, 12 March 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown
 * I accepted it. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! Enjoy the rest of your weekend! Yuchitown (talk) 21:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)Yuchitown

05:23:38, 14 March 2016 review of submission by Jean T. Cullen
Hello - Robert McClenon - thanks for your comments. I will go through the article and follow your directions. I respectfully wish to arrive at a point where some or all of it is publishable. I do think there are adequate external references; e.g., SF Encyclopedia; Karen Wiesner's history book (she is a well known author and Web publishing historian); we have a number of resources I have mentioned at the Clocktower Books Museum pages which I may be able to cite directly in the Wikipedia article. A lot of 1996 info is ephemeral, at the same time, so piecing this fragile stuff together is not easy. Maybe you can work with me a little bit since I am totally inexperienced in Wikipedia matters. Thanks/Jean-Thomas "John" CullenJean T. Cullen (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that this is already being discussed at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Draft:J Luke Wood
Hi, I wanted to get some advice for the following page. It seems that he has published several books as an author, been in a couple of mainstream news articles, and has co-developed several instruments that are widely used in the college system. There are a lot of references / external links as well as the books he wrote listed on the article. Do any of them look useful if used as citations? Could that help the page to stand? Normanbockwell (talk) 07:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:J_Luke_Wood
 * I will comment at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 08:52:42, 14 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Fy6lancs
Hi

I have been referred to the notable section for boxers on wikipedia. However, I can point to an number of boxers that do not meet these criteria that are on wikipedia. For example, Jack Arnfield, Matty Askin etc.

Fy6lancs (talk) 08:52, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I will comment at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 19:54:16, 14 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Michieldewit
First of all, thank you for the very quick review! I just have one short question: of the sources associated with the start.me article, which do you think are reliable and independent? Michieldewit (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sources 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7 definitely are not independent. If you want to ask about the other sources, I suggest that you ask at the Teahouse, and ask someone who reads Dutch to comment on the Dutch sources.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:16, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

21:27:50, 14 March 2016 review of submission by BlackoutDTLA
Hi Robert -- I am trying to be as thorough as possible. I am going to try again. Thanks so much for your help.BlackoutDTLA (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Stop resubmitting the infobox. It isn't a matter of being as thorough as possible with the infobox, but of building an article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help
Thanks so much for your guidance on the Barbara Yeaman article! Krista.Gro (talk) 02:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

11:03:12, 16 March 2016 review of submission by Oriabr
Oriabr (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC) Hello, Per your comments on my draft, i would like to point out my referances to reliable independed sources such as: - The primary source of diamond price information - online news and market analysis - The world’s largest diamond trading network with over $7 billion of daily listings
 * Rapaport (diamonds.net) which is:
 * wikipedia itself has referance to NIRU on de beers 'Sight Holder' value (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sightholder)
 * Debeers group- world’s leading diamond company
 * The Israel Diamond Institute- represents all organizations and institutions involved in Israel’s diamond industry.

I wrote the article as non-comersialized as possible so you would not consider it as marketing purpose. if you think that a specific part is marketing oriented- please point it out and I will fix it accordingly.

In conclustion, I think that NIRU Group is noteable due to its great acchivments and its presanse in the diamond world. I hope that you can reconsider.

Ori

Maya civilization RFC
How do you get 9 "no" and 3 "yes" "!votes" to a "rough consensus" for yes? You need to provide a much better rationale for that decision for me not to take that closure to review. Your current rationale sounds like it is simply your own position. Rough consensus can be claimed by administrators citing a policy reason, not simply by a "idontlikeit" argument favoring such a small minority view.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 19:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I have asked at ANI whether your use of the ROUGHCONSENSUS policy is acceptable in the RfC closure.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 19:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've moved your closure review request from WP:ANI to WP:AN. The real question is whether I misunderstood whether the Yes and the No meant to use Mayan once or twice.  If I misunderstood the question, then the closure can be reversed.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I moved it back, I dont think it is a good precedent to move discussions about your own actions between fora. I think the rationale you gave, including the invocation of WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS, suggests strongly that you understood what viewpoints Yes and No referred to, and that you personally agreed with the minority viewpoint. If you did not mean to overrule the majority, I think you should revert your closure yourself. If you meant to express you agreement with the minority viewpoint that would also be an option. And if you believe the arguments of the majority are invalid and can be disregarded per WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS you should argue why.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 21:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Since you didnt revert your closure yourself I have done it for you. Regardless of whether you misunderstood the question or misapplied the roughconensus policy, the closure was clearly erroneous. Please be more careful in the future.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:02, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

14:42:38, 18 March 2016 review of submission by Lady Boswell
Good morning. Thank you for the prompt reply regarding my draft. I will work on bringing the draft up to Wikipedia standards. I understand the problem with the format of the specific citation you highlighted in the text. Is there a global problem about citations, and if so, can you give guidelines on where specifically you think more documentation is required? Also, can you direct me to instructions for formatting headings? Lady Boswell (talk) 14:42, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you delete Venture Forth?
Please delete Venture Forth, because the article is about an company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. So go head and delete the page Theog11 created including Venture Forth and that's it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifesavers2004 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You have nominated the page for deletion. The AFD will run for seven days.  If you have any questions, ask at the Teahouse or the Help Desk.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Draft on Extended Mathematical Programming (EMP)
Hi Robert, You have asked whether there exist any textbooks that describe EMP and GAMS. People who want to learn about GAMS typically first turn to the GAMS User's Guide (there is a a book and an online version ). The User's Guide has a chapter on Stochastic Programming with EMP. The non-stochastic parts of EMP, the keywords and how to use them are described as part of the JAMS solver manual. This is available online and as a chapter of the book on GAMS compatible solvers. There are several application specific text book like publications on GAMS. They include nonlinear programming with GAMS, mathematical programming models in engineering and science with GAMS , practical financial optimization with GAMS. The book from Gabriel et al. referenced in the article is a mixture of textbook and review and it recommends EMP for solving Variational Inequalities. The article from Grossmann referenced in the article is a review and names EMP in conjunction with LOGMIP as the only solution technology for disjunctive programs that model sequencing problems. I hope this answers your question. Talomar (talk) 20:45, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Advice for AfC
Hi Robert, as you may have noticed, I have recently gotten into reviewing AfC submissions. I have a few questions i wanted to ask.

What is the best way to figure out what are the best categories and Wikiprojsects to add to articles?

When reviewing articles, I have a pretty good idea of the guidelines, but obviously nowhere near what you and some of the others have, how bold should I be when making decisions?

Is there a list somewhere of what constitutes a reliable source and what doesn't? I've just been using my best judgment but have been caught off guard a couple times by other reviewer comments. Example: one of the other reviewrs said that the Daily Mail wasn't a reliable source, and i hadn't known that (nor known where to find that information).

I've taken a habit of just reviewing the "easy ones" where the decision is pretty clear cut, but I'm not sure how much help this is really. Am I better off leaving it to the more experienced reviewers?

Any tips or recommendations would be great. InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:06, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

A Few Rules for AFC
I'm not Roger. I'm Robert. Roger is a different experienced editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know a good way to add categories and Wikiprojects. I guess, and then let New Page Patrol be the next step possibly. As a result, some articles are undercategorized or unprojected. Maybe we should ask for general advice n that objective at the Teahouse or the Help Desk. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

As to what is a reliable source, my rule is that if it looks like a newspaper and it isn't associated with the subject, it probably is reliable, but I do try to look for at least one source that is largely than local. If an article appears to be supported by multiple independent sources, my usual rule is to accept it. I am not particularly bold in that respect, I do often enough leave an article to other reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, most drafts are either inherently not notable, or not ready for mainspace. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

I have a few rules that will always cause me to decline a draft. First, if it doesn't have a proper lede sentence, I decline it. Second, if it includes any external links in the article body, I decline it. Third, if it has even a little peacock language, I decline it. Those are easy. Fourth, if it was previously declined and the changes haven't materially addressed the review, I decline it. Fifth, if it uses the second person plural pronoun "we", I decline it and tag it for speedy deletion. Sixth, if the author and the subject are the same, I almost always decline it if it is of a person, and always decline it if it is of a company, and then consider reporting the username. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

There are also a few drafts that any reviewer has to decline, such as test edits. The only question, which doesn't really matter, is what reason to use. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, most drafts will never make it into mainspace. Either they aren't notable, or the author doesn't have the skills to write the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Maybe more thoughts later. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Robert, very useful info!  InsertCleverPhraseHere  05:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Maya Civilization
Hi. You did get that wron I believe. I thought youwere going to reopen it or change your close, would you please do one of those? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 07:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, User:Doug Weller - It was already reopened, and has now been closed to retain the double wording of the lede. It was complicated by one user who meant well, and one user who didn't mean well in that they insisted on thinking that I didn't mean well.  Maunus appeared to be interesting in insisting that I had closed in bad faith, which is why they wanted to discuss at WP:ANI.  I tried to request closure review at WP:AN, and they took exception because they wanted to discuss a bad faith close, when everyone else saw it as the close of a confusingly worded RFC.  BMK then decided to close at WP:AN by saying that it was going around at WP:ANI, which left only the ANI thread running, and it was then closed.  It appears that KrakatoaKatie finally closed it the other way.  I wasn't going to take any further non-administrator action after there was someone ready to claim bad faith.  I think that a WP:TROUT is in order for Maunus, but I am out of the discussion now.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Everyone of the 12 people who commented in the RfC understood the wording perfectly. If you really didnt understand it that really throws into doubt whether you even read their comments. It is very hard for me to see how that close could have been a good faith error, unless you simply didnt read any of the comments by the people who commented. So a trout for you it is.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, I just saw the new close. Doug Weller  talk 15:06, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. It was complicated not only by my misreading of a confusingly worded RFC, but one editor who was certain of bad faith and so wanted to discuss somewhere else and another editor who was trying to minimize the number of threads without regard to which was the right thread.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * In my experience people who have made good faith mistakes, simply correct them when it is pointed out. You could also look at how your closing "rationale" strongly suggested bad faith 1. by citing "WP:roughconsensus" which suggested that you knew you were siding with the minority argument and intentionally overrided the majority, and 2. by stating bluntly in your rationale your personal agreement with the "yes" argument (which you summarized correctly showing that you did indeed understand it) was correct. Those were two bad moves that you probably want to avoid in the future when you close discussions, especially if at the same time you dont read the arguments made by the editors who commented. So lets just say that "errors were made at all sides" and move on. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Lunar Polar Hydrogen Mapper draft
You mistakenly moved it to User: Lunar Polar Hydrogen Mapper instead of Draft space. I moved it on and nominated the redirect from the mistaken title for deletion. —teb728 t c 05:41, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

18:07:58, 20 March 2016 review of submission by TheVictorCrowley
Hey Robert, I made all requested changes. Thanks for the advice. I am resubmitting because the SOCK investigation was proposed by the one admin, and has been closed. Again, I am not Craig Walendziak, I don't know him, just a fan of his films and music. No COI. No Self Promotion in here. Just a factual article. More than enough references... and I am proud of it. One admins vendetta shouldn't stop a factual article. It meets The Five Pillars.
 * I will let some other editor review it at this point. If you want to get an expedited review, ask at the Teahouse.  Take out the references to IMDB. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:37, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon Hey Robert, thanks for the advice again. I'm surprised IMBD is not a reliable source since Credits need to be verified and approved by Procudtion companies, WGA, PGA and DGA. It's a very thorough process. Either way, I removed the IMBD stuff. I don't need an expedited review - just looking for a fair one :). I appreciate all your help. TheVictorCrowley (talk) 18:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The SPI is not closed. Jytdog (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Discuss the SPI either at the draft talk page, Draft talk:Craig Walendziak or the Teahouse. It would be helpful if you could provide a link to the SPI so that we can view its status.  As I said above, I will let some other editor review it at this point, and a link to the SPI would be helpful.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Cincotta1/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Cincotta1/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 21:11, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Cincotta1/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Cincotta1/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Danny Simmonds


A tag has been placed on Danny Simmonds 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) 10:42, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of John Westcott (footballer)


A tag has been placed on John Westcott (footballer) 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) 10:42, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Footballer notability
Hello Robert. I see that you moved two footballer articles to draft space on the basis that the players had only played in the Football League. The FL is classed as a fully-professional league (see WP:FPL) and as such, any player who has played in it meets WP:NFOOTY. Also perhaps worth mentioning that this is not limited to first tier leagues. Cheers, Number   5  7  16:12, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay. It's complicated and confusing.  If the author resubmits the drafts and you want to accept them, you can.  Alternatively, they can state whether the player played in Football League Championship, Football League One, or Football League Two.  So the articles will go back into article space.
 * It's also slightly confusing because the country names for association football leagues are not the sovereign state but the constituent countries. The British, having invented the sport, are represented under multiple names.  However, I already knew that.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 18:49:00, 23 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Rngirard
Hi Robert, thank you for taking the time to review my article. Can you help me understand which sources are considered associated to the club? I understand how monthlyclubs.com is, but the mentions from CNN, Fortune, and WSJ were given naturally. Thanks so much for your help! Rngirard (talk) 18:49, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * WSJ, Fortune, and CNN are in the External Links section of the draft, not in the References section. If you intend to use them as references, move them to the References section, preferably by the use of footnotes in the article.  If you want any further advice, ask at the Teahouse about references in general and the difference between References and External Links.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:59, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am addressing your questions at the Teahouse, but, as I noted, I think that your draft can be accepted if you make the necessary format changes. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

My Name is G.Gagananand. I work in a Research Firm and would like to know more about Notability. a query was posted to Help Desk Team of Wikipedia regarding this from my user login. Thanks in Advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by G.gagananand (talk • contribs) 14:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am addressing your question at the Help Desk, but notability is only one of the problems with your draft. I don't know what it is supposed to be about.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Request on 14:55:05, 24 March 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Doicho Uzunov
Excuse me for my writing style but this is the first time in my life I am writing an article. I understand that you don’t accept “peacock” language, but I thought that describing the person the way I know him is OK. So, if I understand properly, the description of my friend Georgy should not contain any words describing his personal character? Regarding the references – is it not enough the articles in the magazines and the IHPVA (international Human Powered Vehicle Association) official speed records for the guy to be recognized as a notable Canadian. I see that bloody Canadian murderers like Robert Pickton, Clifford Olson and Paul Bernardo have been honored in Wikipedia, but you think that a guy creating a human powered vehicle that goes with the speed of 83 mph and holding the record for 10 years is not notable enough? Anyway, I humbly need your help in correcting this article in a way acceptable for Wikipedia.

Cheers Doicho Uzunov Doicho Uzunov (talk) 14:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am addressing what appears to be a request for help at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:33, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

20:38:06, 24 March 2016 review of submission by PaintbrushArt
my artical was not accepted - I need to show notoriety. I added links under external link to show notoriety. Due to the subject matter, it was only added to the bottom on the page. I hope this show what you are looking for. I am new to this and do not understand all this coding stuff.

Thank you
 * I will comment at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Barony of Blackhall
Hello Robert. We had asked for resolution of a dispute with Justlettersandnumbers concerning the Barony of Blackhall page. Discussion has been ongoing for years and now our article has just disappeared. There had been discussion on the talk page but the old entries were removed two years ago after a seeming resolution. Justlettersandnumbers appears repeatedly in the history as having removed text. We understand that the dispute resolution process has been stopped by you, yet it seemed to us that there is sufficient history in the talk page to search for a resolution and that Justlettersandnumbers does have an elaborate contact page. Justlettersandnumbers has removed our article repeatedly at a stroke and left something else in its place. Should we reconstitute the original to get the dispute-resolution process moving? He will just remove it again if we do, we think. We left our comments on his (or her) talk page, but he has removed them also. Please help us here. Thanks and kind wishes. Endidro (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

We have just returned the article to its original with a note to please leave, as under disput resolution. we suspect that Justlettersandnumbers will vandalise it again. It's the best we can do to prepare the resolution.Endidro (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

We have just noticed that many of the changes made by Justlettersandnumbers in the history of the page have been removed!!! This person is out of control and accuses =us= of vandalism.Endidro (talk) 18:08, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I will be commenting at the article talk page, Talk: Barony of Blackhall. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

We are grateful. Thank you. Endidro (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC) Thanks, we are attempting to answer the flagged questions.Endidro (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC) We have now completed a list of references and categories. Please tell us what else needs to be done. Immensely grateful for your help. Thank you.Endidro (talk) 22:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, Robert! Just so that you know: I've on this editor at ANI. Best regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:03, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

The article has been taken off again. It's strange that other Scots barony articles didn't get the same treatment. I also thought that you had stopped any more intervention until late April. Bgillesp 89.157.195.106 (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You appear to have a habit of jumping to conclusions (if not of saying things that can easily seen to be not true). Are you saying that the article has been deleted, which it has not, or that it has been semi-protected, which it has been?  It has been semi-protected.  If you read both my words and those of the locking administrator, you will see that I never said that I would do anything about the article.  The locking administrator did say that they would lock the article for one month, and it is locked.  You want to know why this differs from other Scottish baronies, and the answer is, first, that most Scottish baronies have not recently been in dispute, and, second, that most Scottish baronies are not subject to unsourced changes.  Are you one of the four unregistered editors who was in a the User:Endidro committee, which has been blocked for being a committee?  If you notice, the locking administrator said that each of the individuals should register an account, not that each of the individuals might edit as an IP.  If you want to discuss the article, first register an account.  If you have any questions, please discuss at the talk page, which is not locked, or ask questions at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:Lewis rainey/sandbox has a new comment
<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;width:20em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;margin-left: 1.5em;width: 90%;"> I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Lewis rainey/sandbox. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for your feedback re Patricia Fenn. I will try a bit harder! Best wishes

Tishtosh20 (talk) 16:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

18:43:46, 29 March 2016 review of submission by Szeider
I've removed the reference which cited Wikipedia and added some content. Please take another look at it. I appreciate your comments. SZ

collaboration
Lets collaborate on a article. Hihiimpal (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

16:08:29, 30 March 2016 review of submission by 2602:306:BCCC:A310:D13A:D57E:C362:43C1
Robert, have you had a chance to look at my changes? Was