User talk:Robert McClenon#Comment about Wikipedian reputation and small request

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Coefficient of relationship on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Thanks for your time in reviewing an article for creation draft I had here Draft:Collision at Rainbow Bridge. When declining, you left a note saying: "Please do not resubmit without explaining, in AFC comments or on the draft talk page, why this is different from the deleted article."

However, I had a note on the talk page with an explanation, which it seems like you didn't see.... if you have a chance to look at that comment, that'd be great, but if not, no worries. CipherSleuth (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I saw the comment left on Draft:Dragan Bošković. I wanted to note that it was named by a moderator, I could do with the name Dragan Boscovic (in case it gets accepted). I also wanted to ask you about this sentence " Please do not edit the primary page unless you are accepting this draft.". So I shouldn't edit the page once I submit it for review. And about removing the redlined items from the infobox, should I just remove the hyperlink leading it to non-existent Wiki pages or should I remove the words completely. I would also appreciate feedback on how to make the draft better.

Thanks in advance, ~~~ Boskovicdd (talk) 13:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::User:Boskovicdd - No. The primary page is the footballer, Dragan Bošković. Do not edit the footballer page. You may edit the draft in any way that you wish. You may either remove the links from the redlined items in the infobox, or you may remove the phrases completely. Either approach is acceptable. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::Leave the diacritics in. If the draft is accepted, a redirect will be created without the diacritics. We do not use the presence and absence of diacritics to disambiguate between two people with the same name. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey, don’t you think the ANI against me was a bit targeted, given that it was filed by another participant in the DRN?

Also, if the ANI against any of us gets closed, is it possible to reopen the same DRN, or would we have to start again from scratch? User623921 (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::User:623921 - I am not sure what you mean by targeted. Of course it was filed by another participant in the dispute. Discuss at WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::I will decide whether the dispute can be reopened or will have to be started over after the WP:ANI is resolved, and subject to any sanctions imposed by WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

:::I meant that since they knew we were discussing whether the Arameans should get their article or not, and since the person who filed it against me has been very vocal about everything Aramean-related, it feels a bit suspicious that I was reported today.

:::Okay, got it. Hopefully, everything gets resolved, and we can reopen this long-awaited DRN again. Thanks for your contribution! User623921 (talk) 17:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Would it be possible to withdraw the ANI report I filed and reopen the DRN? To be honest, I am more invested in the DRN dispute than in engaging in an ANI. User623921 (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::::User:User623921 - No. There are two reports that have been consolidated. One report is by Surayeproject3 against you, and one is by you against Surayeproject3. You can't withdraw a report that the other editor filed, and only the community can allow you to withdraw a report that you filed. After the WP:ANI is closed, you may file another DRN request unless you are sanctioned by the WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't see the Die Linke dispute resolving at WP:DRN any time soon because the only person who seems to care only seems to care in as far as they can drop in and make a salty comment about another editor once every few days. And, at this point, that appears to be all this one editor seems interested in doing here on Wikipedia. I'm sorry - I've tried to play by the rules at DRN - but it just seems like we're going in circles. So I'm out. If an RfC is needed and people have no objection please feel free to bring my draft live. Or don't. But I'm not burning more cycles having the same argument with the same one editor over and over. Simonm223 (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::User:Simonm223 - As you probably have seen, that issue seemed to fizzle out, and I have closed it. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Yeah. I saw. Thanks. Simonm223 (talk) 10:21, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Robert, thanks for reviewing my draft!

I wouldnt recommend on putting the draft to merge with ASEAN#History however. There was prior consensus that the article had become too large to read comfortably, which led to most of the history section being trimmed down.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ASEAN&diff=prev&oldid=1194706365] A small summary paragraph might be appropriate, but it wouldn't be sufficient to cover the full scope.

To preserve the trimmed content, I created Draft:History of ASEAN, which collects much of the original material. however, to my belief, the section on ASA was too detailed for that draft, leading me to split it further to become this draft.

Would it be more appropriate to include the ASA content in my history of ASEAN draft, Or should I see consensus for a separate article on this topic? Cheers, Kaliper1 (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

::User:Kaliper1 - I will take a look within about 48 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:25, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear Robert,

I just have a quick question before the RFC concludes.User JPratas has been reverting edits from three contributors—myself, Cocoa57, and the IP address 100.36.106.199.

These reversions include: Corrections of spelling and grammar in JPratas’s text.

My addition of a new photo of a recently unveiled bust of Aristides de Sousa Mendes.

JPratas reverted these changes, restoring the previous version (with the original errors), stating that "consensus had not been reached." However, I was under the impression that consensus isn't typically required for straightforward factual contributions (such as an updated image) or for correcting spelling and grammar mistakes.

It seems the edits have been reverted without proper review, which raises concerns about potential Wikipedia:Ownership of content. This concern was also echoed by the IP user mentioned above.

Additionally, it appears that JPratas has been systematically reporting every account that attempts to edit the page—citing reasons such as too few edits or alleged sockpuppetry. In my case, I’m unsure why my account was flagged. This pattern feels restrictive and gives the impression that he's trying to be the owner of the page.

Is there a recommended path to resolve this constructively? I find it a little unfair. Benji1207 (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Courtesy link|Draft:Embassy of the United States, Abuja}}

Hello Robert McClenon, You marked the above submission as "review in progress" 7 days ago. I just thought I would let you know. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 17:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Robert, I just replied to your question about Draft:Eagle Pictures.

You see the following short description? This article is about the Italian film production and distribution company, it does have nothing to do with a brand by Spyglass Media Group (formerly Spyglass Entertainment), it was founded in 1986 by brothers named Stefano and Ciro Dammicco. That’s all I wanted to ask.

Happy editing! 2603:6080:5940:22:84DA:CE31:8273:C8FE (talk) 22:53, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi {{ping|Robert McClenon}} I saw this article Paloma Aguirre come up on my watchlist. Its just been created. I !voted at the last Afd and think that is the reason it was on the watchlist. I see it was yourself that sent the previous article to Afd. Can you take a look at this article and see if she is now notable. Aguirre is now the mayor of Imperial Beach and I'm not sure if she is notable. She does seem to be activist and public servant as well as a mayor. I !voted for you in the speedy Rfa elections. I'm sorry you never got through. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::User:scope_creep - She was mayor of Imperial Beach a year ago when I wrote the AFD. There were two problems with the article when I wrote the AFD. The first was that it was written by a paid editor. The second is that only one of the references was independent. There was also a draft. My thought was to delete the article and allow the draft to be reviewed. The draft then expired. I can't see the deleted article or the expired draft. What I can see is that the new article has 18 references, and it looks like a bona fide article by an experienced good-standing editor. A year ago, I didn't know if she was notable, but wanted to get rid of the puff piece. It appears that she passes notability now (and maybe did last year). I don't plan to spend a little more than an hour checking the 18 references. Does that answer your question? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::Yes, it does and that is fine, but I must admit I find it quite to judge if a mayor of a small town is notable. She is an activist and public servant and was wanting it kept if possible, but wasn't sure. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 16:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. I notice a WP:G6 tag is marked on the mainspace redirect at CAT:CSD. However, looking at the draft, it seems to be mostly unsourced and the sources given don't seem particularly substantial. I'm concerned if I deleted the redirect, to allow the AfC to review to pass, that it would end up back at AfD again. Any thoughts? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::User:Ritchie333 - I have removed the G6 tag pending discussion. In particular, you write: {{tq|I'm concerned if I deleted the redirect, to allow the AfC to review to pass, that it would end up back at AfD again.}} I haven't found an AFD. If there has been an AFD, please tell me where it is. If there has been an AFD, I either decline the draft or discuss it with the submitter. So please tell me whether there has previously been a deletion discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

{{Courtesy link|Draft:Gatti}}

Hello Robert McClenon, You marked the above submission as "review in progress" on April 7. If you would like me to stop bothering you just let me know. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 15:49, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

:User:CF-501 Falcon - I do that too often. I will get to it this afternoon (this evening, if you're on GMT). Robert McClenon (talk) 18:11, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

::No problem! This is a volunteer project after all. I do the same thing. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 18:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

:::User:CF-501 Falcon - I've disambiguated it and accepted it. I think I will propose that a bot look for drafts that have been marked in review for more than 72 hours and put a note on the reviewer's user talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:22, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I was thinking about it too. I just don't have any technical other than limited Python. CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 18:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Spanish Civil War on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Perth on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Blocking redirect has been deleted, per request. Cyrius|✎ 15:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (film) on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

:Geonosis is deleted G6. Please proceed with draft acceptance. -- Whpq (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Anthony Fauci on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Adult human female on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

hi @Robert McClenon, whatever i do is apparently wrong. this time i was simply reverting the drastic changes until there was a consensus. the editor wanted to get his changes in prior to a consensus and i were participating in talk page to reach a consensus, now i am again subject to tban. just looking at the logs, you'll see what i am saying is true, i was simply reverting undiscussed edits that were controversial and challenged. Wlaak (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Robert, Thank you for all of your patience and help. I had two questions; One, would it be okay to hat the sock-puppet comment? Two, would it be okay to propose a TBAN for both Wlaak and Suryayeproject3? or are there better options? Suryayeproject3 appears to want to push their POV across, while a TBAN may not be the best option a formal warning/consequence is due. Both are guilty of the same things. Thank you, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 11:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

::User:CF-501 Falcon - Yes, if I understand correctly, but I have a question. I read this post before I looked back at WP:ANI, and wondered why you were suggesting hatting my comment that the history going back five years includes sockpuppetry. Also before rereading ANI, I was agreeable to topic-banning Surayeproject3. Then I reread the WP:ANI thread, and see that there is a new comment by another sockpuppet below my comment. Of course it is useful to collapse comments by block-evading users; those comments add no value, but distract from discussion. If that is what you are asking about, of course the illegal !vote can be collapsed. I don't know if there is a better sanction, but topic-banning them both is a good start, and we should also declare the topic to be contentious. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:41, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Robert McClenon, Glad to see you agree. I have support asilvering's proposal at VPR. Would you like to do the formal proposal for a TBAN on both editors? I am not experienced with the wording of such proposals. I will hat the sock-puppet. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 16:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Roseto effect on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Hi @Robert McClenon I noticed a brand new account editing the Draft, they don't seem to have done any harm but I am wondering if you have submitted it anywhere or posted it anywhere that could have made them find it Wlaak (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:I have never seen this before but I was even notified on my watchlist that his account was created:

:* User creation log 13:14  User account QQ052025 talk contribs was created Do you know why? Maybe because I wrote to him on his talk page just now?

:Wlaak (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon thank you for the work you have done! i was wondering, should Arameans not be moved to "History of the Arameans"? As we now both have Arameans in Israel and Aramean people, would it not be contradicting/confusing to have "Arameans" be of ancient Arameans (described as extinct, although academically proven otherwise) and then "Arameans in Israel" speaking of the same Arameans but as a modern people? Wlaak (talk) 12:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

::User:Wlaak - The titles of articles on related subjects should be discussed in connection with the discussion of whether the article on Aramean people should continue to exist. Discuss in the deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aramean people. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@Robert McClenon i have a question regarding your review, thank you for it. what was your opinion on it? was the content in it overlapping with any other to a degree its considered a fork? naturally one cant avoid some overlaps, specially with the antiquity section of Arameans Wlaak (talk) 07:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Internet-group-chat.svgYour feedback is requested at Talk:Femosphere on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

I noticed you reached this milestone recently. Very impressive! IAWW (talk) 19:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

:User:It is a wonderful world - Thank you. Is there a report that shows edit milestones? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

::Noo I just saw it when I looked at your contribs. I like to see what people are working on sometimes. IAWW (talk) 06:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Mr. Moderator. How long does the Rfc draft going to take? And how shall it be done? Shall I participate as well? Protector100 (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

::User:Protector100 - I will be providing a draft for review at DRN within 24 hours. I will try to answer expected questions then. Any other questions can be asked at DRN. That case is not closed until I launch the RFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has opened an arbitration case titled Indian military history in response to an arbitration enforcement referral. You are receiving this notice because you are a named party to the case and/or offered a statement in the referral proceedings.

Please add your evidence by June 5, 2025, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage.

For a guide to the arbitration process, please see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg

Hello, Robert McClenon. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "sandbox".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply {{edit|User:Andyvee123/sandbox|edit the submission}}, and remove the {{tlc|db-afc}}, {{tlc|db-draft}}, or {{tlc|db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions here. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Folkezoft (talk) 19:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you, User:Folkezoft, maybe. You just discovered the misfeature that sends a G13 notice to the editor who moved a sandbox into draft space. You can ignore this comment, and I will ignore the note after poking fun at it. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)