User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 25

.

Speedy deletion nomination of Lunar Republic


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Lunar Republic, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Girth Summit  (blether) 16:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah - I kind of feel I should apologise for the CSD - apologies if I've spoiled an April 1st joke. Sorry if I came across as a bit humourless there. Girth Summit  (blether)  16:41, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Girth Summit - No apology required. The rules say that one shouldn't do April Fool in article space or Help space.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes - but if I'd spotted that it was your article, I might have dropped you a note here pointing that out rather than CSDing it, in the spirit of DTTR. If I'd racked my brain, I might have even been able to think of a humorous way of saying it... Girth Summit  (blether)  16:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Section headings at case request
Hi Robert. In order to keep things uniform and due to other recent kerfuffles over section headings, I've removed your sub-headings at the current case request as a clerk action. Sub-headings also make it a tad more annoying for the clerk team to check word limit, etc., which has been an issue in this case request. Rest assured that, even without the sub-headings, your comments are organized such that ArbCom can fully understand and evaluate them. Please let me know if you have any questions. ~ Rob 13 Talk 04:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:DRN
Hello! 2 quick things regarding the WP:DRN, as we seem to be the only volunteers active at the moment. Thanks! --MrClog (talk) 12:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) I'll be going on holiday. I informed the participants, but if you would be able to take over (and willing to), that would be awesome. It seems to be going in the right direction.
 * 2) If you close a case, please (i) place DRN archive top above drn filing editor (as per WP:DRN/V) and (ii) remove , so that the bot will automatically archive it.

Draft:Jeff Hull (artist)
1. Doesn't look like it's anywhere near properly formatted. 2. It's weird how it talks about Nonchalance and Nonchalance's goals very quickly rather than his work and the person in question. 3. The main issue I have is that it's written more about his businesses than about him.

Pkin8541 (talk) 20:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Portal Issues RFArb
This is a courtesy notice that the portal issues RFArb has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 22:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft for GPV web-site
Dear Robert McClenon

We would like to publish the draft of GPV Int. on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:GPV_International_A/S

Could you please give us further instruction of what we can do and how we can revise the text to make it suitable.

We have a large competitor that features also a site on Wikipedia, and structure and content is obviously quite similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zollner

(which, by the way, has no external citations or references but just one link to their web-site)

And on top GPV already has a web-site on the Danish Wiki:

https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPV_International_A/S

How can we achieve the goal? Thank you for your support in advance.

Erolatccsgroup (talk) 08:41, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Portals
DS will never be applied against an Admin and several of the worst offenders are admins. On another note, this may prove useful to you Miscellany for deletion/Portal MFD Results Legacypac (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Legacypac - You forgot to provide a heading, but you weren't responding to a post by a blocked user. I will reply shortly.  Thank  you for the metrics.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

You may decide to put up another proposal after the supervote on X3 that turned 22 in favor amd 14 against into a no. There is a an auto counter at List of Portals that says 5,293 portals now. Update 29 Feb 13 said 5,705 portals which should be near the peak. There are over 600+ pages (nearly all portals) in Category:Miscellaneous_pages_for_deletion so maybe 10% of the peak number of portals is up for deletion and about 7% of the peak have been deleted already. I know your a numbers guy so thought this might interest you. Legacypac (talk) 04:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Now 5,112 portals and 1923 pages at Category:MFD Legacypac (talk) 07:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Legacypac - Does 5112 mean the total number of portals in portal space? Does 1923 mean the total number of pages in portal space that have been listed at MFD (in which case the actual number of nominations is less because some of the nominations are bundles)?  Robert McClenon (talk) 10:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The larger # is pulled from Category:All portals which counts actual portals and redirects but not subpages. The category explains how it works. Category:MFD is any page currently with an MfD tag, which should include all bundled pages as far as I have seen. There are far fewer discussions of course. Legacypac (talk) 10:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Guess the portal before clicking the link ... that the slipper sea cucumber is avoided by most predatory fish, crabs, and gastropod molluscs, but is preyed on by starfish, especially the leather star? Legacypac (talk) 05:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Legacypac - Well, I knew it should be Portal:Echinoderms or Portal:Starfish, so I guessed it would be Portal:Cucumbers. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Seeking advice regarding dispute resolution
Hey Robert, you're listed as a volunteer on WP:DR/N, so I was wondering if you could answer a question for me. There is a quite vociferous discussion ongoing at Talk:Layla Moran regarding whether a bold edit should be kept on a WP:BLP. The discussion is ongoing in part, but it seems like things are pretty entrenched and tempers are becoming flared. Is it too early to seek dispute resolution if the discussion is ongoing, but it is clear that no consensus will be reached? Domeditrix (talk) 10:38, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Domeditrix - It is definitely not too early to see dispute resolution. The case is not appropriate for a Third Opinion because there have been more than two editors, although some of them have not been real editors.  You could either ask for input at the BLP noticeboard, which sometimes works and sometimes does not, or request moderated discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard, or post a Request for Comments to get consensus as to whether to keep or delete the section.  I would suggest doing something while the article is semi-protected, because there is no need to try to involve the unregistered editors.  (My own guess is that the suckpoppets are just either xenophobic or misogynistic, but that is my guess.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Why am I being ignored?
Hi. I have left numerous messages on your page and not received a single response. My sandbox creation has not been reviewed in nearly two months, and any attempts to ask for help is met with no response. I ask you again, Robert McClenon, please either respond to this message or approve my ignored article. Thank you. Good day to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Livonia ainovil (talk • contribs) 13:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I've declined the draft. CoolSkittle  (talk) 14:04, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Livonia ainovil - First, did you read the notice at the top of my talk page, that says that I do not usually follow your submission through the approval process? It has been about six weeks since I declined your draft, and I have not researched it fully, but my recollection is that I posted to the Teahouse, which is where you should be asking for advice.  There are many drafts waiting to be reviewed, and simply yelling louder is not the most effective way to get your draft reviewed.  I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse again.  I also suggest that you read in Wikipedia, there is no deadline and learn to be patient.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rigel
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rigel. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Daylight Entertainment
Dear Robert, First of all thank you for your time to review my draft: Daylight Entertainment again. Followed your instructions in the declined reason, I deleted two off-standard sections, which I think contain most of "promotional" words and tones. What remains is data I collected from wiki and other independent source like imdb. To reply your query, one reason is: I started this editing because I found there was only a Chinese page, but no English page. What I did was simply translating. However if the Chinese page wasn't precise, then it's hard for the translating to be qualified. I didn't realize this until you and other reviewers helped. The other thing is about the source: I tried very hard to find reliable English source in order to meet the standard, as well as to reduce the time of reviewing. Unfortunately, I couldn't find much. That is not because the subject is not important to be covered. It's only because most of covering are in Chinese. For example, the "Works" section is the data I found through wiki and imdb. It's not hard at all to find the subject's name. But they are all fragments, not articles. In conclusion, I deleted all expression sections to make sure there is not promotion, and left date hoping they might be helpful in future for other editors. If this is still not working, I will keep revising. This was my first editing and I want to make it better. Just like people say: things are dificult before they are easy. Thank you again for your time and helping. Best, Mclinyang (talk) 09:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Nature therapy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nature therapy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Nature therapy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Roxy, the dog . wooF 11:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Maybe About Steven Benjamin Damelin
Hi, I have recently created GEAPSU for Steven Benjamin Damelin, a well known academic. The article providers correct references for everything. The article is not long. It is short and factual. By looking at Damelin on the web it is clear immediately how well known he is. Myself (George Andrews) have compared my page with 100's others in academia and find Damelin's article much better in most cases. The later articles lack references in many ways. Can you edit this article and accept it? I have as you suggest asked the TeaHouse. Thank you very much. Geapsu (talk) 17:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Geapsu - It might be a good idea to get some more experience with Wikipedia in general before trying to submit a draft article. Is there a reason why you posted this message at the top of my user talk page?  Can you read the instructions, which say to use the New Section feature to post to the bottom of the page?  Did you say that I said not to post at the top of the page, because it might be ignored?  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Suckpoppets
Suckpoppets like these? &mdash; :) —  Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  14:18, 13 April 2019 (UTC
 * User:Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington - Yes. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:49, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for Draft:Lee Dae-hwi
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Lee Dae-hwi. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Otterlyhwi (talk) 05:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Your articles
Hi! I went through the list of the articles you have created - apparently you have a lot of experience in it. That is why I am asking. Why some of them actually have no verifiable references? Some links don't work at all. What is the purpose of such articles on Wikipedia? Examples: Clothru, Bile_(Irish_legend), Carr_Collins_Sr. What is this article Falls_Church_(disambiguation) about? Best regards Dariakupila (talk) 07:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Dariakupila - I wasn't employed by Clothru or Bile, and I didn't claim that they existed. I wasn't employed by Carr Collins Sr., although I do claim that he existed.  I will research them later today.  A disambiguation article is a disambiguation article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon do you have a proof that I was employed or paid? Do you have a proof that you were not employed? Why do you decline other people's articles but submit yourself without proper references? Dariakupila (talk) 09:04, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Robert is a very experienced reviewer of new articles. You should listen to his advice Legacypac (talk) 09:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Legacypac I would if I would have got any.Dariakupila (talk) 10:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I apologise again for inappropriate behaviour and I will choose my words carefully in the future. I do not want to be taken for a troll neither I aim to insult or upset anybody. Dariakupila (talk) 07:38, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ralph Northam
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ralph Northam. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Marcus Martin (architect)
Hi Robert, Thank you for reviewing my Draft, I have changed the Section heading titles and created a few sub-headings. I hope this accords with you, I was not sure exactly what edits your specifically required. Regards, Michael Michael773623 (talk) 03:04, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Global issues
Hi Robert

At WP:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Global issues, you appear to have made two bolded !votes. Please can you fix that?

Thanks! -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 10:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:BrownHairedGirl Mistake corrected. What preceded sarcastic comment changed to Comment.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:21, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Easy mistake to make, and thanks for being nice about the need to fix. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 14:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Question on delaying Twinkle BLPPROD confirmation
I've been thinking about your complaint a bit, and I think it should be possible to only issue the popup alert if the page is older than a given amount of time. Would that be fine with you? What sort of timeline do you think makes sense, three days? Seven? Sorry for following up so much later. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 19:33, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Amorymeltzer One day or three days or seven is fine. I just want to be able to use it without the prompt on a page that is at the front of the NPP queue.  Mostly they are unsourced stubs where BLPPROD is a good compromise between A7 and AFD.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cannabidiol
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cannabidiol. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the Kilkenny cats
Ah, thanks for this. That's v sweet.

I think that in the medium-to-long-term (by which I mean weeks to months), narrow-topic portals like Portal:Kilkenny should go as part of a much-needed systematic trimming of overly-narrow portals. But I hope that this well-made and well-maintained portal on a small topic will be in the last batch to be zapped, just because its quality is such a notable contrast to the abysmal nature of many others on the chopping board.

As we thin the forest of junk, it's handy to be able to point out that narrow portals don't have to be actually broken. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 16:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for the diligent scrutineer

 * Thank you, User:BrownHairedGirl - I have tried to review all of the portal nominations. It isn't being helped by infighting.  (You know who/what I mean.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * At some point, we need to propose sanctions against at least one member of the portal platoon and probably two or three. Unfortunately, sanctions may wind up hitting one opponent of portals.  At some point, we need real Portal Guidelines that aren't just vague.  Either that, or a pre-review process, or something.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Closed discussion?
Hi Robert, I'm sorry that I was not able to comment on the dispute resolution (about Casualties of the Iraq War) over the holiday weekend. I suspect that the other editors were similarly pre-occupied. However, I would like to continue the dispute resolution process, and could post my responses to your latest question today. The article has been at an impasse for about a year now, and repeated attempts on the article talk page to make progress have gone nowhere. As you can see from the latest responses from and me, we disagree very fundamentally on how we think the scientific community views the Lancet studies. I'm also pinging, , and. Thanks, -Thucydides411 (talk) 17:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Thucydides411 User:Darouet User:TheTimesAreChanging User:Jrheller - Re-opened. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * thank you, I will comment today. -Darouet (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

about declined Article Zinga
Robert McClenon please re cheek the references India's lead news media the 'times of India' published article about the zingaSudhakar naidu 118 (talk) 21:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[] plz cheek Sudhakar naidu 118 (talk) 22:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Sudhakar naidu 118 The draft article should speak for itself. If you think that the production has been notable, please revise the draft to state what has been notable about the film and resubmit.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon sure thank you for responseSudhakar naidu 118 (talk) 06:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Anku1992/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:Anku1992/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * user:RHaworth It isnt my spam. Twinkle strikes again.  Another Meridian Leasing?  Robert McClenon (talk) 13:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Fellowship of Friends Draft
Thank you for your suggestions on how to improve the Draft:Fellowship of Friends before a potential re-submission. I implemented the changes you indicated to the best of my capacity; please let me know what you think. Regarding the issue of the organization's notability, in my opinion the Fellowship of Friends matches these criteria of relevancy: 1. The organization has been featured in several major newspapers (the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and the Sacramento Bee among others) over the 48 years of its existence because of its controversial nature, 2. The organization has 1,600 current members and 15,000 former members, and 3. Of the list of podcasts on 42 famous cults on the Parcast web site (see https://www.parcast.com/cults), only the Fellowship of Friends and the River Road Fellowship don’t have an article on Wikipedia (in bold on the list below). By the way, I'm working on a draft for an article on the River Road Fellowship and I would like you to review it if you have the time.

LIST OF PODCASTS ON FAMOUS CULTS ON PARCAST

The Manson Family (Charles Manson), Heaven’s Gate (Marshall Applewhite & Bonnie Nettles), Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God (Credonia Mwerinde & Joseph Kibweteere), The Family (Anne Hamilton Byrne), The Ant Hills Kids (Roch Thériault), The Children of God (David Berg), FLDS (Warren Jeffs), Aum Shinrikyo (Shoko Asahara), The Branch Davidians (David Koresh), The Peoples Temple (Jim Jones), True Russian Orthodox Church (Pyotr Kuznetsov), Nuwaubian Nation (Dwight York), Sect of Nacozari (Silvia Meraz), Apostles of Infinite Love (Michel Collin & Jean-Gaston Tremblay), Church of Euthanasia (Chris Korda), Rajneeshpuram (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh & Ma Anand Sheela), The Brethren (Jimmie T. Roberts), Twelve Tribes (Gene Spriggs (Yoneq)), Oneida Community (John Humphrey Noyes), The Moonies (Sun Myung Moon), The Narcosatanists (Adolfo Constanzo & Sara Aldrete), Leopard Society), Order of the Solar Temple (Joseph Di Mambro), Raëlism (Claude Vorilhon), Church Universal and Triumphant (Elizabeth Clare Prophet), Sahaja Yoga Movement (Nirmala Srivastava), The Hernandez Brothers’s Cult (Magdalena Solís), Lumpa Church (Alice Lenshina), Mankind Project (Arthur Bell), The Kirtland Cult (Jeffrey Lundgren), The Church of the Last Testament (Sergey Anatolyevitch Torop (Vissarion)), Church of Satan (Anton LaVey), The Way International (Victor Paul Wierwille), Freemasonry (The cult that built America), Kashi Ashram (Ma Jaya), Fellowship of Friends (Robert Earl Burton), River Road Fellowship (Victor Barnard), The Sons of Freedom / Doukhobors (Peter V. Verigin), The Workers’ Institute (Aravindan Balakrishnan), New Vrindaban (Kirtanananda Swami), “The Source Family” (James Baker), “Eastern Lightning” (Zhao Weishan)

Greetings and thank you for your help. UltraEdit (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Any thoughts? UltraEdit (talk) 16:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * User:UltraEdit - Perhaps you thought that by posting to the top of my user page you would get my attention before the messages at the bottom in the usual arrangement. It doesn't work that way.  Did you read the banner that displays at the top of my talk page that cautions you that top-posted messages may not be seen?  I didn't see your message for ten days.  I will look at it later today, but if you use the New Section tab in the way that it is intended to be used, you will post to the bottom where I am looking for messages.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:23, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * User:Robert McClenon I assure you that it was not my intention to attract your attention when I posted my comment on the top of the page -- if that were the case I wouldn't have waited 11 days to ask you if you had any thoughts. At any rate, I apologize for my mistake and I'll make sure I post at the bottom in the future. By the way, the banner that you said is displayed at the top of your talk page is not showing on my screen (see https://imgur.com/a/y3xzlYL). Thank you for your help. UltraEdit (talk) 23:05, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:UltraEdit - The banner only displays when you are editing my talk page.  But in general, do not post to the top of a talk page.  If you use the New Section tab, you should post to the bottom of a talk page the way that you should.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * User:Robert McClenon Understood, thank you. UltraEdit (talk) 16:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * == Deletion review for Draft:Fellowship of Friends ==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Fellowship of Friends. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. UltraEdit (talk) 21:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I have edited my AFA Sports Article
Hello, I have effected the changes on the AFA Sports Draft page as you instructed, please kindly look at it Best Regards Techrebellious

below is the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Afa_sports — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techrebellious (talk • contribs) 15:12, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Question Regarding Notability
Hey Robert - thanks for your time in reviewing my draft. I was seeking clarification to our denial. Was it related to objectivity, or are the links used as references (included below), not sufficient to show sufficient coverage to warrant a page.

Thanks

https://www.nbcchicago.com/on-air/as-seen-on/rapunzl-app-507694692.html https://abc7chicago.com/3439386/ https://abc7chicago.com/3396870/ https://abc7chicago.com/business/chicago-startup-roundup-returnrunners-and-rapunzl-apps/3439386/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianCurcio (talk • contribs) 01:05, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The draft in question is Draft:Rapunzl Investments LLC. Do you have a conflict of interest?  Please do not dump links onto my talk page to ask me to read them.  The draft should speak for itself.  However, my decline was based on the definition of corporate notability, which has to do with what third-party reliable sources say about the company.  Your draft summarizes what the company says about itself.  Your draft is not about what third parties say about the company.  I didn't have to read the references, because the draft wasn't about what third parties say about the company.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:45, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rocket Lab
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rocket Lab. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Robin Kermode


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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 08:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:JMHamo - Not my draft. I must have moved it from a sandbox to draft space.  Oh well.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Copyright of Memes
Hello, my article was recently declined because the subject matter already exists. I believe interest meme would not be the appropriate page for the article because the article focuses more on the law of copyright in US and India rather than the type and uses of memes, which is covered on the internet meme page. In terms of sources, I have only used Wikipedia to link to certain catchphrases and not used it as a reference. The article uses a lot of terms that form of copyright legal discource which have been adequately explained on Wikipedia previously and it would be redundant to reproduce the same in this article also. The other sources used in the article are from published pieces and cannot be sufficiently verified. I hope you reconsider my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoYouEvenMemeBro (talk • contribs) 16:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:DoYouEvenMemeBro - What title do you think that it should have? Do you know how to rename a draft, or should I rename it for you?  Robert McClenon (talk) 13:53, 2 May 2019 (UTC)


 * , there is another draft called Draft:Meme copyright issues that was reviewed prior to the creation of this set. You should merge that information to that draft if you think the topic is still notable enough for its own article, but it's possible that it could be summarized in a section under Internet Memes. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 14:00, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Regarding my article I created on Kamini Dube
Hey Robert,

First of all I would like to thank you for letting me know where I did not follow wiki terms for an article. And as I have seen in your user page you have created many articles, thus I would request your help in creating an article for mine.

Also I wanted to understand, you said that my article has be submitted twice. so please let me know how to deal with that?

I hope you are reading this now and would revert as soon as possible.

Thanks, User: Callmesiddie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callmesiddie (talk • contribs) 23:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Callmesiddie - You requested that one of the two copies of the draft be deleted, and it was deleted. Another reviewer reviewed the other draft, and agrees with me that it is still very non-neutral and promotional.  Please discuss it with the other reviewer, or ask for advice at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:18, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Patrick Hanlon
Hello,

I removed what you said were marketing buzzwords, and added more citations/removed external links. For the two books, I replaced the Amazon links with ones from Simon and Shulster and Pearson. Can you please approve this, or let me know if anything else is needed in order to do so? Thank you.--JamesC33401 (talk) 02:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * User:JamesC33401 - You have not resubmitted your draft. If you were to resubmit it, I would decline it.  The references do not appear to provide in-depth independent coverage.  I suggest that you ask for advice at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:AE vs WP:AN/I
Hi, I saw your comment at my request for arbitration (SashiRolls). Before I read that I had already continued the exisintg AN/I discussion. My thought was that because my concern is related to conduct outside of the context of any content or subject area that the appropriate venues are AN/I and arbitration. Is my understanding incorrect? Thanks. --Kolya Butternut (talk) 09:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Kolya Butternut - Is the conduct related to American politics after 1932? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:12, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Previous sanctions against User:SashiRolls have been the result of conduct in articles concerning American politics after 1932, and of User:Snooganssnoogans has been reported for adding copyright-violating material to articles involving American politics after 1932.  I concur with User:Tryptofish that Arbitration Enforcement is a better forum.  I see that SashiRolls was previously blocked at Arbitration Enforcement.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree with Robert McClenon. I also am very sympathetic to your concerns, and I would be happy to offer advice if you want. You should consider what kind of result you would like to get out of it. One possibility is to have an interaction ban between you and Sashi Rolls. That is something you can still get out of ANI (although it is more likely to be two-way than one-way). At the time that I write this, no one has really replied to you at ANI, and my guess is that the community is fed up with the wall of text there and very likely will not do anything there unless there is a specific proposal to act on. If you would like, I will propose the IBAN and I think it would be likely to pass.
 * On the other hand, there are very good arguments to get stricter sanctions imposed on SashiRolls, and that is simply not going to happen at ANI, given that it hasn't happened already. For that, you would have to go to WP:AE. The fact that you already said that it is not about content may be used against you there, but it probably won't be enough to shut it down. The conduct clearly grows out of Am Pol, and SashiRolls would stand a good chance of getting a long block and/or a topic ban, but it will be a somewhat ugly battle there. You would have to be the filing party (not me, although I can give you advice about how to post it). I'm watching here, to see what you think. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Robert, could you dig up an example of one of these alleged copyright violations I've made? I've never seen you involved with these guys before; I'd be very careful about it... there's a lot of people watching this case right now as I understand it (the governance thread at Wikipediocracy where I requested a hearing back before Halloween has over 4000 views this week because Dysklyver popped it up the other day), including -- most likely -- some journalists.  If I were you, I wouldn't get into the spotlight in order to be shown making stuff up:  as far as I know nobody has ever, i.e. not even once, accused me of copyvio, not even without evidence.  Thanks for "mentioning" me above so I'd know there was plotting going on against me on Labor Day. I hope you're having a good one.  SashiRolls t ·  c 17:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My error. User:SashiRolls has been sanctioned for personal attacks.  User:Snooganssnoogans has been reported for copyright violations.  I identified the wrong person for the wrong offense, although both are offenders, and it is still an Arbitration Enforcement matter.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Actually, the latter has been reported and sanctioned for a lot more than copyright violations. But I'll let y'all do your own Labor Day research.  SashiRolls t ·  c 18:13, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You have just given me four more months than you think you have given me.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


 * You mean y'all work on May Day in the US? Who knew?  ^^   SashiRolls t ·  c 19:20, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * "Who knew?" Americans knew.  Labor Day (US) is the first Monday in September.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not seeking an IBAN. Our interaction has been limited to the AN/I thread (and his recent talk page comment where he seems to be accusing me of behavior related to the "Cross Affair".  I still feel left with questions.... I understand the conduct "grows" out of Am Pol, but it's so indirect; SashiRolls attacked me at AN/I because I was showing that he was making false accusations at Snooganssnoogans which were related to behavior at Am Pol (and WP:Daily Mail).  If everyone tells me AE has jurisdiction over this sort of thing then I would consider that.  You suggested that I consider what kind of result I would like to get;  I feel very uncomfortable asking for a specific result; that seems like something that should be decided by the community, but my impression is that this is a personality problem that is not limited to passion relating to political topics.  If that is accurate then I would assume a site ban would be appropriate, but I have not thoroughly researched SashiRolls' site-wide conduct, nor do I know whether it is my place to do so.  I now see that SashiRolls has edited the AN/I thread, so I will have to continue this later.  Kolya Butternut (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That new thing at ANI is just trolling. I'm going to try to ignore it, and let others evaluate it, and I recommend that you not reply to it either. Given your wishes, I won't propose the IBAN. If you go to AE, it's up to the admins what kind of ban, if any, they hand out, so you cannot really request a site ban. Being at Wikipedia tends to come with crackpots saying obnoxious things about one, so sometimes it's best to just let it pass. I can assure you that no one in their right mind takes seriously the stuff that SashiRolls said about you. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Robert. I just want to thank you for suggesting a block. In my opinion, you were subjected to a lot of pushback that you did not deserve. Best wishes, --Tryptofish (talk) 17:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Tryptofish - Thank you. I think that there is a class of productive but uncivil editors who are envied by some other editors, who would like to be productive uncivil editors when they grow up.  The presence of these editors as role models is one reason why they are unblockable, which actually means unbannable.  They have lengthy block logs with frequent unblocks.  Legacypac is one of these editors, but is a little different because he is not a "content creator" but works behind the scenes, which is why he hasn't been unblocked yet.  I didn't realize that Sashi is one of these editors, but apparently he is also.  And that's the way it is.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:35, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm starting to see some subtypes of these behavioral categories that are emerging more recently. A decade or so ago, the so-called "vested contributors" were incivil editors who were nonetheless outstanding at content creation. There are differences emerging now, as well as some new types of low-quality editors who like to hang around ANI and comment on almost every thread, effectively arguing that the low standards of discourse that are common at other websites should also be the new standard here, sort of like they had never grown up with a sense of talking to real people face-to-face. I'm still mulling this over, but I intend to comment on it more in the near future. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:06, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Edwina Dunn
Hi Robert, thank you for your time to review my draft: User:Edwina Dunn. I followed your instructions in the declined reason, I added to references and deleted words of "promotional" tones. I would like to know specifically what more needs to be done to the page to make it publishable? It is now being considered for deletion. I would like to know exactly where I am going wrong if you would be so kind?
 * User:Edwina Dunn - The draft in question is Draft:Edwina Dunn. Please follow the instructions for Miscellany for Deletion.  Please also read the autobiography policy and the conflict of interest policy.  Please also be aware that it is not always possible to make a draft on a subject "publishable" if the subject is not notable, and that most editors cannot write a neutral draft about a subject where they have a conflict of interest.  I will take another look at the draft and advise further.  It would be a good idea to ask for advice at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 13:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Edwina Dunn - You said that the draft is not an autobiography. Are you Edwina Dunnn, and is the draft about yourself?  If so, the draft is an autobiography, and saying that it is not is tendentious.  If it is, then please be aware that Wikipedia has found, first, that an individual is not the best judge of their own biographical notability, and, second, that an individual usually cannot write a neutral draft about herself.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Robert, thank you so much for getting back to me. I entitled it Edwina Dunn but that is not my name (sorry, I'm Anthony Thompson) I have now explained this in the talk section of my page along with a conflict of interest. Despite the connection, all information is factual, referenced, and written with a neutral point of view. All your time and feedback is much appreciated!
 * Comment - Please take further discussion to WP:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Edwina Dunn. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk)

Hi Robert

We are trying to delete the page but we can't find the delete button which should be (according to the instructions we found online) between the history and move tabs?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Many thanks,

Anthony — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony at Starcount (talk • contribs) 12:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Anthony at Starcount - Why are you trying to delete the page? What are you trying to do?  Also, who is "we"?  Who are you sharing your account with?  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

(talk) Hi Robert, the review seems to be stuck 'pending'. I would like to delete it and resubmit a new draft. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.192.95.19 (talk) 08:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Global Hotelier Draft
Thanks for the information regarding my posted article's infringement of policy and guidelines. I will rework the article in hopes to meet the rules of this platform. The last publication received a speedy delete notice. Will this be in place even if I change the content to be in line with the guidelines? Like a black mark on the title of the article that will be dismissed out of hand in the future? I certainly hope not.

Again thanks for any help I can get or advice that may lead to the successful publication of my first addition to Wiki.

Sincerely,

Christopher Roper. Draft:Edwina_Dunn
 * User:ChristopherRoper - The 'new section' feature is available on most talk pages including my talk page, and adds a section to the bottom (not the top) of the page. The instructions that are displayed when  you edit my talk page tell you to use New Section.  Is there a reason that you chose to post to the top of my talk page rather than using New Section?  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you have a conflict of interest? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There are many Wikis. Referring to Wikipedia as Wiki is sloppy.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Rama Arbitration Case
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for Karikku
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Karikku. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Waggie (talk) 19:43, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Previous listing as a party
My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)


 * User:DeltaQuad - No problem. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Decline in insect populations. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Request on 21:57:48, 3 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Passani
Hi, Stefano Vaccara is a very respected journalist in Italy and elsewhere. What makes him notable is the fact that he was the target of a lawsuit by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi a few years back, but in addition to that he is also a published author that explained the dynamics behind JFK's assassination.

Honestly, I see people that have pages in wikipedia that are way less worth than Mr. Vaccara. I have added all the key references (including an interview on RAI, the Italian State TV) to the article and the Amerigo price which he received lasy year. I hope this makes the article good enough.

Passani (talk) 22:49, 3 May 2019 (UTC) Passani (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Passani - I see that you have edited the draft since I declined it. As the statement that you read when you edit my talk page says, I do not normally follow a submission through the approval process.  I will let another reviewer review it.  You may also ask for advice at the Teahouse.  However, it is not useful to explain on a reviewer's talk page why a draft should be accepted.  The draft should speak for itself.  (I see that you have now put the Berlusconi suit in the draft.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:56, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Revision of Geapsu
The submission for consideration for publication has been submitted. Thank you. Geapsu (talk) 11:30, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Revision of Geapsu
Thank you for editing the article 18 days ago. I see it is waiting for review. If there is anything further you would like to be done, please tell. Worked hard on the article following all suggestions. This has been a continuous process. Thank you.

Geapsu (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

House of Marley Article
Dear Robert McClenon,

I am writing in regards to the House of Marley article. I am currently a student at the University of Derby for the Writing and Publishing BA, and for an assignment we had to create our own Wikipedia articles for a set deadline. I am also NOT employed by the company, so this is not a self-serving or deliberately promotional article.

I apologise for the page duplication, it was a misunderstanding — I thought the submission form was suggesting I also make a 'draft' page as well as a 'user' page, and was not trying to improve my chances for acceptance.

I would be deeply appreciative if you could give me some constructive feedback for the article — I made a mention on the user/draft talk pages regarding the tone and a potential to sound persuasive, which you commented on. Besides this, what else would you suggest I change?

If you could respond as soon as possible that would also be much appreciated, only due to my deadline restraints.

Thank you, GoldVine5 (talk) 16:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:GoldVine5 - If this is an educational assignment, who is your instructor? Please advise your instructor that expecting students to create Wikipedia articles by a set deadline is contrary to Wikipedia guidelines.  See the guidelines on educational assignments.  You may ask for advice on draft articles at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles should not be persuasive because they should be neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Signing
I've been signing behind you at AN with a basic wikilink. Hope that's cool, also you made a mistake and tagged the wrong Fæ, which I didn't change because TPA etc. etc. --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:49, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:QEDK - Thanks. Well, well.  I had not known that there were two users, one with the ligature and one with the diphthong.  If so, if she is using a difficult form of a username, which imposes a burden on the rest of us, she certainly has less right than I thought to make a fuss about pronouns.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:28, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Copyright Bowen Family Systems Theory
Robert I have included permission from Dr Anne McKnight Director of the Bowen Center for both the content of the Bowen Center website and Bowen Archive as well as excerpts from a book at the bottom of the article. What did I do wrong? NigelNgard11476 (talk) 22:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC) ngard11476Ngard11476 (talk) 22:04, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Ngard11476 - I don't have the original article, with the permission, in front of me. However, first, as I recall, the permission was a standard copyright release that would permit publication of the copyrighted content in Wikipedia.  That isn't the same as a Creative Commons release, which releases the copyright as a copyleft for limited reuse by all in the world, not only by Wikipedia.  Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and does not accept a limited permission that is only for its own use.  That is why it was still subject to deletion as not consistent with Wikipedia's copyright requirements.  Second, even if you had provided a Creative Commons release, the purpose of the draft was still promotional, intended to promote a particular mode of family therapy.  Third, after I finish writing this reply, I will check whether you have made the proper conflict of interest disclosure.  It seems that your only objective is to try to use Wikipedia to advertise your particular style of family therapy.  You may ask other editors for advice at the Teahouse, but I think that they will agree with me.  I will caution you that continuing to try to push your article into Wikipedia may result in a block.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't see a conflict of interest disclosure. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Jimfbleak - Perhaps you may want to add something, or to agree or disagree with me. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Robert. The "permission" was claimed in an email to me, so nothing amounting to a waiver on their website or an OTRS ticket. Anyone can claim at the bottom of an aricle that they have permission, so that's worthless too. In response, I posted this on 's talk page, stating exactly what you have said regarding spamming, COI, WP:RS and so on. It's a promotional text dump that I would delete on sight even if it wasn't copyright. This editor appears to have ignored everything that they have been told, and approached you to see if you were more accommodating than me! I fear this may not end well if they continue to ignore our advice, Cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:44, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Superconductivity
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Superconductivity. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Parmish Verma
Hello sir, I am fairly new to Wikipedia and this draft is my second contribution on Wikipedia. Parmish Verma is a popular Punjabi singer and actor in India. All of his videos on YouTube cross 100 million views in a week. I am a follower of his work and I was surprised to see that he does not have presence on Wikipedia. That is why I wrote this article. I have searched for relevant news articles and accordingly written this article based on the facts available on news portals. I have not picked up any anonymous content from any portal which is not trustworthy. If you go through his social media profiles, you will realize that he is really popular in India. Kindly guide me to edit the article. Since I am new to Wikipedia, it will also be a learning for me. I love music and movies and I am looking forward to write and contribute more to Wikipedia around these topics mostly from India. Looking forward for your support! Best Regards! Abhishekbiswas82 talk 11:48 am, 9 May 2019 (IST)
 * User:Abhishekbiswas82 - What draft are you asking about? Do you mean Draft:Pragya Dasgupta?  Robert McClenon (talk) 10:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I had created a draft of Parmish Verma which was deleted by you. That is how I saw your profile and I was asked to talk to you. I have created a draft again. Request you to kindly review the content if possible. Here is the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Parmish_Verma. It will be helpful if you can review Draft:Pragya Dasgupta as well and share your opinion. I can edit if required and you can help me to publish it. Thanking you! (Abhishekbiswas82 (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)).
 * User:Abhishekbiswas82, there is an existing Draft:Parmish Verma, and the previous deletion was by, not this editor Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:19, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Ric & Thadeus article - Notability (music) Criteria
In article submission for Ric & Thadeus, the following notability criteria have been met:

- Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. - the subject has produced a Gold record in Sweden (see cited sources 5 & 6 in article)

- Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. - the subject has produced a Grammy Nominated song (see cited source 1 in article)

- Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition. (Refer to above)

There are adequate sources being cited in the submission. Acceptance should be on the basis of the notability criteria listed above. The subject of the article is mentioned by name in many relevant cited sources. Any cases where the subject's name is omitted from a source, the source was cited to merely back up a statistical claim in the article.
 * User:196309c The draft is Draft:Ric & Thadeus. Please sign your posts.  Robert McClenon (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The draft had reference errors, and used Wikipedia as a reference. Robert McClenon (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you have a conflict of interest? Robert McClenon (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:196309c - It is not necessary to put a long statement of notability on a reviewer's talk page. When I said to put it on a talk page, I meant on the draft talk page, and I have copied it for you.  Robert McClenon (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

apologies. thank you for copying this for me. will await re-review.

Pay & Allowances ...
Thanks to all the 'Editors' of Wikipedia (who participated in this Test-Project) for providing sufficient ‘evidence’ to seek a court-administered injunction against viewing Wikipedia in India -- unless Wikipedia prominently displays on its each & every web-page a Disclaimer to the effect that 'Wikipedia is not a reliable resource' (this is already officially admitted by Wikipedia on one of its web-pages, and also by one of its Editors during a ‘Live-Chat’) because its Editors are admittedly not ‘Subject-Experts’ and, moreso, some of them have not even passed High School; hence, they may not be expected even to know the true Definitions of 'Encyclopaedia', ‘Dictionary’, 'Research', 'Research-Paper', 'Research-References', 'Essay' etc -- not to speak of being able to understand well the Philosophy of Law and the methodology of writing Legal Articles.

BTW, I am on the Board of Editors of 3 International Research Journals and am a Peer-Reviewer of another International Research Journal which is published on behalf of Cambridge University (UK), my Articles are published on Editorial Pages of leading National Dailies (English) and are read by Legal Fraternity (including Judges), my Papers are presented at International Conferences & Seminars, I have more than 3000 ‘Followers’ (including Academics, bureaucrats, News-Channels etc) who read my Articles published at LinkedIn -- all of them understand my Articles, Papers etc because they all are highly learned Intelligentsia (they are not individuals who have not yet passed even High School). Philhorn (talk) 07:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * uh... your point? CoolSkittle  (talk) 11:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Philhorn, User:CoolSkittle - This may have been a blatant violation of Wikipedia is not a lab, of testing the behavior of Wikipedia editors to some draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I will research this more in the next 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * User:Hell in a Bucket - The whole point is that a fair closure and a nuanced closure could not exist in the same space. Erasing a notice is hardly a nuance because it is gaming the system.  Next stop, either a binding RFC, or WP:ANI.  Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Templates for MFD noms
Thanks for you suggestion of using templates for making MFD noms.

I thought of that, but there far too many variants of case for one template to do. Plus with templates, I'd have to save first and then edit.

So what I do is to use a clipboard manager to store a range of stock phrases and paragraphs which I can combine in various ways, and hack about in the edit window before saving. More flexible, lower overhead.

But thanks again for the suggestion. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:13, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If you thought of it, you thought of it. I use templates for messages in declining AFC submissions, such as draftautobio, compsays, and noccs.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Request on 09:13:34, 13 May 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Paul Zawilensky
Hi Robert,

I need help to understand why exactly my draft for the article about the Dubblestandart band, has been rejected and what I can do to solve the issue. The article is in many parts based on the existing article about the Dubblestandart Band on the German version of Wikipedia. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubblestandart and has just been updated with new content. It should exist in the English speaking world as this is mainly where the band and fans live and operate. The Dubblestandart Band has a wide array of collaboroations with international known artists from the Reggae Scene as well as a huge back catalog and is signed for more than 17 years to the well known German label Echo Beach. I believe it qualifies to several of your notability criterias concerning musicians and bands and there are reliable, secondary sources that have independently written about the band. There are countless mentiones in online and printed magazines for the last 20 years!

https://www.allmusic.com/artist/dubblestandart-mn0000211873 https://reader.exacteditions.com/magazines/493/search?q=Dubblestandart https://shop.pmedia.de/p_de/catalogsearch/result/?q=Dubblestandart https://www.falter.at/archiv/search?term=Dubblestandart https://www.forcedexposure.com/SearchResult.html?SearchType=Basic&Type=artist&Key=Dubblestandart https://fm4v3.orf.at/stories/1712230/index.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subatomic_Sound_System

I can also upload a file with collected printed material if needed... If there is an issue in the way I have listed or categorized, pls advice how I can do better...:) Please let me know, what exactly the issue is about, so I can update... Many thanx Paul

Paul Zawilensky (talk) 09:13, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Paul Zawilensky - First, do not upload a file with collected printed material, and do not dump links onto my talk page. It is not useful to provide documentation to a reviewer.  A draft article should speak for itself.  Allmusic is not a reliable source.  Do not use Wikipedia as a reference.  I will review the draft shortly.  However, I suggest that you ask for the opinions of other experienced editors at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Paul Zawilensky - Did you read the comments that I made on your draft? Most of your English draft is not written in complete English sentences.  It needs to be edited into proper English paragraphs, preferably with section headings.  Also, as I said, it is not clear which of the musical notability criteria the band satisfies.  It may satisfy one or two or three of them; a reviewer should be able to tell which ones.  Your draft has introductory material that is not part of the article.  We do not want that.  Please organize your article into sections in English sentences.  If you have any further questions,  you may ask at the Teahouse.  Robert McClenon (talk) 17:08, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Being and Nothingesss
Hello, Robert McClenon. I suggest that you might want to consider declining to give a third opinion at Talk:Being and Nothingness. Drevolt has placed a request for comment regarding the editorial disputes at the article. The request will inevitably attraction attention from multiple other users, meaning that the disagreements at the page will no longer be between two people only, making this a situation in which a third opinion is inappropriate. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18


Hello ,

, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
 * Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
 * Reliable Sources for NPP

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
 * Backlog drive coming soon


 * News
 * Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.


 * Discussions of interest
 * A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
 * There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
 * What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Kamarupi DRN
FYI. I am not knowledgeable about the disputed content itself, but If there is any other way I can help just let me know. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, User:Abecedare - I am not knowledgeable about the content either. I expect the participants to educate me as to the content.  However, it appears that one editor is going back to arguing that we should not have split the two articles.  I think that the split was a consensus decision.  Please clarify exactly what the nature of the sanctions were that were imposed on Bh.  I have re-alerted both parties to discretionary sanctions, but I think that one is innocent and one is being tendentious.  Do we give one more try, or do I fail the DRN and let it go back either to you or to Arbitration Enforcement?  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Bhaskar currently is only prohibited from discussing the issues related to Kamarupi articles outside the DRN-process. That is a voluntary measure but, if needed, discretionary sanctions can be used to back up or expand the prohibition.
 * FWIW, my impression from when I reviewed the ANI report is similar to yours with respect to the conduct issues. And as far as the content dispute goes, to me it is noteworthy that initially uninvolved editors, and  who took a detailed enough dive into the subject ended up on one side of the debate (I readily concede that this is an imperfect metric). That said, by now you have the best independent and detailed view of both the content dispute and the disputants' conduct. So I will let you decide on how and how long to drive the DRN process. Abecedare (talk) 23:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Abecedare - My thought at this point is to start two minor RFCs and then see if the parties are willing to close out the DRN and resume discussion on the talk pages. I don't know if that will work, but I don't know if anything will work other than a topic-ban.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It may be that the subject is to esoteric and requires to much prior knowledge/reading for it to attract outside opinions at the the RFCs. But they are at least worth a try. The latest RFC, which asks a very focused question may well serve as an entry point for some new editors. To aid the effort, I have advertised the discussions at the India-project noticeboard. Abecedare (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * There may be a lot of scholarly knowledge involved. Of Indian languages, it is Sanskrit that is esoteric.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Abecedare and Robert McClenon, some online resources on the subject maybe of your interest, thanks a lot to both. भास्कर् Bhagawati  Speak  12:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Bhaskarbhagawati - It is not helpful to advise a reviewer, mediator, or other third party to look at additional information. A draft should speak for itself, an article should speak for itself, and any references should be discussed in mediation.  There should not be any side conversations about article content; that should be discussed on the article talk page, or, in this case, on the discussion talk page.  I am ignoring that link.  If you want a specific change made to one of the articles to reflect content in that link, make that request in response to my call for changes.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Internet censorship in China
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Internet censorship in China. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:John Ferrar


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

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

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

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 09:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC) User:JMHamo - It wasn't my draft. These mentions don't do any good for the real draft author anyway because the deletion after the tagging is speedy. I hadn't realized that it was six months ago that I moved that draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Canadian Politics Arbitration Case
If you do not want to receive further notifications for this case, please remove yourself from this list.

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Canadian politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Canadian politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 7, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Canadian politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:00, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Left reply on dispute resolution noticeboard
Hi Robert. You are the volunteer that's been helping me out with my dispute. I left you a comment and was also wondering the way forward. Dispute_resolution_noticeboard. Thanks. BrieDeChevre (talk) 02:29, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

rm "Too long, didn't read" hat from Summary of dispute by X1\
Since the DRN JFG posting appears somewhat DOA, could you remove your Template:collapsetop "WP:TLDR" and just post a note there that you "didn't read" my Summary of dispute by X1\. ? It took hours to write, my first posting at DRN, and there still are still editors working on that section. Searching can not be properly done unless [show] is done every time, which is annoying. It will be used as a reference for future potential discussions; see for example per 15:18, 24 May 2019. X1\ (talk) 20:14, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

I see now you've closed it. May I remove the "collapsetop" myself? X1\ (talk)
 * User:X1\ - No. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No to both questions? (see first sentence)  X1\ (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:X1\ - No. To both questions.  Leave the closed case alone.  You may copy your overly long post to your own talk page.  Other than that, if you spent hours writing it, I am not responsible for the fact that you spent hours writing it.  You may copy the material to your own talk page or a user page.  Do not edit a closed archive.  Editing a closed archive is disruptive and may be reported to Arbitration Enforcement.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:13, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I get it. Do not edit a closed archive.  X1\ (talk) 21:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hopefully it was correct of me to restore a deletion (by 123IP) from the Archived DRN; see User talk:BullRangifer. If it was someone else's role to restore (unrestored for over 19 hours), my apologies, as I stumbled across it during clean-up of my user talk page.  X1\ (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Disruptive changes to an archive can be, and always have been, fixed by any editor acting in good faith, so you did the right thing. Hopefully the matter ends there. Pushback to your fix would be deliberate disruption that should be sanctioned. -- BullRangifer (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * If I'm going to mentioned yet again by these people, I might as well be notified. As I've outlined on my talk page, I removed something that I never actually placed there, or intended to be placed there. My changes to the archive were completely constructive, since that was not actually an archive of what I said as my dispute summary. That had absolutely nothing to do with my summarisation of the dispute and I'm quite distressed to see another editor, particularly someone very personally against me, place something in there that had nothing to do with the dispute and without context. However, I completely respect if it would be more proper for someone else to remove that paragraph rather than myself. I was certainly not aware that it had been placed there again a final time, otherwise I would have removed it before the archiving. Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Adele for deletion
There is currently a discussion taking place as to whether Portal:Adele should be deleted at MfD. You are being notified because you were a participant in the previous nomination discussion. Thank you, &#8211;  MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 21:00, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines for WP:DRN
Hey Robert. In your opinion, is there any special rule (or usual practice) that prevents editors from putting their own comments into talk threads started by others? I notice that an ANI has started up in which this is one of the complaints. After noticing this issue, I went to look at the header of DRN, which appears to stress the informality of the process. Certainly at AE we would not accept people commenting in the wrong section, but AE is nothing *but* rules. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:EdJohnston - Thank you for commenting and asking. Exactly.  That's the reason why I think that the thing is a tempest in a teapot, and that it wasn't worth harassing me about.  Courtesy and honorable tradition are what apply to coloring inside the lines at DRN, and the fact that the sections are designated for statements by the editors, and that some of the editors have been to AE or ARC or some other forum where coloring outside the lines will get your crayons taken away.  I didn't think that it was worth the original flap, and I certainly didn't think that I should be either ordered to correct the transcript or whined at about correcting the transcript, but I went ahead and tried to correct it because the coloring outside the lines was making the children cry.  I didn't and don't see a formalized talk page guideline for cases that are waiting to be opened.  If I open a case, I require that the editors respond only in their sections, but I do that pursuant to the mediation guidelines rather than a specific talk page guideline.  At this point I think that both editors have been unreasonable, but I just want to be finished with this particular dispute and go back to counting portal views.  Dammit, Jim, I'm a computer scientist, not a lawyer.  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:06, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No one was trying to harass you, and calling us "children" is really beneath you.
 * Volunteers at drama boards have signed up for certain custodial duties, and those duties can include fixing irregularities which can cause misunderstandings. One might say they have enhanced refactoring powers. You have that authority. Without it you wouldn't have much of a job there. I suspect that EdJohnston shares my opinion. If not, I'm very open to learning more.
 * If there is any question about this, then the instructions for volunteers should clearly state this, but not doing this type of thing would mean that minor matters would get escalated and create a hell of a lot more disruption. We try to prevent that using simple fixes. If nothing else, IAR and common sense certainly apply.
 * I tried to fix the problem and communicate through edit summaries, but when that obviously wasn't working, I decided to take the issue to you for a quick and easy fix. I had no idea you would balk at doing it. I wasn't asking you to do anything that numerous other volunteers at drama boards do routinely. Now that you've fixed it, I will thank you and let you get on with your business. -- BullRangifer (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * BTW, just because there is lots of talking at DR/N does not make it a talk page. Other guidelines apply, and they are much tighter. -- BullRangifer (talk) 20:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If a dispute (about talk page behavior) like this had come to WP:AN3 I suspect it would have been closed with warnings to both parties. If DRN doesn't actually *have* the rule that BullRangifer was trying to enforce, I'm not clear on how his action was justified. EdJohnston (talk) 20:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:BullRangifer wrote: "BTW, just because there is lots of talking at DR/N does not make it a talk page. Other guidelines apply, and they are much tighter."  Show the guidelines to me, and I will show the talk page guidelines to you.  "The guidelines below reinforce the prime values of talk pages: communication, courtesy, and consideration. They apply not only to article discussion pages but everywhere editors interact, such as deletion discussions and noticeboards."  So talk page guidelines do so apply to noticeboards.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand that clarification. Thanks. My point is that there is "more" to a drama board than an ordinary talk page. There are "more" rules than just normal talk page rules. If DR/N is an exception to the rules which apply at other drama boards, that's news to me. -- BullRangifer (talk) 00:28, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * And if you double my pay, you can try to assign me twice as many duties, which doesn't mean that I will take them. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * And the parties at DRN were acting like children quarreling about a coloring book, and I was trying to sweep it under the rug rather than look at it. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)


 * User:EdJohnston wrote: "If DRN doesn't actually *have* the rule that BullRangifer was trying to enforce, I'm not clear on how his action was justified."  Yes, thank you, but he wasn't trying to enforce it, but to compel me to enforce it. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Finished. Over and out.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * . That user had already US politics DS alert (3 weeks ago). Just saying so you know. My very best wishes (talk) 21:27, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:My very best wishes - Is there any simple way to verify whether a user has been notified within the past twelve months that both avoids the risk that they will slip out of Arbitration Enforcement by not being notified, and ensures that the innocent party will not notify them twice? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If you try to notify a person of sanctions using and click on Preview it opens up a dialog in which you can search for previous alerts. EdJohnston (talk) 21:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Chamupa Unlimited (Musician)
Just to let you know he hasn't given up - check Draft:Chamupa Unlimited (Musician). Dan arndt (talk) 02:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Dan arndt - I have put a comment in the draft for the deleting administrator to please consider putting 'Chamupa' into the title blacklist regexp list. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

MusenInvincible
First of all thanks for closing the Dispute Resolution God, although I had sent 10 mins working on a response when you did it. MusenInvincible has been a real nuisance on God as you can see from the page history 4 different editors have had to revert major irrelevant additions. Looking at their talk page it seems they have a long history of disruption. Can something be done ? it is very disheartening and time wasting having to deal with people who are not willing to engage but would rather indulge in edit wars and escalations. Unibond (talk) 20:51, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Unibond - As you can see, they have been blocked in the past. Read the dispute resolution policy.  However, if they won't discuss, and persist in edit-warring or other disruption, you can go to WP:ANI and request a topic-ban.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

new review after your comments
Dear Mr. Robert McClenon,

Thank you for the review you did to my page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ethyl_lauroyl_arginate. I have followed your advice and I'm no longer using the (R) symbol. I have also included more references.

Would you be so kind as to review again the page and give me any other advice that could, to help me have my page published?

I want to change the page name from "Ethyl lauroyl arginate" to "Ethyl lauroyl arginate, (LAE)" but I don't have the "move button" How can I do it?

Thank you very much for your help.

Yours faithfully, Marisa — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCF19 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Just commenting here because I saw the suggestion for Ethyl lauroyl arginate (LAE) as the name for the article. We don't normally employ abbreviations this way, as part of the article title. Also, one of your references says "LAE is the dehydrated crude product containing 85-95% Ethyl lauroyl arginate HCl". So if this is true, then Ethyl lauroyl arginate is not exactly a synonym of LAE. EdJohnston (talk) 22:57, 30 May 2019 (UTC)


 * User:EdJohnston, User:MCF19 - There already is a stub article on ethyl lauroyl arginate, the pure substance. I have recommended that the draft be copy-pasted over the stub.  There is so little information in the stub that a history merge is not necessary and no harm is done by a copy-paste.  (I know that a copy-paste is normally deprecated.)  Is LAE actually the pure substance, or a commercial product containing primarily the pure substance?  An earlier draft had a (R) symbol, which I said to remove, so I am somewhat concerned about promotion, but we want to describe every substance in as much detail as we can.  Robert McClenon (talk) 23:06, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Good morning Mr. Robert McClenon,

Thank you for your comments, I have followed your advice and I will name the page "Ethyl Lauroyl Arginate Monohydrochloride". Nevertheless, I cannot use the existing previous page of "Ethyl Lauroyl Arginate" as this has a different CAS number: 48076-74-0 and my page has a CAS number 60372-77-2 that corresponds to the monohydrochloride molecule" — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCF19 (talk • contribs) 08:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
 * User:MCF19 - Do you have any conflict of interest? Robert McClenon (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Good morning Mr. Robert McClenon, No I don't have any conflict of interest, but from my point of view it seems more accurate to describe this molecule with its correct CAS number, so if I do as you suggest me to copy paste in the already existing page, I will be eliminating another molecule no extending its information, may be I'm wrong...Can you advice me once more please? Best regards,Marisa — Preceding unsigned comment added by MCF19 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC) Dear Mr. Robert McClenon, Could you please give me some advice on how to proceed? as I explained to you both CAS numbers are not the same, and I think that renaming my article it would be better for Wikipedia. What do you think? Best regards, "MCF19 (talk) 08:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC)"MCF19 (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Good afternoon Mr. Robert McClenon, Can you please help me with my last question? I would appreciate it the most. This is my question: "I will name the page "Ethyl Lauroyl Arginate Monohydrochloride" as I cannot use the existing previous page of "Ethyl Lauroyl Arginate" as this has a different CAS number: 48076-74-0 and my page has a CAS number 60372-77-2 that corresponds to the monohydrochloride molecule, if I do change the name of my page ("move" it) Do you think it will be ok for Wikipedia?MCF19 (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

List of French marquisates
Hi. This is a plea for help, since I don’t want to take yet another noob to any of the drama boards. Yesterday a new editor waltzed in, changed the inclusion criteria in the list, edit warred to keep it in, despite my objections. I have reasoned with him, laid out my objections, pointed to BRD, all to no avail. I am at my wits end. Could you interfere as a neutral party and keep me from going French Revolution on his pars posterior? Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 08:08, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Kleuske - You were both past WP:3RR. The other editor was substantively wrong, but I didn't want to do anything that might get  you both blocked.  So I have thrown an RFC into the works.  I am sure that you can present the solid case why the list, which is not meant to be legal (after all, there have been no legal titles of nobility in France since the Third Republic was instituted in 1871), should reflect legal titles, so-called courtesy titles, and for that matter widely accepted pretensions.  After all, the reason why Louis XIII and Louis XIV started enforcing rules about titles was that there had been a lot of people claiming them, some of whom had more legal basis than others, and legality was always a little uncertain anyway when the king was said to be absolute but couldn't collect new taxes.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Damn and blast. You’re right. I could have sworn I slammed the brakes at 3RR. Thanks for your efforts. At the moment i’m editing under the influence, so I’ll respond on the TP tomorrow. Kleuske (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Robert McClenon,

You are wrong : even in 2019 under the French Republic, in France authentic titles are legal and considered as a part of the name. LE SCEAU DE FRANCE,TITRE NOBILIAIRE..

As I wrote in talk page I give up because I waste my time trying to explain something that English contributors don't understand (I do not blame you...)

I wanted only to improve it but in fact I don't care because its in English and in France nobody cares about it, so its not a problem the contents of this article is wrong and confusing with some fake titles (that are "courtesy title"). I prefer improve the same aticle in French. Goodbye Wikipedia in English and thank you both for your desire to understand what is not your culture... --Frenchmarquis (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Collaborations with Charles Fefferman and connections to Paul Erdos included in Geapsu article under consideration
HI Robert McClenon, The Geapsu article has been edited to include connections to the famous mathematician Charles Fefferman--widely considered the best mathematician in the world. Steven Damelin has 4 papers with him. Also a note on the strong connection of Steven Damelin to the famous mathematician Paul Erdos. Steven Damelin has several papers on Erdos weights introduced by Paul Erdos and has an Erdos number of 3 from 6 mathematicians.

Thanks for helping with this article and we looking forward to it being published.

Geapsu (talk) 23:46, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Copyright stuff at MFD
If this was on Commons, I would tag it as PD-text because I don't think it meets the threshold of originality. Would you not agree with that assessment? &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electric smoking system
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv 🍁  15:05, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Nothing Nothing Nothing Nothing Nothing
2601:142:4201:F4AE:11E2:8A4C:FF31:7E6B (talk) 23:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rheumatoid arthritis
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rheumatoid arthritis. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

BLP policy
Hi Robert, just a point of correction regarding your ArbCom statement, the Foundation had nothing to do with the introduction of the BLP policy. That policy, including the decision to create it, is the work entirely of the editing community. SarahSV (talk) 04:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Would you mind striking that? I think it's important to make clear that that's a community policy, in case anyone sees your post and believes that it came from the WMF—especially in light of the CEO's recent comments about our policies not working. SarahSV (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * User:SlimVirgin - Oops. I had marked up my statement and was planning to insert a revised version with additions, but then it was at about 560 words, so I didn't replace it, and then was interrupted.  Done now.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Robert. SarahSV (talk) 01:18, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft: CamEd Institute
Hi Robert, just a minor request, Could I change my draft name from Draft:CamEd Institute to CamEd Business School? I found that I cannot change it to CamEd Business School because this page title was previously blocked. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phengly Oeung (talk • contribs) 16:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Copyright violation. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:49, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Robert for your help with WIKI. Could you help to check with permission ticket Ticket#2019070310000777 and Ticket#2019062810000795 as the owner already submitted the Copyright permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phengly Oeung (talk • contribs) 01:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Phengly Oeung - What is your association with CamEd Institute? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:00, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon - I am staff at CamEd Institute, responsible for website and data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phengly Oeung (talk • contribs) 02:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Phengly Oeung - In the future, when you submit a CamEd Institute, you must make the conflict of interest disclosure. It would also be a good idea to rewrite the description in your own words.  That is easier than proving that you have a waiver of copyright.  Also, I am not entirely sure that CamEd Institute understands the impact of the CC-BY-SA copyleft, but I am not sure that I understand it either.  Robert McClenon (talk) 03:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Robert McClenon for now, do i need to submit additional reference? Please advice...

How long does it take for a dispute resolution process to start?
Just curious, but how long does it take for a dispute resolution to start? Dispute resolution was requested by an editor here, and it seems like it has been sitting here for a long time. There continue to be all kinds disputes between editors in of that article, and I think things will just get more and more tangled the longer things wait. One editor, at least, is very unwilling to wait, and it's been quite draining. - GretLomborg (talk) 01:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Kamrupi
Thank you for your help with the DRS process. Greatly appreciate your efforts. Chaipau (talk) 03:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electric smoking system
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

A torte
We may have disagreements in regard to ANI or other WP business, however I thought you deserved a torte. We are all working toward the same goal.

Please comment on Talk:Polyphenol
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polyphenol. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019


Hello ,

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important. Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR. The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever. NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so  you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations. Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for  the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging. Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway. School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * QUALITY of REVIEWING
 * Backlog
 * Move to draft
 * Notifying users
 * PERM
 * Other news

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)