| Revision as of 17:31, 24 January 2020 editEdJohnston (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,240 edits →AN3 report which mentions a DRN that you moderated: new section← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:46, 22 January 2025 edit undoRobert McClenon (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers197,491 edits →A Few More Comments: add comment | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} | {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} | ||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | |||
| | age=1440 | |||
| | archiveprefix=User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive | |||
| | numberstart=32 | |||
| | maxarchsize=75000 | |||
| | header={{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
| | minkeepthreads=7 | |||
| | minarchthreads=3 | |||
| | format= %%i | |||
| }} | |||
| {{archives|search=yes}} | {{archives|search=yes}} | ||
| {|class="wikitable" | {|class="wikitable" | ||
| ! Other archives | ! Other archives | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| |] | |] | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| |] | |] | ||
| Line 20: | Line 30: | ||
| |] | |] | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| {{purge box}} | |||
| == Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment == | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 12:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| == Feedback request: Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines request for comment == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 111251 --> ] (]) 04:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 23:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Draft:List of Books About Women in History == | |||
| == ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message == | |||
| Thanks for your speedy review of ]! Added disclaimer about incompleteness of list. ] (]) 17:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> | |||
| == State Portal Metrics == | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div> | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-text"> | |||
| Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| Greetings, Robert McClenon. I flagged ] for inaccuracy because ] had the wrong info, and someone else on the talk page had had a problem. I don't think there is any rush, but you might want to know. -] (]) 17:43, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == Reviews == | |||
| </div> | |||
| Sorry about ] and ], I'd loaded a few up in advance and I'm not getting the popup warning for some reason. All the best, '''<span style="font-family: Arial">] ]</span>''' 18:26, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| ::] - I am not sure what the issue was with Gyus324, because it is gone. With Kryton, I see that you tagged it for G12, presumably a copy of their own web site, and I tagged it for G11 as advertising, and it is waiting for deletion, and my guess is that both G11 and G12 do apply. I don't know what you are apologizing for. We are both reviewing the usual input of crud. I haven't been reviewing that much cruddy input recently because I have been reviewing cruddy portals. ] (]) 19:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 --> | |||
| :::{{u|Robert McClenon}}, I don't know really, just letting you know I'm not trying to contradict, I agree both could apply, it was a batch copyvio run. And the portal thing is '''still''' ongoing? I thought we'd just about got rid of the abandoned ones or ones created from a single template. Is there a cleanup tracking category you can point me to so I can resume helping out? Best, '''<span style="font-family: Arial">] ]</span>''' 22:00, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Cleanup tracking categories, like tagging the portals with {{tl|update}}, has no effect. What has an effect is tagging the portals for ], and they are still being nominated there, and normally deleted there. The portal advocates then say that problems with portals should be taken care of by tagging and normal editing, but there is evidence that tagging, whether with tags or with categories, doesn't get anyone to fix them. ] (]) 23:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| == Proposals regarding AfC & NPP == | |||
| How is still considered too soon if the series will release next week on Prime Video. | |||
| You are invited to comment at discussion currently taking place at ] for pre-opinion on the combined functions of Articles for Creation (AfC) and New Page Review (NPR). | |||
| <hr> | |||
| <small>This mass message invitation is being sent to subscribed members of the work group at the project '']''.</small> ] (]) 00:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Kudpung@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:The_future_of_NPP_and_AfC/Work_group_list&oldid=906078596 --> | |||
| Source: https://trendrod.wordpress.com/2024/10/29/julia-montes-sharon-cuneta-comeback-series-saving-grace-heads-to-prime-video-this-november/ ] (]) 02:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| ::It will release next week. It hasn't been reviewed. ] is based on ] by ], such as reviews. ] (]) 02:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::Now, that is starting to make sense. I was going to ask that IP user about when it is ready for resubmission, and I'm the one who created the draft article. So, we need to wait until after the show airs next week to resubmit the draft article for review, and we have to provide additional reliable sources besides ABS-CBN, which is considered an ], as references when expanding the article before that. ] (]) 04:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::It will be hard because there are times a series or a movie is out but only ABS-CBN is the only source not a lot of additional sources. It's only often you get these addtional sources. :( ] (]) 06:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == '']'' arbitration case opened == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 111649 --> ] (]) 04:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 23:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ] ] 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:SilverLocust@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Update_list&oldid=1260341982 --> | |||
| == Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment == | |||
| Hi Robert. Would you mind perusing through this newly created article and doing a quick assessment? It didn't go through AfC and was created by an SPA so there are always standard concerns (COISELF, PAID, BIO, etc.) when that happens, but this might be a case of NEXIST even though right now the article is only supported by PRIMARY/SELFPUB types of sources. There are some pretty obvious formatting errors (SECTIONCAPS, SURNAME, etc.) that I was going to cleanup, but not sure whether it might be best to DRAFTIFY this to give the creator more time to work on and then have them submit it to AfC for review when they're ready. For reference, I came across this while checking on ]. -- ] (]) 20:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 20:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::], ] - I have reviewed the article briefly. The problem, as the first reviewer has noted, is that it doesn't have any secondary sources, sources indicating what other people have written about Laredo's work. As Marchjuly says, we can do one of two things. I can move the article back to draft space, or you can leave it in article space. If you leave it in article space, you need to address the formatting issues, and to look for secondary sources. Also, do you have any ], such as working for Laredo's estate? I will review it again, but this is my first pass. ] (]) 22:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== ANI Notice == | ||
| I see your comments at ] and ] about fixing format issues before the article could be accepted. The problems in these drafts seem opinion relatively minor, and can either be fixed by oneself at least as easily as explaining to a new user how to do it, or dealt with after the article is in mainspace, in the usual way for all articles--there are many wikignomes who really like that sort of work. Of course, it's a matter of degree and judgment--I too will sometimes decline a draft--or even draftify an article--if the errors are so great as to make the article unclear, or represent a really rough machine translation, or make it difficult to see just what the references are--in fact, I declined at least 3 for such reasons this very evening. This is just meant as a discussion, for what we say at AfC usually very closely agrees. ''']''' (]) 09:41, 13 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Yes. First, I didn't decline those drafts. I commented on them. I thought that other editors could do just as good a job as I could of cleaning them up. I wasn't sure whether the Cappus draft, which is really more a list of his works than a BDP, was ready for acceptance, but its acceptance is all right. It is true that I sometimes simply comment on drafts rather than accepting them or declining them. ] (]) 15:58, 13 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> <b>]</b> 15:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| ::] - Thank you for notifying me. I have no opinion at this time on whether the article should be deleted, because I have not at this time done a source review. I have no opinion on whether RocketKnightX is associated with the sockpuppets and sockpuppeteers and have no plan to file a ]. However, I do have an opinion that RocketKnightX has exhausted the patience of the community. I have proposed that they be ]. ] (]) 22:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] updates == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 111953 --> ] (]) 04:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| You are receiving this message because you are on ] for ]. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is {{tqq|The interaction of named parties in the ] topic area and examination of the ] process that led to ] ] to ]}}. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made: | |||
| == Feedback == | |||
| First, '''the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days''', until '''23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC)'''. Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on ], providing a reason with ] as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective. | |||
| Hi Robert, | |||
| I saw that you rejected ] because you felt the content was not neutral and merely promoted the subject. I would like to resubmit an improved version that addresses your feedback but I’m just not sure what parts of the page are not neutral. I was wondering if you could give me more info, like a couple examples of the parts that aren’t neutral. | |||
| Thanks in advance, | |||
| Deb <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 07:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::] - I don't generally provide a lot of assistance to paid editors. However, I will offer a few thoughts. First, as I said, your draft gives details about Wininger's personal life that are not related to whether and why he is notable. Second, your draft appears to be praising or advertising ] and ]. Third, when I read a draft that contains a lot of ], I think that it is marketing. It is true that Wininger is an entrepreneur, and he may be an innovator or inventor, although usually an inventor is someone who invents things, not business concepts. However, when a draft says that someone is an entrepreneur and an inventor or innovator, that makes me think ]. Well, it is paid editing. You are the editor who is being paid to write neutral-sounding material without being neutral. It is your job to figure out how to do that, not mine. I suggest that you ask for advice at ]. Some of the editors there might be willing to help you. ] (]) 16:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Second, the ] '''has been extended by a week''', and will now close at '''23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)'''. For the Arbitration Committee, <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion of "3D-CMCC-CNR Biogeochemical Model" page == | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:HouseBlaster@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Update_list&oldid=1260342644 --> | |||
| == Backyard Skateboarding Info == | |||
| Dear Robert McClenon, | |||
| I send you this message regarding the deletion of a page, ], written by me a few months ago. | |||
| First of all, I would like to thank who, like you, makes several efforts to carry on an important project such as Misplaced Pages. As a user, I well know how Misplaced Pages is crucial for sharing and diffusing knowledge. The submission procedure of the "3D-CMCC-CNR Biogeochemical Model" page let me understood directly how many efforts this huge project implies. | |||
| I just would submit to your attention some issues that I consider fundamental and that should be taken into account to evaluate the publication/deletion of "3D-CMCC-CNR Biogeochemical Model" page. | |||
| One of the main motivations for the page deletion is based on the low number of citations on Google Scholar, undoubtedly an unavoidable source to evaluate scientific works. However, I think that further criteria should be taken into account for the evaluation. | |||
| The 3D-CMCC-CNR model is one of the tools available in scientific research to forecast climate change effects on terrestrial ecosystems. Simulation models like 3D-CMCC-CNR allow to better understand the modifications of our planet due to climate change under present-day as even more on the long-term. Hence, the model is a fundamental mean between scientific research and society. The simulation of the forest carbon dynamics by the models allow to understand the role of the ecosystems in the climate change mitigation and to plan the best interventions to reduce as much as possible the climate change effects on our society. For this reason, an eventually Misplaced Pages page of the 3D-CMCC-CNR model would not be an end in itself but a relevant explanation of an important tool in the hands of the human being to understand (and forecast) the modification of the Earth due to one of the biggest issue ever in human history. | |||
| Another important reason to consider is that the 3D-CMCC-CNR model takes part in several important projects of international level. The most important is The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) (https://www.isimip.org/). This project involves several simulation models to study and forecast the future effects of climate change on terrestrial ecosystems. | |||
| It is important to highlight that the 3D-CMCC-CNR has increased its relevance starting from the first publication (2014), with almost 1 article published each year on relevant scientific journals, including Global Change Biology (IF: 8.997) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14857). Furthermore, the 3D-CMCC-CNR boasts the collaboration of distinguished scientists in forest modelling, such as Peter Thornton, Philippe Ciais, Ben Bond-Lamberty, Trevor Keenan, and Colin Prentice (https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpz034, https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1837, https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018MS001275). | |||
| For the reasons described above, please let me ask to revalue the decision about the publication of the 3D-CMCC-CNR page on Misplaced Pages or the possibility to resubmit the page. | |||
| Thanks in advance to take into account my point of view. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::] - Address your arguments to ] or ]. You may resubmit a version of the paper that is substantially different from the one that was previously deleted. ] (]) 23:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Hello {{u|3d-cmcc-cnr}}. The page in question was deleted following a community discussion which determined that it did not meet our guidelines for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Those guidelines can be found at ]. As Robert McClenon noted above, the article can be recreated but would need to carefully address the concerns raised in . Otherwise it would likely be subject to speedy re-deletion. Additionally, I am concerned that you may have a connection to the subject of the article which might constitute a conflict of interest. Please read ] before attempting to recreate the article. Thank you for your contributions to the project. -] (]) 00:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| What detailed information about '']'' is shown on the ] page? The only information is just stating its title. ] (]) 22:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == About my Battle for Dream Island draft. == | |||
| == Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment == | |||
| My draft is about Battle for Dream Island, but the other submission is about the Battle for Dream Island series. | |||
| Should my draft be more unique? | |||
| --] (]) 16:49, 17 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - First, it would help for your draft to clarify the difference between the series, the season, and the episode. This is often a cause of confusion. Second, I have disambiguated the draft on the series, and have requested deletion of the redirect. ] (]) 17:37, 17 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::] Ok. Thanks for helping. ] (]) 20:57, 17 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 22:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Editing News #2 – Mobile editing and talk pages – October 2019 == | |||
| == Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment == | |||
| <em>] • ]</em> | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 15:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Inside this newsletter, the ] talks about their work on the ], on ], and at ]. | |||
| == Feedback request: Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines request for comment == | |||
| === Help === | |||
| '''What talk page interactions do you remember?''' Is it a story about how someone helped you to learn something new? Is it a story about how someone helped you get involved in a group? Something else? Whatever your story is, we want to hear it! | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 16:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Please tell us a story about how you used a talk page. <mark>Please share a link to a memorable discussion, or describe it on the ''']'''.</mark> The team would value your examples. These examples will help everyone develop a shared understanding of what this project should support and encourage. | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| === Talk Pages === | |||
| The ] was a global consultation to define better tools for wiki communication. From February through June 2019, more than 500 volunteers on 20 wikis, across 15 languages and multiple projects, came together with members of the Foundation to create a product direction for a set of discussion tools. The ] of the Talk Page Consultation was published in August. It summarizes the product direction the team has started to work on, which you can read more about here: ]. | |||
| The team needs and wants your help at this early stage. They are starting to develop the first idea. Please add your name to the ] section of the project page, if you would like to hear about opportunities to participate. | |||
| === Mobile visual editor === | |||
| The Editing team is trying to make it simpler to edit on mobile devices. The team is changing the ]. If you have something to say about editing on a mobile device, please leave a message at ]. | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| ] | |||
| * On 3 September, the Editing team released ]. Anyone could use the new version in the mobile visual editor. | |||
| * There is an ] on the Edit Card for adding and modifying links. There is also a new, ]. | |||
| * Feedback: You can try the new Edit Cards by opening the mobile visual editor on a smartphone. Please post your feedback on the ]. | |||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| ].]] | |||
| * In September, the Editing team updated the mobile visual editor's editing toolbar. Anyone could see these changes in the mobile visual editor. | |||
| ** <em>One toolbar:</em> All of the editing tools are located in one toolbar. Previously, the toolbar changed when you clicked on different things. | |||
| **<em>New navigation:</em> The buttons for moving forward and backward in the edit flow have changed. | |||
| **<em>Seamless switching:</em> an ] for switching between the visual and wikitext modes. | |||
| * Feedback: You can try the refreshed toolbar by opening the mobile VisualEditor on a smartphone. Please post your feedback on the ]. | |||
| === Wikimania === | |||
| The Editing Team attended ] in Sweden. They led a session on ] and a session on ]. They tested ] new ] in the mobile visual editor with contributors. You can read more about what the team did and learned in ]. | |||
| === Looking ahead === | |||
| *'''Talk Pages Project''': The team is thinking about the first set of proposed changes. The team will be working with a few communities to pilot those changes. The best way to stay informed is by adding your username to the list on the project page: ]. | |||
| *'''Testing the mobile visual editor as the default''': The Editing team plans to post results before the end of the calendar year. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: ]. | |||
| *'''Measuring the impact of Edit Cards''': The Editing team hopes to share results in November. This study asks whether the project helped editors add links and citations. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: ]. | |||
| – ] (]) & ] (]) 16:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Whatamidoing (WMF)@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:VisualEditor/Newsletter&oldid=920787225 --> | |||
| == Reduce protection for ] == | |||
| Reduce protection for ] so that the project can be initiated and built up by talks. ] (]) 07:47, 18 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Thiyya&redirect=no ] (]) 07:47, 18 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I do not know what I had to do with the redirect ]. However, if you want it unprotected, you may request the reduction of its protection level to ] at ]. However, if you want to create a separate article ], the best approach would be to discuss it at ]. Have you tried creating a draft at ]? ] (]) 12:48, 18 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == The Real Housewives of New York City RfC == | |||
| Hi there, Robert McClenon! The RfC regarding sorting expired, and it did not generate a consensus. There are also points to be made about the RfC not being necessary in the first place due to there being a majority view on the original RfC and preceding discussion on the article's talk page. How should we proceed? I'm asking because AnAudLife recently reached out to another editor to respond to the RfC even though it's expired, so they're still holding on strong to their view as well. Thanks! ]<sup>]</sup> 04:02, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - The RFC has expired, but it has not been formally closed. I haven't yet checked whether there is already a request at ] for a formal closure, or whether one should be requested. If one hasn't yet been requested, you can request it, or you can ask me to request it, and I will request it. I will be looking at whether there has been a request for closure in maybe 12 or 18 hours. That is my advice for now, to wait for closure. If there is edit-warring or personal attacks, you may report them at ] or ], but I think it is better to wait for a formal closure. ] (]) 04:55, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ah, I understand. I'm not all that familiar with the process, so may I ask that you request for closure? Thank you again! ]<sup>]</sup> 04:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I have read the votes and even some of the ones who voted “C” are in agreement with sorting her name with “Lesseps” not the “de”. And people are still voting as of just a few days ago. Should we extend to allow for more input? What’s the rush to close when people are still contributing? ] (]) 05:42, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::] - I have checked ], and our RFC is not yet listed. Do you want closure requested, or do you want to take the suggestion of ] and wait a while? If we do request closure, there is no guarantee as to when we will get it. We might get closure in 2 days, and we might have to wait more than a month for a closer. If either of you request that I request closure, I will request closure. ] (]) 06:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Does closure give a decisive conclusion regarding sorting? If not, is reopening the RfC as AnAudLife suggested an option? I'm afraid if we leave it as it is then the discussion would get archived and the dispute is once again left unresolved. ]<sup>]</sup> 07:36, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I do NOT request closure, I would like to give it more time. ] (]) 14:49, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ====Sorting of Names Issue (again)==== | |||
| I am not familiar with the concept of re-opening an RFC, but that could be done by inserting a new {{tl|RFC}} template at the top of the RFC, which would open it for another thirty days, and would start a new cycle of robotically requesting editors to visit it. I don't know of a way to re-open it for less than 30 days. An alternative is to leave it alone, if editors are continuing to express their opinions. My guess is that a close will result in No Consensus between A and B, but might result in the closer teasing out some lesser conclusion. I can request closure, in which case it will be closed in some time between tomorrow and maybe two months, or I can do nothing, in which case it may be closed sometime. If closure is not requested and discussion stops for a period of time (and I haven't checked the period of time), a bot will archive it, in which case it will be a retired RFC that never did anything. If there isn't presently a clear consensus, there isn't likely to be a clear consensus. Just leaving it open in the hope that consensus develops seems futile. I will leave it alone for now. That doesn't mean I will leave it alone on Sunday. ] (]) 15:40, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :It seems that AnAudLife and I are in agreement on this one. Just so we can put the dispute to bed, I restarted the RfC per ]. Thank you again for all your help! ]<sup>]</sup> 16:22, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I know what you and ] meant to do. You didn't quite do it. You put in your timestamped signature where the RFC tag had been, but you didn't put the RFC tag back in. I have put the RFC tag back in for you. It will now run for thirty more days before the bot pulls it again. We definitely want to request closure after the bot recloses it again. ] (]) 17:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==] concern== | |||
| Hi there, I'm ]. I just wanted to let you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. | |||
| If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. | |||
| You may request ] of the content if it meets requirements. | |||
| If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at ]. | |||
| Thank you for your attention. ] (]) 22:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 112333 --> ] (]) 04:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==] concern== | |||
| Hi there, I'm ]. I just wanted to let you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. | |||
| If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. | |||
| You may request ] of the content if it meets requirements. | |||
| If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at ]. | |||
| Thank you for your attention. ] (]) 01:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Sally Helgesen == | |||
| Hello Robert, | |||
| I have replied to your comment on my draft page https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Sally_Helgesen. I would like to know how long it will take for the review. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | ||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material |
In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can . An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | ||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-draft-deleted --><!-- Template:Db-csd-deleted-custom --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| 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 ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| ::Thank you, ] - This was even sillier than many of the G13 messages that I get. The G13 messages are often because I disambiguated a draft, which creates a redirect of which I am the creator. But in this case it says that I created the redirect in 2020. Well, well. ] (]) 23:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == RfC == | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 16:49, 23 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| {{User QAIbox | |||
| == Steve Huffman edit war == | |||
| | image = Ehrenbach, snow on grass melting.jpg | |||
| {{hat|Stop quarreling on my talk page. ] (]) 02:20, 26 October 2019 (UTC)}} | |||
| | image_upright = 1.3 | |||
| Can you please revisit the talk and history page of that page? | |||
| | bold = ] · ] · ] | |||
| }} | |||
| The RfC that you started, about the composer of the opera I look forward to see today: I believe it should be mentioned on the projects Composers, Classical music and Opera. It seems not well known that, while the former two still have a guideline against infoboxes, it was {{diff|Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Opera/Article_guidelines|900552820||dropped from project Opera}} in 2019. - My ] is about the opera. Happiness and sadness under music, travel pics under places (unfinished). -- ] (]) 12:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Listen today to ]'s 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the ] when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with ], because he was on my ] this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --] (]) 17:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Going back to July 2017 you can see https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Auror_Andrachome and https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Digbybare beginning this edit war. Looking at the history and changes on that page it is clear '''The talk has been beaten to death since the incident.''' | |||
| I come to fix the cellist's name, with ] and new pics - look for red birds --] (]) 20:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| This was a major controversy, involving '''just Huffman'''. The page has his "Net Neutrality position" as a seperate section and a major controversy specific to him as an individual buried under a few lines of text. I kept the text and citations but could add another 20+ articles to help source it if that helps? | |||
| All I am seeing is a few individuals getting angry as hell I tried to seperate a major controversy into its own heading. Misplaced Pages's guidelines say that explicitly. What am I not seeing here? | |||
| ] it's a great woman, soprano ], and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote ] for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! --] (]) 20:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| '''"Controversy" section. "For a specific controversy that is broadly covered in reliable sources. "''' This is a specific controversy covered in reliable sources. A simple google search returns hundreds of outlets covering this. | |||
| == Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment == | |||
| https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/reddit-chief-admits-to-editing-comments-that-were-critical-of-him/ | |||
| https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-44779237 | |||
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/26/reddits-ceo-regrets-trolling-trump-supporters-by-secretly-editing-their-posts/ | |||
| https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-modifies-donald-trump-the-donald-2016-11 | |||
| https://mashable.com/2016/11/24/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-pizzagate-trolls/ | |||
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/reddit-ceo-steve-huffman-apologizes-for-manipulating-trump-supporters-posts/ | |||
| https://www.ibtimes.com/who-steve-huffman-reddit-ceo-sparks-controversy-editing-comments-critical-him-2450793 | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 05:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| '''The topic of the controversy is best named in the section title''' | |||
| == Feedback request: Biographies request for comment == | |||
| If you look at the edit opencooper reverted, I did just that. I made the topic of the controversy (Controversy over political comment manipulation) the name of the section title. | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 16:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| This isn't a reddit specific incident because Huffman was operating outside of his normal duties at Reddit when engaging in this behavior. This isn't UNDUE, this isn't CRIT being used inappropriately. | |||
| == New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive == | |||
| There has been talk for years about this specific controversy, and edit wars for years. Its doubly frustrating that this is the exact type of PR for the incident of controversy in question ::facepalm:: | |||
| {| style="border: 2px solid #36c; border-radius: 4px; background: linear-gradient(to right, #ffffff, #eaf3ff); padding: 10px; color: #000;" | |||
| A major controversy specific to one individual is in line with a separate heading. Everything else involving this entire process is little more than burying me with BS paperwork in the hopes that the edits will never stay. Lets get some integrity here and give a major controversy a separate heading like we do for other individuals. ] (]) 23:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| | style="vertical-align: middle; font-size: 130%" | ] | <span style="font-size: 85%">''']''' </span> | |||
| | rowspan=3 | ] | |||
| :To save you some searching RM see the threads ] and ]. Regards. ]|] 00:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |- | |||
| | | |||
| ::Here is another one ]. ]|] 00:34, 26 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| * On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. | |||
| * Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. | |||
| :::What do my user comments and talk about the article have to do with the fact that Misplaced Pages rules which I quoted indicate that should be its own section. Stop trying to muddy the waters. This issue has to do with a major controversy involving one person NOT being a separate heading for that user's[REDACTED] page. ] (]) 01:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| * Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. | |||
| {{hab}} | |||
| * ] will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. | |||
| * Barnstars will also be granted for ] previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. | |||
| == Vandalism here. Edit war == | |||
| * Interested in taking part? ''']'''. | |||
| {{collapsetop|Edit-warring has been reported at ]. ] (]) 02:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)}} | |||
| |- | |||
| * {{vandal|Ahuwwhh}} User is here to disrupt the article only, not to contribute.Repeatedly disrupting the original work ] ] (]) 01:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"|You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself ] | |||
| {{collapsebottom}} | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 112670 --> ] (]) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == I find your behavior towards me specifically hugely hypocritical == | |||
| I reached out to you for DRN that I will admit probably should have been better put together. You closed it which was totally reasonable. I then went to here to your talk page, and asked you to revisit the issue again because of the listed reasons. Other users then began to attack me personally, at which point I asked them to stop muddying the waters and focus on the issue. You closed that with a big red box and stated DO NOT MODIFY. I respected your request and moved on. I then noticed your comment specific to me ON THE HUFFMAN PAGE. "User:Siihb - I usually pay very little attention to an editor who always erases messages from their own talk page while leaving a lot of messages on other editors' talk pages and on article talk pages. It usually indicates an editor with an open mouth and closed ears." | |||
| However it is perfectly allowable behavior to trim a talk page of comments. So you are holding perfectly allowable behavior against me, and using that as a premise to insult me on a page that is in no way related to me. | |||
| Thats a fine example you have set for me asking for help with a formatting issue. Which I might add, was not first brought up by me, and is as of this date, unaddressed except by individuals with affiliations to the paid content editors I referenced in my DRN. I'd appreciate it if you just commented on the merits of the issue and left your personal comments on me or how I use[REDACTED] to my talk page so I can remove them and not ruin others times with petty personal issues. Have a great day. ] (]) 05:10, 27 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Steven Universe : The Movie == | |||
| Can you write this on the release category ? | |||
| The film was released on October 27, 2019 on ]. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:54, 27 October 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Your submission at ]: ] (October 28) == | |||
| <div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> ]Your recent article submission to ] has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.<nowiki> </nowiki>The reason left by Robert McClenon was: | |||
| {{divbox|gray|3=This submission is not adequately supported by ]. ''Reliable'' sources are required so that information can be ]. If you need help with referencing, please see ] and ].|}}<!-- | |||
| -- | |||
| --> Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit ''when they have been resolved''. | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to ] and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. | |||
| * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Misplaced Pages's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to ], click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{tl|db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. | |||
| * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and ]. | |||
| * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the <span class="plainlinks"></span>, on the <span class="plainlinks"></span> or use ]. | |||
| ] (]) 13:58, 28 October 2019 (UTC)</div><!--Template:Afc decline--> | |||
| {| style="margin: 0.4em 2em;" | |||
| |- style="vertical-align: top;" | |||
| | ] | |||
| | <div style="background-color:#f4f3f0; color: #393D38; padding: 1em; font-size: 1.1em; border-radius:10px;box-shadow:-2px -2px 1px #8e8a78;">Hello, '''Robert McClenon'''! | |||
| Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the ''']'''. If you have any ''other'' questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the ''']''', a friendly space on Misplaced Pages where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ] (]) 13:58, 28 October 2019 (UTC)</div> | |||
| |}<!-- Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/AfC Invitation --> | |||
| ] | |||
| ==Disambiguation link notification for October 30== | |||
| Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] ( | ). Such links are ], since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].)</small> | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 07:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Draft:Adani Transmission == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| My Misplaced Pages draft of Adani Transmission was declined by you. The reason stated, "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own." It is one of the largest transmission companies in India and has numerable articles covered by Indian news houses. Further, many other subsidiary companies of Adani Group are live as well. Why does it not meet the Misplaced Pages notability criteria? Can you suggest any changes I can make? ] (]) 07:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - First, do you have any affiliation with ] that is a ]? Second, have you discussed creating an article on Adani Transmission on the talk page of the parent article, ]? Third, have you asked for advice at ]? ] (]) 13:12, 1 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I dot not have any affiliation with the organization. Also, I will surely discuss this on the ] and ask for advice at the ]. ] (]) 06:24, 4 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 113005 --> ] (]) 04:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == New Page Review newsletter November 2019 == | |||
| <div style="border:2px solid #90C0FF; background:#F0F0FF; width:99%; padding:4px"> | |||
| {| style="float: right; border: 1px solid #BBB; background: #FFFFFF; | |||
| |- style="font-size: 86%;" | |||
| |} | |} | ||
| ] (]) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=1263150419 --> | |||
| Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}}, | |||
| ==Top AfC Editor== | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:top;" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon. | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Articles for Creation Barnstar 2024 Top Editor''' | |||
| ;Getting the queue to 0 | |||
| There are now {{NUMBERINGROUP:patroller}} holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.<br> | |||
| Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If ''each'' reviewer soon does '''only 2 reviews a day''' over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by ''every'' reviewer doing '''only 1 review every 2 days''' - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.<br> | |||
| Want to join? Consider adding the ].<br> | |||
| Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some ]. | |||
| ; Coordinator | |||
| Admin {{U|Barkeep49}} has been officially invested as ] by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers. | |||
| ;This month's refresher course | |||
| Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: ] will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Misplaced Pages or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See ] to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources. | |||
| ;Tools | |||
| *It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list. | |||
| *It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar. | |||
| ;Reviewer Feedback | |||
| Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. ] will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional ] for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch ''November 13''. | |||
| ;Second set of eyes | |||
| *Not only are ''New Page Reviewers'' the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the ] section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing ''good'' work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR. | |||
| *Do be sure to have ] on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers. | |||
| ;Arbitration Committee | |||
| The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights. | |||
| ;Community Wish list | |||
| There is to be no ] for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion. | |||
| <hr> | |||
| <small>To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself ] | |||
| </small> | |||
| </div>] (]) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Kudpung@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=924341675 --> | |||
| == format issue, follow up. == | |||
| *] Yes, heading format needs fixing, but the refs are good enough as they stand--there is no requirement they be in any particular form. . I would normally make the changes myself to the headings and accept, but I have decided this time to accept it as it stands. If none of the wiki-gnomes get around to it, I will fix it later. ''']''' (]) 05:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == TED Interview Reply == | |||
| I have added the main details and additional external references in a subsection of the main article ]. --] (]) 22:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Bundling MFDs == | |||
| Recently you boldly bundled two ongoing MFDs together at ]. While I'm certain that your intentions were to be helpful, my opinion is that this bundling made it far more difficult to gauge the consensus of the discussion, and ended up being more disruptive than anything else. Since the bundling was done a full 2 days after the start of the Portal:Basketball MFD, it resulted in a lot of seemingly duplicate votes that needed to be manually untangled to understand what happened. My advice: if pages are going to be bundled together in an MFD, they should be bundled together from the start of the discussion. Merging two ongoing discussions together is a recipe for disaster, and, under other circumstances, could have resulted in a procedural No Consensus closure. ] ||</span>]] 17:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I have reviewed those one-and-one-half MFDs, and have come to the conclusion that my consolidation of them was an unsuccessful experiment. If I had known whether it would have improved the discussion, it wouldn't have been an experiment. Misplaced Pages guidelines say to ] and to ], and in this case, common sense includes learning what didn't work. ] (]) 18:13, 5 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Fair enough, thanks for understanding. ] ||</span>]] 18:18, 5 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Ute Lotz-Heumann== | |||
| Hello. I noticed on the ''"Ute Lotz-Heumann"'' talk page you noted that she passed WP:PROF . Given that she passes WP:PROF, I am thinking that tags on the top of the article page are not necessary . I am also inviting ] to this discussion because they tagged it with {{Tlx|Primary sources}} - . I'm making the same argument, that since the subject passes WP:PROF there is no need for this tag. I am glad to add a reference to the subject's Google Scholar page as evidence if you think this will be helpful. Anyway, I am wondering what your opinions are on this matter. Thanks. ] (]) 06:35, 6 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| I added the Google Scholar reference. I also added a JSTOR reference. Cheers.---] (]) 07:33, 6 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I am not entirely sure that I understand what your argument or concern is. I accepted the draft but tagged it because I thought that it satisfies the ] but that its sources could be improved. Would you have preferred that I decline it because the sources could be improved? Are you implying that we make a binary distinction between perfect articles that do not need improvement and drafts that should be declined? I think that I don't understand. ] (]) 08:47, 6 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::], thanks for your response. I am not saying the article should have been declined at AFC because the sources could be improved. I am not implying a binary distinction or any other kind of distinction. To explain further - Along with deeming the article notable because the subject passes WP:PROF, I noticed that a BLP tag, a Primary source tag and a Section tag (create sections) has been placed on the article. There is nothing wrong with doing this. | |||
| :::I suppose it can be seen as using editorial judgement. So, what I was trying to say about the BLP tag and the Primary source tag is, I think it would be OK to remove both tags because the subject passes WP:PROF. But I wouldn't remove those tags unless you agree. As you may or may not know, a university researcher-scientist-teacher may not be likely to receive mainstream press, but still have an impact in her field, as shown by her body of research. | |||
| :::This means the subject can have a notable biography on Misplaced Pages because you and I have established the person passes WP:PROF. These circumstances may supercede the need to place a BLP and a Primary sources tag on the article. In other words, if we here agree this biography merits inclusion on Misplaced Pages, then maybe this renders the need for a BLP tag and a Primary source tag moot. So, I am wondering if you agree that it is OK to remove the BLP tag and the Primary sources tag. Hopefully, this clarifies what I meant. If it still seems confusing then simply let me know. ---] (]) 05:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - I think that you and I have different interpretations of the BLP and Primary Source tags. I think that you are saying that they can be removed because we do not have a question about notability. I am saying that they should be kept on because, although the subject is notable, the article still needs improvement. I did not apply a Notability tag. I think that the tags mean that, although the article should not be deleted, it should still be improved. Maybe we can discuss this further with other editors at ]. ] (]) 06:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::], yes I agree that we seem to have different interpretations for the BLP and Primary Source tags, just as you described it. My view is motivated by having observed, the subject of this biography does not have coverage in the mainstream press at this time. Also, she is not likely to have coverage in the mainstream press in the near future. So, having BLP and Primary Source tags seems to me to be extraneous at this time. Perhaps as a metaphor, the tags are decorations on this biography article that don't seem to be needed right now (imho). | |||
| :::::This seems to mean that any editor who tries to find secondary sources bumps up against a barrier that perhaps cannot be passed. The only caveat are University of Arizona press releases , but even in these there is only passing mentions of the subject. Anyway, maybe we can open for a wider discussion at the Tea House. As an aside, User:Theroadislong has removed the Primary Source tag, which they affixed to the article in the first place, so I don't have a problem with its removal. Regards, ---] (]) 18:01, 7 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==A Disco Ball== | |||
| ==Disco ball of unlimited knowledge== | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I appreciate your contributions! Thanks for continuing to make Misplaced Pages a productive space. ] (]) 00:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| *Is it just me, or does it seem like the above editor is thanking every editor who has even a civil disagreement with me, regardless of whether he himself had any involvement therein? ] (<small>]]</small>) 02:44, 7 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 113337 --> ] (]) 04:24, 8 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == First and second fundamental theorems of invariant theory == | |||
| Sorry, but I just don’t understand the issue. I have a book with me right now. I can see the proofs to the theorems (not exactly short). They might be added in the future but there is no need for the tag for that. Many theorem article does not give a proof. We generally don’t tag articles for not giving proofs. —- ] (]) 07:41, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you for the edits. I think now I understand the issue. I explained the situation in the edit summary. If still not clear, let me know; I will try to do something further. —- ] (]) 07:52, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Readers don't read the article history and the edit summaries. Edit summaries are for the information of other editors. Readers look for verification to the notes. I wouldn't be able to understand the proofs, having forgotten a lot of higher math when I was studying chemistry, but I know to look in the notes. It is now taken care of, in my view. ] (]) 08:05, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==When will it end== | |||
| ] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> | |||
| == ] meditation == | |||
| Hello! Thank you for offering to mediate. Although the article will come out of edit-protection in 5 days, I've been tirelessly engaged in gathering sources to use for expanding the article in its talk page. Please see ]. I feel like this page needs a neutral set of eyes to establish consensus, especially with me being a new Wikipedian! Please feel free to ask any meta question you may have in my talk page. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:50, 10 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Civility Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |- | ||
| |style="vertical-align: center; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | In 2024 you were one of the , thank you! --] (]) 13:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | thank you so much I will work on it again until it meets your expertise | |||
| Submission declined on 31 October 2019 by Robert McClenon ] (]) 09:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |} | ||
| == |
==Your draft article, ]== | ||
| Hello, Robert. You were involved in the creation of the ] article back in May and you're also listed as a ] on ], so I was wondering if you could could help with a situation that is happening with that article. Yesterday somebody editing from the IP address 38.80.239.148 removed the picture, blanked entire sections and deleted the references without leaving any comments on the talk page. The IP that was used for the edits (38.80.239.148) is located in the same area of the headquarters of the organization (Oregon House, CA, USA) so I suspect that it is an effort of the organization to "sanitize" the article in order to attract new members (only negative information and criticism was removed). This happened in the past, by the way. I reverted the deletions but the person undid my edits twice. Since this may be leading to an edit war, I am asking if you could help dealing with the situation. If you can't, please indicate who I should ask. Thank you in advance for your attention. --] (]) 08:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I see that neither you nor the unregistered editor have tried to discuss on the article talk page. My advice would be to restore your edits one more time and explain on the article talk page what you are doing and why, and request that the other editor discuss. That is the ] cycle. If the other editor doesn't discuss, my advice then has two parts. First, be careful not to approach ] and not even get close. Second, if the other editor does not discuss, go to ] and request ] for a limited period such as one week. That is my advice. ] (]) 08:38, 12 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Will do, thank you for your help. --] (]) 08:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I left a message on the Talk page yesterday and today on the talk page of the person editing from IP address 38.80.239.148 but he/she continues to remove content without any dialogue. At that point I requested Page Protection as you told me and the page is now protected. The version that is now protected is the one after the last edit of the person removing content from an IP address, not the one that was stable since May this year. I can't revert his/her edits because I did it twice in the last 24 hours and I don't want to break the 3RR. What's the process to restore the original version before the IP vandalism occurred? Thanks again for your help. --] (]) 07:46, 13 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::You've made the appropriate request. Just wait and see. Sometimes in a case like this the page is semi-protected rather than fully protected. At this point, just wait for an administrator to respond to your edit request, or for the page to come out of full protection. If the page comes out of full protection and the IP again stubs the page, if all else fails, you can always use a ], but that is a heavyweight process that takes 30 days, so my advice is, next time, very specifically ask for semi-protection in your protection request. ] (]) 08:21, 13 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Sounds good, thank you. --] (]) 08:56, 13 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 113645 --> ] (]) 04:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Portal guideline workshop == | |||
| Hi there. I'm taking it upon myself to try to moderate a discussion among Portal power users with the intention of creating a draft guideline for Portals, and I'd like to invite you to join this discussion. If you're interested, please join the discussion at ]. Thanks. ] ||</span>]] 02:50, 14 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Draft:DPP v Peter Cullen == | |||
| Hello Robert McClenon, this editor is contributing as part of a class project that I am coordinating (as indicated on their user page). It is not intended as an AfC submission and I would prefer that it stay in the student's sandbox until it is ready to be assessed as part of the course. Is there a way to undo your move? Thanks. ] (]) 22:02, 15 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::], ] - I have moved the draft back to ]. The page had been tagged for AFC review, and when a page is tagged for AFC review, it is normally moved into draft space by the reviewer. In this case, it appears that it wasn't ready for review. | |||
| ::When the work on it is finished, and when it is split into two drafts, they probably should be accepted as articles if, as I understand, they are cases that were decided by a national supreme court. ] (]) 22:42, 15 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::], ] - I have removed the AFC submission line that says that it should not be removed. It should not be removed while a draft is in the review process, but this draft got into the review process by mistake. ] (]) 22:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks Robert! I am not sure why it was tagged for AFC—I will check that out. I made the sandbox so I may have mistakenly included it. ] (]) 23:05, 15 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::] - You didn't accidentally submit it. Looking at the history, I can see that ] submitted it by pushing on a blue button. This may have been a mouse-click error, or they may not have understood what the blue button did. As long it doesn't do the equivalent of blowing up the world, such as erasing all of your user files, or displaying profanity at the ], or whatever, ]. ] (]) 19:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi, just wanted to let you know I corrected the syntax on the MfD (it was a pesky '''|''' in an external link that caused the template not to work properly). It should be fine now. --<span lang="gsw" dir="ltr">] ]</span> 06:36, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Thank you. ] (]) 16:45, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hallo Robert, I'm a bit baffled by what happened to this draft. You rejected it at AfC ("does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, ...") and told the editor that it needed "review by a neutral editor", but surely that's what AfC represents. the version you commented on with the current version, there's nothing of substance which other editors have considered to be puffery or self-promotion - the changes are very minor and a little light copy-editing. The editor had declared her CoI. How else should she have proceeded? I thought about asking this at ] where the article has been discussed, but decided to come here to ask you in person. ]] 10:40, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I will try to respond to your points, although it appears that you may not be interested in my reply and are only interested in telling me that I was wrong. First, I did '''not''' reject the draft. I declined it. There is a difference. Second, it is true that I did not give the article a detailed review. I gave it an initial review, and decided that it needed to be reviewed in more detail, with particular attention to the fact that it was an ], and Misplaced Pages strongly discouraged the submission of autobiographies. This appears to have been one of the exceptions where an autobiography was in reasonable shape. I have seen maybe 3 good autobiographies, and maybe a few thousand bad autobiographies, and I wanted to leave it to someone who was in a more patient mood than I was in a few days ago. How the editor should have proceeded was either as she did, but, even better, by asking someone at the ] to write it for her. Third, I am aware that sometimes a project or an edit-a-thon have editors thinking that they, and not AFC, will be making the decisions on what to accept. I don't know if the WMF has in fact said that a WikiProject or an edit-a-thon should override usual policy, and so I simply follow the usual procedures. I know that this probably won't make any difference, and that you already have decided that I was wrong. (If you don't mean to be politely telling me that I was wrong, then maybe either your tone is harsh, or I am still not in a very good mood.) ] (]) 17:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks for your reply. Please AGF. I said I was baffled, not that you were wrong. I don't understand the whole AfC process in detail, hence not distinguishing "decline" from "reject", though they probably feel the same to a first-time contributor. I think perhaps there's a problem that a default comment with words like "not written in encyclopedic language" sometimes gets applied when it's not what the reviewer really means - I think I've come across this before. The instruction/suggestion that the article needed a neutral reviewer also seemed weird: what else were you, there at AfC? (OK you were a tired/impatient reviewer: it might have been kinder to newbie editors to stop reviewing sooner, or to pass over, unreviewed, anything not obviously bad and leave it for another reviewer?) | |||
| :::I appreciate that AfC reviewers face a deluge of promotional and/or incompetent rubbish, and I AGF'd that you had actually found something you thought was the matter with this article, but I couldn't see what. I hope that despite this wobble en route to mainspace Elizabeth Rowe will decide to contribute more to the encyclopedia now that she's had a successful go at editing. (If I was "only interested in telling you you were wrong" I'd probably have done so on the WiR talkpage where the article was being discussed, and possibly triggered a chorus of criticism: I chose to ask a question here instead.) ]] 19:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - Please do not use ] as a cudgel to beat me up with further. Let me try to explain my defensiveness, and also to explain a little more. Yes, I do feel that you are now using AGF as a cudgel. (I know that you don't intend to be doing that.) It is very common in Misplaced Pages for one group of volunteer editors to dump on another group of volunteer editors. It isn't pleasant, and it isn't pretty, but it may be that there is no easy way to avoid it with ordinary human editors. In particular, the AFC reviewers get dumped on frequently, in various ways, especially for not being sufficiently welcoming to new editors. Also, a specific reason why I didn't give the Rowe draft a long neutral review is that I strongly support the Misplaced Pages ] policy, and was not sure that I would be able to give an autobiography a neutral review. So try to consider that I did the best I could, and please don't beat me up with the AGF cudgel of saying that I didn't do enough AGF. ] (]) 02:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Pakistan-related WikiProjects == | |||
| Hello Robert! Can I ask why did you mention me on ]? --] <sup><span style="color:Red;font-size:85%;">«] ♦ ] ♦ ]»</span></sup> 12:04, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] You are listed as a member of ], and you have received a courtesy notice. ] (]) 16:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Draft:Water Wall Turbine == | |||
| Hello, As my first contribution to Misplaced Pages, I've made an attempt to resolve the remaining comments on the draft for the ] page. Given that you were the last person to review it, would you mind taking another look? If you still feel that some tonal (or other) issues remain, I'd appreciate some further direction regaring which parts of the page they occur in. Thanks so much for your time! <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 22:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::] - I have taken another look at it, and it still looks to me as though it has promotional aspects, but I think that you would be better off to ask for the advice of other experienced editors at ]. Also, I see that you haven't yet answered my question about ]. ] (]) 02:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - Thanks for taking a look at the changes and the hint for where to get further feedback. I'm not the original contributor, but I do not have a COI. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 06:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 113965 --> ] (]) 04:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ArbCom notice == | |||
| You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at ] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the ] and the ] may be of use. | |||
| Thanks,<!-- Template:Arbcom notice --> ] (]) 16:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Your submission at ]: ] (November 18) == | |||
| <div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> ]Your recent article submission to ] has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.<nowiki> </nowiki>The reason left by Missvain was: | |||
| {{divbox|gray|3=This submission is not adequately supported by ]. ''Reliable'' sources are required so that information can be ]. If you need help with referencing, please see ] and ].|}}<!-- | |||
| -- | |||
| --> Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit ''when they have been resolved''. | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to ] and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. | |||
| * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Misplaced Pages's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to ], click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{tl|db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit. | |||
| * If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and ]. | |||
| * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the <span class="plainlinks"></span>, on the <span class="plainlinks"></span> or use ]. | |||
| ] (]) 22:09, 18 November 2019 (UTC)</div><!--Template:Afc decline--> | |||
| == ArbCom 2019 election voter message == | |||
| <table class="messagebox " style="border: 1px solid #AAA; background: ivory; padding: 0.5em; width: 100%;"> | |||
| <tr><td style="vertical-align:middle; padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</td><td>Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2019|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. ] (]) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| </td></tr> | |||
| </table> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2019/Coordination/MMS/01&oldid=926750232 --> | |||
| == Article Review == | |||
| Hello ] thanks for the answer and the instructions on how to create the good article. These days I just read through[REDACTED] about the rules and terms and then I tried to edit the article according to the rules required. You can find the edited article ].Thank you --] (]) 17:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | ||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material |
In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can . An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | ||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-draft-deleted --><!-- Template:Db-csd-deleted-custom --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 21:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| 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 ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| == Happy Holidays == | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice -->] (]) 20:00, 21 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 4px solid #FFD700;" | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 2px 2px 0 2px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | | |||
| ---- | |||
| '''Hello Robert McClenon, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this ]. Spread the ] by wishing another user a ] and a ], whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. <br />Happy editing,'''<br /> | |||
| ] (]) 22:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ''{{resize|96%|Spread the love by adding {{tls|Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.}}'' | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 114282 --> ] (]) 04:26, 24 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |} ] (]) 22:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Dealing someone's personal attack in edit summary == | |||
| == Your submission at Articles for creation: World Of Pain --- Notes reviewed.. == | |||
| Hi there Robert, I found ] you open a decade ago and I just want to get some advise on how you deal it because I'm having the same situation. See their . ] ] 03:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Greetings Robert McClenon! I've looked over your notes regarding the submission requirement(s) and hope with the information below I have fulfilled your request. There haven't been any issues approving Wiki pages for the other bands on the same record label, so not quite sure why this one is being held up, as many of the references are the same. Thank you for your assistance. | |||
| :You also did this to me a few months ago, you're joke with your summary but i never complaint to anybody. Oh my god. <span style="font-family:Cursive">]<sup>(])</sup></span> 04:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Meets the first criteria requirement of Notability (music), as this artist has been the subject of discussion per multiple reliable sources (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)). These references include and are not limited to 'The Ithaca Times' (newspaper serving the Ithaca, New York; ), 'AWAY FROM LIFE' (print and digital magazine serving Europe; ), 'Janky Smooth' (print and digitral magazine servering Los Angeles; ) and others. It is important to note that many of the same references used on this page were also used and approved on Wiki pages of bands who are or have been labelmates of World Of Pain (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Lionheart_(hardcore_punk_band) and https://en.wikipedia.org/Xibalba_(band); lambgoat, pitchfork, Idioteq, etc). | |||
| ::], ] - Please discuss your issues in a civil manner. It appears that there is an issue about a K-pop group. I don't see a personal attack, although maybe I missed it. Be aware that personal attacks in edit summaries are even more serious than personal attacks on talk pages, because they can only be deleted by admins. What is the issue? ] (]) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::I created this ] of an upcoming group then the other user created a draft of it then suddenly edited and copy paste the contents from their draft to the redirect page I created then published it after that they moved it to other space in WP to have ]. ] ] 04:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::], ] - This sounds childish. There is now a redirect from ] to ]. There is also a draft at ]. The draft is not ready for article space, and both of you can work on improving it. When will the band first either perform and be reviewed or release an album or single that will chart? You can both collaborate. If there is any more quarreling, I may have to file a report at ], which might result in both of you getting logged warnings or short blocks. If you don't have a different idea for how to divide the labor, each of you can research the history of some of the band members. Misplaced Pages is big enough for both of you. ] (]) 05:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| In addition, this article meets the fifth criteria requirement of Notability (music), as World Of Pain has released 'two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels.' Beatdown Hardwear is a VERY notable record label in Germany, which has produced/established bands such as Lionheart (https://en.wikipedia.org/Lionheart_(hardcore_punk_band)) who is currently ranked in the top 10 on the German metal charts (https://www.wdjc.de/mrc/index.php?LG=de&ID=1) and NASTY (https://de.wikipedia.org/Nasty_(Band)) who is regularly on the biggest metal/hardcore festivals in Europe (see: EMP Persistance, Impericon, Wacken Open Air, etc). | |||
| Your bludgeoning accusation to me at the DRV for ] is a bit off-topic so I'm responding at your talk page. I really don't like repeating myself, but I did so in response to your comment because you mentioned {{tq|It isn't clear what if anything the appellant wants to change in the outcome.}} That was a very confusing comment to me because I felt that I had been very clear in that regard. So I succinctly explained what needs to change in this outcome for your own clarity (along with addressing the ''red herring'' policy forum suggestion). That you followed it up with accusations of bludgeoning is perhaps even more confounding. I disagree that I am making a very high number of comments and making the same arguments over and over again. Bludgeoners {{tq|always have to have the last word}}, which is not an accurate portrayal of my participation. In fact, Compassionate727 got the last word in both of my other responses. So I now ask you: please explain from your point of view how I am bludgeoning or withdraw your accusation. --] <sup>(])</sup> 16:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == I have sent you a note about a page you started == | |||
| == Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment == | |||
| Hello, Robert McClenon | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 02:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for creating ]. | |||
| == Happy New Year, Robert McClenon! == | |||
| ], while examining this page as a part of our ], had the following comments: | |||
| <div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks"> | |||
| ]] | |||
| {{Paragraph break}} | |||
| {{Center|{{resize|179%|''''']!'''''}}}} | |||
| '''Robert McClenon''',<br />Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable ], and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. | |||
| <br />] ] 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)<br /><br /> | |||
| </div> | |||
| ''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}'' | |||
| {{clear}}<!-- From template:Happy New Year fireworks --> ] ] 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == January music == | |||
| {{Bq|Is there a reason you've created this redirect from mainspace, as opposed to having it at ]?}} | |||
| {{User QAIbox | |||
| | image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg | |||
| | image_upright = 1.3 | |||
| | bold = ] · ] · ] | |||
| }} | |||
| Happy new year 2025, opened with ] that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). - I saw ] by Rimsky-Korsakov, - see ]. -- ] (]) 16:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ], my ] 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. ] will be my story tomorrow. --] (]) 21:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Rosguill<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with {{code|<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}} . | |||
| My ] is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. --] (]) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| <small>(Message delivered via the ] tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)</small><!-- Template:Reviewednote-NPF --> | |||
| ... and today, ], ], in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author ]. --] (]) 18:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| <sub>signed, </sub>] <sup>]</sup> 20:00, 25 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - No. I've moved it to project space. ] (]) 20:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Today I had ] (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with ] who just became GA, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --] (]) 08:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ==Arbitration Case Opened== | |||
| 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 ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by December 20, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ]] 20:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment == | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 18:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 114612 --> ] (]) 04:25, 30 November 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==] concern== | |||
| Hi there, I'm ]. I just wanted to let you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. | |||
| == Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment == | |||
| If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 02:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| You may request ] of the content if it meets requirements. | |||
| == DRN == | |||
| If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at ]. | |||
| Hi Robert, hope you’re doing well. Letting you know that I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages and I’ll be doing some bits and pieces over at DRN from time to time. I’ve seen a thread about DRN and its effectiveness (closed, since October last year) but it raises some good points that I think should be considered, as our DR processes have changed since I first created DRN 12 years ago. I’d be keen to hear your thoughts too. Speak soon, <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 18:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for your attention. ] (]) 01:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :Greetings, ]. I will provide some thoughts about dispute resolution within the next 48 to 72 hours. ] (]) 05:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ===Some Thoughts on DRN=== | |||
| You, ], refer to a thread on the effectiveness of ] that has been closed since October. I assume that you mean a thread at ] that was in August, and, two months later, in October, the originator withdrew it. I completely missed it in August, because I wasn't watching the DRN talk page at the time. I probably wouldn't have said anything in defense of the continued existence of DRN that would have added to what was said. The originator provided some interesting statistics, and I think in good faith missed the point in a few ways. He overestimated the community time that was lost on the misplaced filings. More importantly, he assumed that the filers of the misplaced filings would have somehow found more constructive solutions on their own, when we know that many editors, especially new editors, don't have a clue what to do about a dispute, and can use advice, and he failed to attach value to having a place for volunteers to give advice. I think that one effect of a proposed shutdown of DRN that was not mentioned is that more disputes would go to ] as a place of first resort, if DRN was eliminated as a place of first resort. Some of those disputes might then go to article talk pages, Wikiprojects, or RFCs, but there would be hard feelings from the ] thread. I don't think that the originator thought his idea through. | |||
| ==Holding reply== | |||
| Hi. thanks for bringing that to my attention. I have no memory of doing this at all, so it is either a complete mistake on my part or conceivably someone has gained access to my ID. I was away from home that day, but I did log on for a while so I will have to check through everything I did and see if there were any other actions I don't recognise. ] (]) 18:26, 4 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| I think that one change to DRN could be to recognize that it has at least two functions in dispute resolution. The first should be as a help desk for advice and possibly quick assistance in answering where to take disputes. The second would be for mediation. The current description of DRN is that it is an informal place that is an early stop in disputes. What other than RFC, ], and ArbCom are later stops? When DRN was established, there was MEDCOM. Was there also MEDCAB, or did DRN follow the dissolution of MEDCAB? | |||
| Update - Well, I've had another look and I can't understand this at all. I'm wondering whether, because I was using an unfamiliar keyboard, I clicked on something I didn't intend to. There doesn't seem to be enough time between my edits for someone else to have come into the room and done it when I wasn't looking. What do you think I should do to correct the error? ] (]) 18:34, 4 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Well, since the user who wrote the comment that disappeared seems to think that it may have been deleted because it was too harsh or divisive, and it was sarcastic, but, as I thought, not sarcastic enough to warrant removal, I suggest just leaving it gone. It was in the section for back-and-forth discussion, which I provide just so that the editors can say snarky things that will be ignored, and it is being ignored by being in the ]. ] (]) 19:09, 4 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Okay, thanks. It seems pointless to stir things up after a couple of days have passed and things have moved on. ] (]) 19:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| Some of the disputes that we listed as closed because they belonged somewhere else may be successes if we think that directing a user to the right place is a success. | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| What else did you have in mind as the changes that you say there have been in dispute resolution since DRN was created? | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 114936 --> ] (]) 04:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| I will have more comments, but I think that I should post these now so as to ask you to explain which changes in dispute resolution you were thinking about, and whether you have any specific ideas. | |||
| == 'My' draft == | |||
| ] (]) 21:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Please let me clarify. I know you just declined "my" draft. The thing was, I just came upon the category "Pending AfC submissions being reviewed now" and saw this draft in '''someone else's''' sandbox. I checked the edit history and found out that the "reviewing" template was not posted by an AfC reviewer but that user himself. I realized that the user must have meant to put the "Waiting for review" template instead. So, not aware that a draft called ] already existed, I changed it and, simultaneously made several minor changes to help the draft. By the way, I wasn't even the one who submitted the original draft. So can you please transfer the message at my talk page to the user in question, ] and tell him about it? Thanks for your understanding. ] (]; ]) 09:30, 7 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - ] has already been notified in their talk page that I have left comments. ] (]) 15:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :So, I've given this a lot of thought over the past few days, and talked about this with quite a few people to get their thoughts on the current state of DRN, and of dispute resolution in general. I'll go in a little bit of a random order to address your thoughts, as I think we are aligned in some ways on how DRN should operate, but vary on perhaps our approach. So, let me give you my (somewhat unstructured thoughts). Way back when in 2011 when I created DRN, it was really designed as a 3O+ - handle content disputes in a relatively lightweight fashion with minimal structure or bureaucracy, and acknowledged the fact that existing dispute resolution processes at the time (which were predominantly MedCab, which I closed after DRN was created and effective), and MedCom (which closed much later) usually had one DR volunteer to many involved editors, which could cause mediator burnout (it required focus from one person over an extended period of time). By creating a relatively unstructured noticeboard (as other noticeboards are), it would allow a many-to-many relationship between dispute resolution volunteers and editors, reducing this burnout and aiding prompt resolution. To me, dispute resolution on Misplaced Pages made sense where disputes had somewhere else to go other than DRN (and not just RFC, and I'll get to my thoughts on that shortly). By having MedCab and MedCom closed, DRN has morphed into a one-stop shop for most content disputes, which is not what it was intended to be (the Autism dispute currently open is a prime example). So now, I consider what's working well at DRN and what I think needs to be improved. DRN 100% should remain a noticeboard that we can direct issues to more suitable forums (in a way, act as triage/traffic control), but in my view, with a less strict adherence to rules than is done presently - the overarching idea behind DRN was to keep it lightweight and super informal. I've mediated some disputes where I have found putting in ground rules and structuring conversations is beneficial, but this is something I've evaluated on a case basis rather than a universal approach. An example of a dispute where I took this approach , and while it did spin off to a ], I found that the approach I took garnered a fair bit of success, and I relied on overseeing the conversation and steering it was more effective than breaking up conversations into sections and largely restricting users to their own section (e.g. like ArbCom). | |||
| == Request on 19:57:39, 8 December 2019 for assistance on ] submission by Dubyavee == | |||
| :Now, the question in some degree becomes, what is the impact that happens due to this structure. Reflecting on my original design of DRN, and myself as a DR volunteer, I take the Autism dispute as an example, and due to all the conversation being in sections, I can't actually follow the conversation between editors, and that makes it challenging for me as a volunteer to provide additional assistance to the dispute. I'd like to discuss the idea working with you to return DRN to it's original style, and see if that has an impact on the volunteering effort. I'd also like to discuss the use of the term "moderator" as I think what we historically do at DRN is more in line with "mediation" which is a little more involved in shaping the conversation where traditionally, moderation is more about enforcing rules than leading the conversation. I'm also considering reopening MedCab, and referring larger disputes there. Let me know your thoughts - as our main volunteer to DRN, I'm keen to have an open conversation with you on how we can improve our processes. If you're interested in having a chat via email or Discord, I'm happy to do so as well, but of course also happy to chat here. Speak soon, <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 05:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| {{anchor|19:57:39, 8 December 2019 review of submission by Dubyavee}} | |||
| ::Hi Robert, just following up the message above. If you’d rather not discuss the above, that’s fine too, just let me know. Thanks, <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 18:40, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| {{Lafc|username=Dubyavee|ts=19:57:39, 8 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Confederate_government_in_West_Virginia}} | |||
| ====Wait Until 21 January==== | |||
| ] - I will reply in more depth no later than 22 January 2025. I have two higher priorities at this time. The first is unpacking all of my household goods in a new townhouse (well, new for me). The second is writing about the national tragedy, to distribute it no later than 19 January 2025, while I know that I still have freedom of expression, and before I have any specific wrongs to comment about. I am not choosing not to discuss. I am choosing to discuss next week. ] (]) 19:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :No worries at all, we all have busy lives! I moved a couple of years ago and unpacking was a nightmare so I completely get it! I'll await your reply. <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 19:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| ===A Few More Comments=== | |||
| ] - It is now 21 January 2025 in North America. | |||
| My reading of your comments is that you are identifying two main issues. The first has to do with lightweight versus heavier-weight dispute resolution processes. The second has to do with the degree of control exercised by the volunteer. I think that I will focus at this time on lightweight and heavyweight dispute resolution processes, and first will provide some preliminary remarks, and will then say that I think that two tracks for content disputes, a lightweight track and a heavier track, should be defined. | |||
| You mention that you originally started DRN to be a lightweight process, not that much heavier than Third Opinion. I can see that there had been no lightweight process for disputes with more than two editors, or for disputes where one editor disagreed with the Third Opinion. I know from when I worked more Third Opinions than I do now that those cases are eventually resolved as the Third Opinion had been, with or without blood. That is, the outcome on content is almost always consistent with the Third Opinion, and the outcome on conduct depends on whether the editor who is in the minority is reasonable. | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 19:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| At the time that you created DRN, the only lightweight dispute resolution process was Third Opinion, which was not available if there were already three editors involved, and there were two heavier processes, MedCab and MedCom. I wasn't editing at the time that there was MedCab, so I will try not to say much about it. MedCom was the last step for content disputes, and had some strings attached, such as that it was a self-perpetuating committee, had discretion on what cases to take, and had a provision that its proceedings were sealed. However, it did exist, and so a DRN volunteer who saw that a dispute would not be lightweight could say that it should go to MedCom. | |||
| Hello, I am surprised at the review you gave to my draft. The article addresses issues that are not covered in any other article. It is too large a subject to fit into the History of West Virginia or West Virginia in the Civil War. There are already TWO articles on the Union government in West Virginia, The Wheeling Conventions, and The Restored Government of West Virginia. There are TWO separate articles on Kentucky and Missouri Confederate governments. I submitted my article to Scott A. MacKenzie, who has written articles for West Virginia History journal and Ohio Valley History, and he approved of what I had written and suggested only two minor additions. I would request that another reviewer take a look at my article and someone more familiar with the subject matter. ] (]) 19:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Perhaps the way that my review was provided seemed more negative than I intended. I did not intend to be rejecting your draft, but only advising you to discuss at ] before resubmitting. So discuss at ]. If there is rough consensus there that a separate article is in order, either I or another reviewer will accept it. (I realize that the wording of the review appears negative.) ] (]) 21:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| I recall a few unpleasant persistent disputes that eventually went to ArbCom, including War of the Pacific, and Motorsports. They were small compared to the cases that ArbCom usually handles, but they really did need to go to ArbCom. Sometimes the community can handle otherwise intractable content disputes that are complicated by conduct, and sometimes it can't. That is a reminder that there should be at least one stop for difficult cases before they go to ArbCom. | |||
| == Speedy deletion nomination of B D Kavi == | |||
| I wasn't editing at the time that MedCab went away, and I don't really know why it went away. I was editing actively and working at DRN when MedCom was abolished. I understood the stated reasons why it was abolished, but I disagreed with the conclusion that it should be dissolved, and I never understood the real reason why it was abolished, which I inferred was political. One reason was that they were very few qualified mediators, sometimes only one or two, and the second reason was that there were very few cases going to it. I think that part of the problem was that there were high qualifications for mediators to qualify, and that a solution would have been to expand the panel by accepting more people. So what I don't know is why the proponent of ending MedCom proposed to end it rather than to improve it. | |||
| Hello Robert McClenon, | |||
| After MedCom was abolished, I had to handle heavy-duty cases such as the list of Italian political parties, where part of the problem was that anything that was agreeable to one of the parties was unacceptable to the other. Maybe I should have failed that dispute before I did, but at least with that record the community had an easier time deciding what to do, which was to topic-ban both parties. I had to ignore the idea that DRN was for cases that could be resolved in two to three weeks. I thought that those cases would otherwise probably go to ], which is the wrong place for content disputes. Sometimes someone takes a look at the dispute, and says, "Content Dispute", which is true, but not helpful unless there is a way to resolve stubborn content disputes. Sometimes someone takes a look at it and sees conduct issues, which there usually also are, and it winds up with sanctions, when it would have been better to focus on the content issue and ignore the conduct. | |||
| I wanted to let you know that I just tagged ] for deletion, because it seems to be ], rather than an encyclopedia article. | |||
| Maybe those are preliminary thoughts. The underlying issue is that there are both lightweight content disputes and heavyweight content disputes, and one size fits all is an illusion. We need a variety of procedures for dealing with content disputes. I don't have a strong opinion on whether that means two noticeboards, or one noticeboard with two or more tracks. If you are saying that we should have two tracks somehow, I think I agree. The lightweight track should be volunteer assistance, and the heavier track should usually, but not always, be mediation. The Autism case is an example of a heavy dispute that is not really mediation so much as guided discussion. It doesn't really fit any particular model, and is really something that I thought I should do by ignoring the constraints. | |||
| If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can <span class="plainlinks">''''''</span>, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. | |||
| You also mentioned the possibility of restarting MedCab. If you are saying that DRN can be restored to dealing with lightweight issues, then one of the options should be to decide that the dispute should go to MedCab. I sort of like the idea of DRN being a big tent with various services, including, "MedCab: A Service of DRN", but it can instead be separate. | |||
| You can leave a note on ] if you have questions. Thanks! | |||
| So, if you are saying something to the effect that we should have two tracks for dispute resolution, one lightweight and one for longer disputes, I agree. If that isn't what you are saying, then I misunderstood you. | |||
| <small>Message delivered via the ] tool, on behalf of the reviewer.</small><!-- Template:Spam-warn-NPF --> | |||
| ] (]) 03:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Here is an afterthought. I have no interest in using Discord. I have never used Discord, which I understand is a chat facility, and do not see a need to learn to use it. I am ready to use email, which I have been using for forty years, which is longer than some people have known it existed, but I would prefer to use it only if there is a privacy reason for using it, such as naming names. ] (]) 15:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) 18:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Twinkle strikes again. It wasn't my draft. I didn't even move that draft from the sandbox to draft space, but had moved a different draft from the sandbox into draft space. ] (]) 23:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == A donation for you! == | |||
| == Editor using my real life disorder to punish me == | |||
| {{archivetop|NAC: Advice given on OP's talk page. ] (]) 18:48, 10 December 2019 (UTC)}} | |||
| Hi, I need your attention. | |||
| An editor is trying to harass me by imposing "no-edits" restrictions to prohibit me from any edits/typo fixes to my comments. This is an insult to my personality and I can't cope with! I took this insult very personally and I don't know what to do. I always respected other people's disabilities and disorders, and I never expected that someone in Misplaced Pages is so heartless as to use mine to punish me for not liking me. --- <span style="text-shadow:#CCC 0.1em 0.3em 0.3em; font-family: Trebuchet MS">] <sup>(] | ])</sup></span> 15:13, 10 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Aegean_dispute&type=revision&diff=930145565&oldid=930143388&diffmode=source | |||
| ::] - Is this a dispute with an administrator? I don't normally want to get drawn into a dispute between an administrator and a non-administrator. However, if I understand what the issue is, which is that you are copy-editing your own posts after posting them, my advice is to compose your posts in Word or Notepad or WordPerfect or whatever, that is, off-wiki, until they no longer need copy-editing, and then post them to their intended target page. Is that the issue, or have I misunderstood what the issue is? I will look into it further, but what I can see is that it appears that you are posting first and copy-editing afterward and annoying another editor. I don't think that they have any real business being annoyed, but we can deal with the source of their annoyance. Or is it something else? ] (]) 16:54, 10 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| {{archivebottom}} | |||
| == sorry == | |||
| Didn't mean to make you feel dumped on! ] (]) 22:21, 11 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - It is very much the Misplaced Pages way to pick some other group of Misplaced Pages volunteers to whom one does not belong and dump on them as not doing a perfect job. That doesn't make it desirable, but it is very much the Misplaced Pages way. For instance, the backlog of Articles for Creation is several months long, and some editors dump on the AFC reviewers for not doing enough. Oh well. Thank you. ] (]) 22:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Oh, I know. It's the same working on the Main page. :D I don't think you don't do enough. I think you work very hard, and your work is recognized and appreciated by many people, even if they don't tell you so often enough. I seldom comment at ANI because I seldom think my input would add anything, but I do see what goes on there and do know that you regulars are working hard in a generally thankless area. Thank you for doing that. ] (]) 12:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Yes, the Main Page is a lot of work by multiple volunteers. Some editors only noticed it when a dispute about some of the parts of the Main Page wound up going to ArbCom, but the real problem was, as is too often the case, simply that two editors did not like each other. ] (]) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Please comment on ] == | |||
| The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 115298 --> ] (]) 04:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Request on 08:29:29, 12 December 2019 for assistance on ] submission by MatWr == | |||
| {{anchor|08:29:29, 12 December 2019 review of submission by MatWr}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=MatWr|ts=08:29:29, 12 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Waukauyengtipu}} | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| Hello, | |||
| Thank you for your review. | |||
| I am writing this comment as unfortunately I cannot agree with your point of view. Having been actively involved in the research of the Guyana/Venezuela region for some years myself, I prepared a separate article about Waukauyengtipu in order to clear up the nomenclatural inaccuracies being spread in available sources, basing my information on tangible results of exploration on site. Truth is that information about Mount Venamo is vague and mostly based on very old, fragmented pieces of information coming in most part from an old expedition made there by J.A. Steyermark in 1960s. The sources provide much better information about Waukauyengtipu rather than Mount Venamo, thanks to D. Clarke's Waukauyengtipu botanical expedition from 1997 - so there is no point in providing information about Waukauyengtipu in a Mount Venamo article. The claim that both mountains are the same thing was put in the Mount Venamo article without having any basis in professional sources has since led to strong confusion, even within the scientific community - having a separate article about Waukauyengtipu will help stop spreading misinformation about the geography of the region. | |||
| Another reason why I am so strongly convinced about my case is that I personally led an expedition to Waukauyengtipu mountain in January 2018, confirming my claims regarding the nomenclature with local Indigenous communities and supplementing to the observations made by the 1997 Smithsonian expedition. | |||
| I hope you will reconsider your decision. I will be happy to provide any more information should there be a need to do so. | |||
| Yours sincerely, | |||
| Mateusz Wrazidlo | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 08:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I will respond on your talk page within 24 hours. ] (]) 14:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| You indicated that this subject meets ]. What evidence did you find? ~] (]) 17:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - In looking at the draft again, I probably thought at the time that the subject had received a prestigious award, Criterion 2. In taking a third review of the draft, I don't think so. It appears that the draft is something relatively uncommon, which is a long well-written draft about a professor that nonetheless does not establish ]. I also don't see a basis for ]; I don't like the general notability rules, because reasonable editors can disagree and usually do disagree about general notability. However, that isn't the issue. ] (]) 21:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Do you want to strike on the draft? 05:17, 29 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - If you think that it needs to be struck, you can strike it. I would prefer simply to have you state that you disagree, or something. I do not really want to over-worry about every draft that I have reviewed in the past month or two months and make sure that I have never left evidence of mistakes. Maybe some reviewers are perfect. I try to do the best that I can, and I am willing to leave that one as it is. ] (]) 18:42, 29 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Seeing your comment, I was going to accpet the draft since sourcing has been improved since you rejected it. But I couldn't see that ] was met in a quick check. I will strike your comment. ~] (]) 18:56, 29 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disambiguation link notification for December 13== | |||
| An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] ( | ). | |||
| (].) --] (]) 07:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Request on 16:00:38, 13 December 2019 for assistance on ] submission by Jack Zagorski == | |||
| {{anchor|16:00:38, 13 December 2019 review of submission by Jack Zagorski}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=Jack Zagorski|ts=16:00:38, 13 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Mana_(meal_replacement)}} | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| Hi Robert, thank you for your prompt feedback regarding the following draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Jack_Zagorski/Mana_(food). First of all, sorry for submitting multiple copies of drafts. I thought that by submitting the second I was overwriting the first. Second of all, I just wanted to clarify the following comment about notable references: " do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." | |||
| I believe that the sources I cited meet these criteria. They are reliable, secondary sources that are independent of Heaven Labs s.r.o., which focus exclusively on our company/products and which are not just passing mentions. However, I also understand that I am a new Misplaced Pages user and that I have a conflict of interest. So, my overall understanding of your feedback is that the references themselves are not inappropriate, but that we simply need more references, ideally from bigger names. Is that correct? Thanks in advance for the clarification/advice. | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 16:00, 13 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process, and not every draft ever gets approved. I do not normally work with editors who have ], although I am glad to see that you have declared your conflict of interest. I suggest that you ask for advice at ]. ] (]) 16:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ] Thank you for the information. Will take my question there. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:55, 16 December 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Articles for creation: Phil Haus == | |||
| ] Thank you for your swift review. Does the standard Misplaced Pages have different notability criteria than Simple English version? I wanted to move an established article from SE https://simple.wikipedia.org/Phil_Haus. --] (]) 18:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I don't know anything about the ], but the notability criteria of '''any''' two different versions of Misplaced Pages are different, and in general the ] has relatively strict notability rules, in spite of or because of having more articles than any other Misplaced Pages. I would suggest that you might be able to get answers about the ] at ], although it is an ] information forum. ] (]) 21:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==] concern== | |||
| Hi there, I'm ]. I just wanted to let you know that ], a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. | |||
| If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. | |||
| You may request ] of the content if it meets requirements. | |||
| If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at ]. | |||
| Thank you for your attention. ] (]) 01:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Cheers== | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | ||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | ||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''This cool penny''' | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | ] short story is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the ] | |||
| <blockquote>This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true.</blockquote> | |||
| No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well RM. ]|] 03:34, 17 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == Request on 19:39:42, 18 December 2019 for assistance on ] submission by Carlden10 == | |||
| {{anchor|19:39:42, 18 December 2019 review of submission by Carlden10}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=Carlden10|ts=19:39:42, 18 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Radmila_Lolly}} | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> Hi Robert, I'm not clear how my Radmila Lolly article doesn't qualify for suitable mentions. She has proven to be associated with celebrities, covered in international magazines, performed at renown venues, and is verified on Instagram. Can you review again and provide specific suggestions? Thank you. | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 19:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - There was a deletion discussion that was closed on 1 July 2019. I said, in declining the draft, that if you thought that she now met one of the notability criteria, please indicate on the draft talk page. You still may discuss notability on the draft talk page and submit the draft for re-review again. If you think that the article should not have been deleted, you may go to ] and request to reverse the deletion; it is more likely that DRV may say to submit a draft for review, and may specify what criteria should be considered in the draft. If you have any more questions, we can ask at ]. ] (]) 20:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::] - Discuss notability at the draft talk page, or at ]. I have not compared the draft article and the deleted article, but the AFD creates a presumption of non-notability, and it is up to you to overcome the presumption. ] (]) 15:16, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ArbCom evidence == | |||
| {{tq|I agree with and will refer to the evidence entered by User:BrownHairedGirl...}} How can you possibly agree with BHG's evidence when she hasn't posted her evidence publicly yet? ]★] -- 09:30, 19 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == New Page Review newsletter December 2019 == | |||
| <div style="border:2px solid #90C0FF; background:#F0F0FF; width:99%; padding:4px"> | |||
| ] | |||
| <!-- ] --> | |||
| ;Reviewer of the Year | |||
| ] | |||
| This year's Reviewer of the Year is {{noping|Rosguill}}. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult. | |||
| Special commendation again goes to {{noping|Onel5969}} who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to {{noping| Boleyn}} and {{noping|JTtheOG}} who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well. | |||
| Several newer editors have done a lot of work with ] and ] (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year. | |||
| Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year. | |||
| {| class="wikitable sortable" | |||
| |+Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days | |||
| !Rank | |||
| !Username | |||
| !Num reviews | |||
| !Log | |||
| |- | |- | ||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for all the work you do at DRN. Here's a penny portraying King ] as a donation. ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 00:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| |1 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Onel5969" |47,395 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |2 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Rosguill" |41,883 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |3 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="JTtheOG" |11,493 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |4 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Arthistorian1977" |5,562 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |5 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Boleyn" |4,866 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |6 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="DannyS712" |3,995 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |7 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Cwmhiraeth" |3,812 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |8 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="Ymblanter" |3,655 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |9 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| | data-sort-value="CAPTAIN" |3,553 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |- | |||
| |10 | |||
| |] (]) | |||
| |3,522 | |||
| |Patrol Page Curation | |||
| |} | |} | ||
| ::A penny from ] that is authenticated to be approximately 1250 years old and so authentic would be worth far more than a penny. ] (]) 06:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| (''The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found ''']''''') | |||
| == Merge tag == | |||
| ;Redirect autopatrol | |||
| A recent ] on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was ]. New Page Reviewers are now able to ] who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a ] whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by {{noping|DannyS712 bot III}}. | |||
| You have added this to ] but I think that it has been complete. Can you review it or is it okay if I remove it? ] (]) 11:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ;Source Guide Discussion | |||
| ::] - I don't own the merge tag. If you have done the merging, you may use your own judgment in reviewing it and removing the tag. ] (]) 22:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Set to launch early in the new year is our first ] discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a ] prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the ] for more information. | |||
| == Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment == | |||
| ;This month's refresher course | |||
| While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on ]. Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag. | |||
| </div>Delivered by ] (]) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Barkeep49@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter_list&oldid=931696676 --> | |||
| ]Your feedback is requested  at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) | Is this wrong? Contact ]. | Sent at 16:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| == Request on 11:52:23, 21 December 2019 for assistance on ] submission by MatWr == | |||
| {{anchor|11:52:23, 21 December 2019 review of submission by MatWr}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=MatWr|ts=11:52:23, 21 December 2019|declinedtalk=Draft:Waukauyengtipu}} | |||
| == Closing a dispute resolution request == | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| You closed the because I submitted it as an ip. Before submitting the motion, I searched to see if it was allowed for ip's to submit motions and found nowhere that it was not allowed. Can you please provide me with the link that confirms that your motion is correct? ] (]) 18:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Hello. | |||
| :I suggest that you provide me with a link that says that I am not allowed to close a DRN request from an unregistered editor with a shifting IP address. It might be easier to ]. If you disagree, you can also post an inquiry at ] or ]. ] (]) 19:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for your reply. | |||
| ::Ιf something is not forbidden, it is allowed. You can't make up new rules yourself. ] (]) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| In order to present a history of the exploration of Waukauyengtipu (along with botanical observations made during the expeditions), it needs to be granted a separate article. I makes no sense to write about Waukauyengtipu expedition reports in an article about Mount Venamo. Nomenclatural inaccuracies are not everything - these are two separate mountains. Whereas Mount Venamo has no sources providing any tangible information about its exploration history other than fragmented notes. Waukauyengtipu, on the other hand, is much better documented in source materials. | |||
| ::Hi Robert, I'm afraid I disagree with your thoughts here, I've commented on the posting at WT:DRN and re-opened the dispute which I will happily handle. <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 02:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::] - Okay. I won't handle the dispute, but if another experienced volunteer is ready to handle it, that is all right. ] (]) 04:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| I still hope my proposal will be reconsidered. | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| Best Regards, | |||
| Mateusz Wrazidlo | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 11:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Cheers == | |||
| {| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 6px solid #FF4646; background-color:#46CB18;" | |||
| |align="left"|] | |||
| |align="center"|<font color="red">'''<font size=4>''Merry Christmas, {{BASEPAGENAME}}!''</font><br /> Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Misplaced Pages. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. ] <sup>]</sup> 11:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| |align="right"|] | |||
| |} | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| ==] nomination of ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| A tag has been placed on ] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under ], because it is a redirect from the ] to a different ] except the ], ], ], ], or ] namespaces. | |||
| If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by ] 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 ]. <!-- Template:Db-rediruser-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 01:50, 22 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Weird. I don't know what happened here. I see that I moved ] to ], a musician. Oh. I see what happened. ] did some questionable moves to try move the musician draft into article space, and one of them created a cross-name-space redirect. I think that the student user needs to be told to rely on AFC and to ask for advice at ]. ] (]) 03:16, 22 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == User: Ross Kolby/Sandbox == | |||
| ] Dear Robert. Thank you for your message. I am sorry for updating the sandbox so it seems that I apply two times with tha same article. I am not used to edit on Misplaced Pages, and it is just a result of me not knowing how to make an article correctly. I believed the Sandbox was a place where I could keep an article for myself and store it. I of course only wish to apply with one version of the article. Should I delete the version I now have saved in my Sandbox? Best, ] (]) 18:15, 23 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Just work on ]. It doesn't matter what you do with a sandbox, except that if you tag it for review, it gets reviewed, and the reviewer tries to move it to draft space. So play in the sand; just don't throw sand into draft space. ] (]) 18:22, 23 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::] I see. Thank you. I have worked quite a lot on the ] and I for now do not know how to improve it more without guidance. Would you be able to review the draft for being published as an article here? Or might you give me some advice if you feel it must be improved? I have worked on the inline citations and to make it pass the Misplaced Pages demands. Best, ] (]) 18:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::::] - I do not usually follow a draft through the approval process. If you need guidance on how to improve your draft, I would suggest that you ask for advice at ], which has a diversity of experienced editors. ] (]) 21:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Thanks for the heads-up! == | |||
| Thanks for pointing out the additional submission of the Lillian Shalom draft; good to be aware of this type of editing. ] (]) 20:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ==Happy Holidays== | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:0.5em 0.5em 0 0.5em; {{border-radius|1em}} {{box-shadow|0.1em|0.1em|0.5em|rgba(0,0,0,0.75)}}<!-- | |||
| -->;" class="plainlinks">]]]{{Center|]}} | |||
| '''Hello Robert McClenon:''' Enjoy the ''']''', and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand ]. Cheers, ''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .5em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 18:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ]{{paragraph break}}{{-}} | |||
| </div> | |||
| {{paragraph break}} | |||
| :<div style="float:left">''{{resize|88%|Spread the WikiLove; use {{tls|Season's Greetings1}} to send this message}}''</div>{{-}} | |||
| == Your submission at ]: ] (December 24) == | |||
| <div style="border: solid 1px #F99; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> ]Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the <span class="plainlinks"></span> or use ].<nowiki> </nowiki>The reason<!-- pluralize "reason" -->s left by Robert McClenon were: This topic is ].<!-- | |||
| --> This submission is ].<!-- | |||
| -- | |||
| --> The comment the reviewer left was: <!-- Template:Draftautobio --> | |||
| This draft appears to be an ], the submission of which is strongly discouraged. See ] for more information. | |||
| If this draft is resubmitted, it is recommended that it be ]. If this draft is not an autobiography, it may be resubmitted with an explanation on the draft talk page that it is not an autobiography. | |||
| <!-- Template:Notadv --> | |||
| This draft reads like an advertisement, but ]. | |||
| This draft is the work of a sockpuppeteer. | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| ] (]) 18:33, 24 December 2019 (UTC)</div><!--Template:Afc reject--> | |||
| == Your submission at ]: ] (December 24) == | |||
| <div style="border: solid 1px #F99; background-color: #F8EEBC; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;"> ]Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the <span class="plainlinks"></span> or use ].<nowiki> </nowiki>The reason<!-- pluralize "reason" -->s left by Robert McClenon were: This topic is ].<!-- | |||
| --> This submission is ].<!-- | |||
| -- | |||
| --> The comment the reviewer left was: <!-- Template:Draftautobio --> | |||
| This draft appears to be an ], the submission of which is strongly discouraged. See ] for more information. | |||
| If this draft is resubmitted, it is recommended that it be ]. If this draft is not an autobiography, it may be resubmitted with an explanation on the draft talk page that it is not an autobiography. | |||
| <!-- Template:Notadv --> | |||
| This draft reads like an advertisement, but ]. | |||
| This draft was submitted by a sockpuppet. | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| ] (]) 18:36, 24 December 2019 (UTC)</div><!--Template:Afc reject--> | |||
| == Thanks for reviewed my sandbox draft == | |||
| I have created the Phemex Misplaced Pages page at my sandbox please let me know why it's not approved and what can I do for the approval. I believe the page is important because its about a bitcoin futures and cryptocurrency derivatives trading platform.(] (]) 21:12, 24 December 2019 (UTC)) | |||
| ::] - I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. The importance of a page in Misplaced Pages depends on its coverage by ]. ] apply to disruptive editing or to advertising of cryptocurrencies. If you think that the subject is notable, you may ask for advice at ]. ] (]) 17:19, 25 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Thanks you Robert, Good to see you again. I really appreciate your work and guidelines.(] (]) 18:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)) | |||
| ==Good luck== | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px; {{round corners}}" class="plainlinks"> | |||
| ] | |||
| <center>{{resize|200%|'''豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s'''}} | |||
| Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.<br> | |||
| この]]はRobert McClenonたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！<br> | |||
| {{resize|200%|'''フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!'''}}<br> | |||
| ]] 04:21, 25 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| </center> | |||
| </div> | |||
| ::] - Thank you for putting Cdr. ] on watch on my home page. ] (]) 23:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == To whom it may concern... == | |||
| <div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">] | |||
| ] (]) has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit! | |||
| Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{tls|GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message. | |||
| </div> | |||
| Merry Christmas! Who knows, maybe the Grinch will steal every portal while you're sleeping. We know what a loss for Misplaced Pages that would be. ] (]) 07:56, 25 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I don't think that the warrior princess who is on watch, in the uniform that my mother would have worn a few years before I was born, will allow the grinch to pass. If the grinch enters through the portal, he is a prisoner and can be sent to ] for interrogation to give evidence to the ArbCom. ] (]) 17:27, 25 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ok, ], I see. You didn't put the warrior princess on watch. ] did that. It doesn't matter. She is there standing watch, and isn't likely to allow a grinch to pass, whether through a portal or to steal a portal. Happy New Year anyway. ] (]) 17:42, 26 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Multiple submissions but unsure about versions == | |||
| How do I find the different submissions for Sammy Voit? I would like to delete all except the one submitted for review today but I don’t know how to find them. Please help. Thanks ] (]) 02:05, 29 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hello {{U|Robert McClenon}}, as the nom of this article at AfD, I wanted to let you know I've rescinded my recent Close as Delete in favor of Relisting for further discussion, based on ] by {{U|Magog the Ogre}}. <i><b><small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small><span style="color: blue;"> <sup>]</sup></span></b></i> 22:04, 29 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration case opened == | |||
| 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 ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by January 14, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, <span style= "font-weight: bold;">]</span><sup>]</sup> 03:19, 31 December 2019 (UTC) | |||
| == Advertisement? == | |||
| {{hat|Comments about drafts that have been nominated for deletion should be posted to ], not to the nominator's talk page. ] (]) 16:57, 1 January 2020 (UTC)}} | |||
| Please tell me where you see and advertisement? If so, then I see many more advertisements here too: | |||
| https://en.wikipedia.org/Comparison_of_genealogy_software <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:38, 1 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| And I see many more advertisements here too: https://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Windows-only_software | |||
| And I can continue this... | |||
| Since you cannot see advertisements here https://en.wikipedia.org/Comparison_of_genealogy_software or here https://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Windows-only_software you have no objection to me posting the article again. | |||
| {{hab}} | |||
| == Hayley Griffiths == | |||
| Robert, https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Pmsouc I apologise if it looks like I have duplicated a submission. My understanding was that the article was sitting in the Draft space for a number of months but on checking the guidance it looked like it had to be moved to my own user space and then submitted. My understanding of the Draft page is that this is a temporary page. Provided the original article is in the queue for review that is fine.] (]) 18:27, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - You created multiple copies. I will review one copy. ] (]) 18:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you ] ] (]) 18:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Please review ] and identify which criteria she satisfies. I am not saying that she does or does not satisfy the criteria, but that I am asking you to decide which criteria are applicable. Please indicate on the draft talk page what criteria are applicable and what references apply. ] (]) 20:38, 1 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == I have Created Another Page Please Give me The Feedback == | |||
| I have created another page kindly review my sandbox and let me know what's you feedback.(] (]) 20:29, 1 January 2020 (UTC)) | |||
| == ] notification: ] has a new comment == | |||
| <div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;width: 100%;"> ] | |||
| I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at ]. Thanks! ] (]) 23:04, 1 January 2020 (UTC) </div> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ] ], (]) 2:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | ||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia ], 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 {{edit|Draft:Quantenna|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 get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 19:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Sumitomo SHI FW Page Deleted == | |||
| Hello Robert, | |||
| I had posted a page to be published and you had deleted it due to a quote from a magazine that was used directly. I would gladly update that to be a paraphrased version but the entire page is now gone. How can it be restored and then fixed? Thank you for any insight you can provide on this. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::] - After considerable searching, I see that a draft page ] was deleted on 4 November 2019 by ] for copyright violation. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violation very seriously, and I see no particular reason why we should assist you in recovering content that was lost because you infringed copyright. If you have the original material available on your computer or elsewhere, you can resubmit it. If you believe that a substantial amount of non-infringing material was deleted, you can ] at ], although material that was deleted for copyright violation is very seldom if ever restored, or you can request ]. In either case, I am not optimistic that we will be able to restore your page. It should have been your responsibility to keep a copy of it. I have found a record that I moved your sandbox to ]. I cannot retrieve its content. You should have kept a copy of it. ] then deleted your sandbox because it was only a redirect to a deleted page. ] (]) 21:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::* The page was also hopelessly spammy. If a new version were to be created, it would need to have almost entirely different text so there is no point in letting you see the deleted stuff. — ] (] '''·''' ]) 20:50, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::] - I assume you are telling the OP that there is no point is letting them see the deleted draft, because I didn't ask to see it. It is common for material to be both copyvio ]) and spammy (]) if it was copied from corporate advertising. That is two reasons why we don't want that crap in Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 21:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Request for assistance on ] submission by Suarezmartell == | |||
| {{anchor|12:03:35, 8 January 2020 review of submission by Suarezmartell}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=Suarezmartell|ts=12:03:35, 8 January 2020|declinedtalk=Draft:Webfleet_Solutions}} | |||
| Hi Robert. I'm writing to kindly ask for your help in regards to a Misplaced Pages entry I submitted two months ago. | |||
| I created a Misplaced Pages entry for my client, "Webfleet Solutions" and submitted it two months ago. At the time I received timely feedback from you, I quickly made all the arrangements (added third party information from reliable sources) you suggested on your feedback but I have not received any news or update or feedback from you or any other reviewer. | |||
| I wanted to ask you if you knew a way of knowing when will I receive new feedback or to know if my entry is approved or rejected? I contacted the help desk yesterday and they sent me information regarding conflicts of interests but I'm not sure how this is related to me since Webfleet Solutions is not my company. | |||
| Also, I would like to know if I edit the draft version and submit it again, will the days start counting again until a reviewer can see my entry? I mean, if I edit it again, will I have to wait two more months? | |||
| On the other hand, before submitting this entry I had not previously been active on Misplaced Pages and had no Wiki authority, does this affect the review of my entry? | |||
| Thank you in advance for your answers. | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 12:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Since ] has replied to you at the ], I have replied there rather than here so that we can keep the discussion in one place. ] (]) 15:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == ] notification: ] has a new comment == | |||
| <div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;width: 100%;"> ] | |||
| I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at ]. Thanks! -- <b>]]] </b> 04:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC) </div> | |||
| == Hello Robert == | |||
| Hey Robert, | |||
| I noticed you declined my draft, thanks for the feedback! | |||
| I added more sources and rewrote my draft ]. The topic is worth writing an article on and I've really been struggling write this. There are reliable sources out there . Many of these sources are restricted by paywalls, and I can't afford to go out of the way. This is an important article. | |||
| Please hear me out, I'd love feedback and help with the article. | |||
| Best, | |||
| ] (]) 19:15, 9 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I do not usually follow a draft through the approval process. However, you say that this is an important article. Why is it important? Why is the subject notable? Is it important because you are working for the subject? If so, please read ] and make your declaration. The article should explain why the subject is ]. I suggest that you ask for advice at ]. If I were to re-review the draft, I would decline it again, and I do not think that the Teahouse will be optimistic. ] (]) 21:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::The only conflict of interest is that I'm interested in it. I'm about as remote as physically possible from that person. I live on a different continent and I learned about them only a few weeks ago while researching for the ] article. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:31, 10 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::::] - Why is it important to have a separate stub article for ]? His notability appears to have to do with the ] independence movement. I suggest asking for advice at ], but they are likely to advise including any appropriate information about Dinka in the article on the region. ] (]) 16:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == ] notification: ] has a new comment == | |||
| <div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;padding-bottom:1em;color:black;margin-bottom: 1.5em;width: 100%;"> ] | |||
| I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at ]. Thanks! ] (]) 21:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC) </div> | |||
| == Request on 21:31:44, 9 January 2020 for assistance on ] submission by Jziemniak == | |||
| {{anchor|21:31:44, 9 January 2020 review of submission by Jziemniak}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=Jziemniak|ts=21:31:44, 9 January 2020|declinedtalk=Draft:John_Shields_(chef)}} | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| Thank you. This is for a different chef with the same name, John Shields, in Chicago. Please let me know if there are any changes I can make! | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 21:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - This is an interesting situation because it seems that more disambiguation is needed than is usually the case, because there are two people in the same line of work with the same name. I have renamed your draft to include his middle initial. This is an interesting disambiguation question, and I suggest asking for advice at the ] as to exactly what is the preferred degree of disambiguation. ] (]) 21:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Your submission at ]: ] has been accepted == | |||
| <div style="border:solid 1px #57DB1E; background:#E6FFE6; padding:1em; padding-top:0.5em; padding-bottom:0.5em; width:20em; color:black; margin-bottom: 1.5em; margin-left: 1.5em; width: 90%;">] '''], which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.'''<br /> The article has been assessed as '''Start-Class''', which is recorded on the article's ]. You may like to take a look at the ] to see how you can improve the article. | |||
| You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to ]. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can ] without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to ] if you prefer. | |||
| * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the '''<span class="plainlinks"></span>'''. | |||
| * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider {{leave feedback/link|page=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Articles for creation|text=leaving us some feedback}}. | |||
| Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages! | |||
| ] (]) 21:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)</div><!--Template:Afc talk--> | |||
| == John Shields == | |||
| Hi. Regarding ], the other editor posted ] earlier, if you'd like to combine the two sections, or ... <span style="color:red">—](])<span style="color:red">]—</span> 00:18, 10 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == ] discussion for "Doncram's actions ignoring the AfD Result and now edit warring" == | |||
| Hi {{u|Robert McClenon}}, | |||
| I don't have an opinion on the matter, but the ] thread originated with a single proposal, supported by one other editor, and then devolved (as is typical at ANI) into a series of sidebar discussions and general comments and observations. Given {{u|Girth Summit}}'s comment that he would like to see the thread closed, I'm contemplating closing as no consensus and/or wrong venue or unclear proposal. There's a lot of involved editors and administrators that are likely precluding it from being closed. There is some later discussion that some issues may be worth considering, in a different venue, but there is no consensus for the original proposal. Being an experienced editor, and seeing as you're also uninvolved in that thread, would you mind giving me a second opinion on if you think such a close has merit? | |||
| If you prefer to close that thread, I would have no issues with that as well. | |||
| Cheers, | |||
| <br />--]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> ]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 02:52, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :'''Comment''' A bot just archived that discussion. What's the policy on unclosed ] discussions being archived? Should they be closed, or perhaps one should initiate a request for closure? --]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> ]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 02:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Threads in ] are archived if there is no activity in a period of time which may be 72 hours. If you read the header of an archive, you will notice that it normally has instructions which say not to edit it. That means do not edit the archive of a talk page or a noticeboard. This amounts to a close due to community boredom. So the community decided not to do anything about that issue because they didn't do anything in 72 hours. ] could have closed the thread if they had acted. Now my view, which is consistent with the banner at the top of the archive, is to let sleeping bears sleep. (If you wake up a bear, the result is unpredictable, because bears are unpredictable, but one likely result is that the bear will injure you and then go back to sleep.) If the user who was the original subject of the discussion messes with the article, then I would suggest that a report at ] would be more likely to get action than another report at ], but either would be reasonable. If there is another thread opened, then please ping me. I wasn't paying attention to that ] thread. But to answer your question about policy, the policy is that the thread is closed by having been ignored by the community for 72 hours. ] (]) 05:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yeah - I didn't feel I should be the closer, since I'd expressed an opinion on one of the various side issues that arose (the relisting of the AfD, which was criticised by the OP). I'm quite content for it to slip away into the archive and attract dust instead of flame. ]] 15:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I will restate something that apparently needs restating. The banner at the top of a noticeboard archive that says not to edit the contents of the archive means not to edit the archive of a noticeboard or a talk page. If you think that you misread it because your thread was supposed to be closed, you read it correctly, and it says not to edit the archive. Leave it alone, like a sleeping bear. ] (]) 16:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Sorry if I wasn't clear? I am not suggesting that it should be closed post-archiving - I just dropped in to explain why I didn't close it myself (since you pinged me, and mentioned that I could have done so), and to say that I'm happy to leave it as is. I'm not suggesting that anyone disturb the bears... ]] 16:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::{{u|Girth Summit}} and {{u|Robert McClenon}}, thanks for your replies. I didn't realize ] threads could be archived without closure. It's clear that nothing needs to happen from that thread as there's no clear outcome on what, if anything, needs to happen. If someone from that thread wants to re-open an aspect of that discussion, they're certainly able to do that by bringing a new discussion to an appropriate venue. ]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> ]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 16:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::] - There is much detail about Misplaced Pages, some of which one should know, most of which one can get away without knowing, as long as one doesn't mess in it. This may be off any subject, but, ], please consider whether, if you don't know how ] is archived, and there are other things you don't know, is it possible that you don't know enough to do non-admin closures of XFD? Either you know what you are doing and can't explain it, so that other think you don't know what you are doing, or you actually don't know what you are doing. ] (]) 16:56, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::{{u|Robert McClenon}}, I accept that don't know everything about Misplaced Pages and, you're right, you can get away with that as it's not necessary. However, to be honest, I find the ] page overly cluttered relative to other areas of Misplaced Pages, so I just missed that banner you referenced. In terms of non-admin closures, I haven't closed any AfDs (other than withdrawing my nomination) and my closures have been limited to a handful of RfDs and several TfDs. I have curtailed my closures at TfD pending a more thorough understanding of the nuances of the process and, even at RfD, I have not closed anything in over a month. None have been challenged at DRV and all were supported by the participants, but even there, I want to more fulsomely digest the applicable policies in that area before I resume closures. At least 4-6 months. Even when I resume doing a few closures, I will still limit myself to one or two areas and not AfD, given that is a much more high profile and controversial area. CfDs can be complicated in terms of multiple closing outcomes discussed in the comments, so would also avoid that, and I would also avoid MfD until the dispute over portals ends. ]''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:top;"> ]</span>''·''<span style="font-size:small; vertical-align:bottom;">]</span>'' 17:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Dispute resolution - close? == | |||
| Hello, | |||
| You posted a message on ] dispute. I think it can be closed for two reasons: | |||
| * Today we worked on updating the lede regarding the content that Lightningstrikers was concerned about | |||
| * The user has been blocked for 2 weeks ]. | |||
| I am hoping that we all come back with a calmer approach going forward. Should this be closed now? | |||
| I wasn't sure how to ask that on the dispute page if no one had volunteered to take it yet.–] (]) 03:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - {{Done}} ] (]) 05:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks much! And, I don't remember being part of a dispute before, but am now familiar with how it works, thanks to you.–] (]) 05:52, 11 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sunil Prem Vyas== | |||
| Hello Robert McClenon, | |||
| last month you had rejected Biographical article of "Sunil Prem Vyas". i'm not able to understand what kind of changes should i do in article. first point you said i can split this article with another article "Take it easy (Movie 2015)" which is directed by Sunil Perm Vyas. but this is movie article and i had discuss with one of our editor on Tea house, he said we can not add biography information in movie article. second point you said this person is not notable but i have given you some news paper links of mid-day Mumbai, Times of India and some other web links. i have saw some Biographical article on Misplaced Pages with very less references but they got publish. so i think i have given proper references then why my article is getting declined. | |||
| so i don't want to split this article with another article i want to make biography article of Sunil Prem Vyas. | |||
| so please guide me for the same. | |||
| Thank you. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 08:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ::] - First, the page that was rejected was a sandbox that has only a picture of Vyas but no biography. If you want to use your sandbox for some other purpose, you can blank it and reuse it. Second, I suggest that you ask for advice at ]. ] (]) 16:29, 13 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::Also, you are having difficulty in communicating in English. Have you considered contributing to the Misplaced Pages in your first language, maybe the ]? ] (]) 16:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration case opened == | |||
| 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 ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, <span style= "font-weight: bold;">]</span><sup>]</sup> 05:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | |||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia ], 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 {{edit|Draft:Aarthi Ganesh|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 get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice --> ] (]) 21:58, 15 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ] ], a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 23:12, 15 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Draft:Trang T. Lê rejected questions. == | |||
| Hello Robert McClenon, thank you for reviewing my submission. It seems I have resubmitted a more recent draft with the same name. How do we move forward reviewing the most recent draft (December 28, 2019), and discarding the first draft reviewed in (September 30, 2019)? Thank you for your help. | |||
| ] (]) 23:02, 16 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - The draft in question is ]. You submit a draft for review by submitting it. You did not submit that draft. Click on the tab for the purpose. Do you want me to submit it for you? ] (]) 23:32, 16 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Yet another potentially ] editor == | |||
| In the light of people's opinions on ]'s case, I am wondering if I need to take any special actions on ], considering that, after checking, for all 3 days of their account's existence all they have done is accumulate userboxes. --] (]) 18:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - As they say at ], let the user edit. If the user edits, the userboxes are harmless. If the user doesn't edit, the userboxes just sit there and are harmless. None of them tell lies. ] (]) 18:49, 17 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Non acceptance of the proposed article on the Inca complex ar Pisac == | |||
| I wish to ask you to reconsider your decision to not allow the creation of my article called “Inca Pisac”. | |||
| You suggested that I incorporate what I have written into the existing “Pisac” article. | |||
| I visited the area in 2017 and was blown away of how massive what I term “Inca Pisac” is. Upon my return home I found that there is very little information available on it, mostly tourist blogs and the odd scientific paper. As a result I decided to be bring it to people’s attention. I had intended once the article was accepted to then revise the main “Pisac” article. | |||
| The concurrent Misplaced Pages article called “Pisac” is on the existing town and surrounding area. This area was settled by various tribes from which no buildings remains before it was conquered by the Incas. They constructed a massive complex on a mountain side overlooking the valley. This complex is believed to have functioned as a combined royal retreat, farm, fortress and town. When the Spanish came the Inca complex was abandoned and the Spanish established a town on the valley floor below it and gave the Inca name to this town. | |||
| In many ways what I have termed “Inca Pisac” is the same as the following all of which have separate articles in Misplaced Pages: | |||
| - The Acropolis overlooking Athens | |||
| - The Alhambra palace complex overlooking the city of Granada | |||
| - Edinburgh castle overlooking Edinburgh | |||
| If what you are saying is correct then shouldn’t these and any place, castle, significant structure not have a separate article and instead be incorporated in the article on the town or city in which they are located. | |||
| If you search for “Pisac Archaeological Park” in Google maps and go to the 3D option you will get an appreciation of its size and how it relates to the town. | |||
| Part of the problem is that the name “Inca Pisac” also refers to the period of Inca occupation of the area, which I think confused you. | |||
| If you agree that your decision should be reversed there is still the problem of the article name, if you feel it is confusing. | |||
| Various peoples seem to use the terms “Inca ruins”, “Inca citadel”. “Inca ruins at Pisac” is not suitable as it is a term of the state of repair. “Inca citadel at Pisac” is not quite correct as it had more functions than acting as a fortress. | |||
| The legal name of the complex is the “Pisca Archeological Park”. I don’t think this is the best as we don’t use the legal name for the palaces, castles, etc which are now museums as their article name. But at the end of the day the important thing is to describe this stunning place. | |||
| ] (]) 23:43, 17 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| John Prattley | |||
| ::The draft in question is ]. (It helps a reviewer to be given a link to the draft or article in question.) If you think that a separate article should be ] from the article on the village to discuss the Inca ruin, the place to discuss ] an article is the talk page of the existing article, that is, ]. Please discuss there. If you have any further questions, then experienced editors may be able to help you at ]. ] (]) 00:47, 18 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hello ]<br> | |||
| Could you please spare some time to review my draft? Could you please check this draft out for an approval? ]. I added extra links on the talk page of the article. Maybe this could be considered. | |||
| --] (]) 16:53, 18 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I do not usually follow a draft through the approval process, but I am willing to ask other experienced editors at ] to comment within 24 hours. ] (]) 21:28, 18 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you. Would be expecting a feedback. --] (]) 00:12, 19 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Talk:Take It Easy (2015 film) == | |||
| Hey RMcC, I hope you don't stress too much about the discussion at ]. I just need a little clarification. Sorry if you felt that it went a little weird. We're all still friends. Regards, ] (]) 05:42, 19 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I thought I had clarified it after the first explanation. ] (]) 07:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - To explain a little further, what was weird was that I had apparently confused you to the point where I couldn't resolve the confusion, because I thought that I had tried to explain that it was a question of whether to spin out an article and that the place to discuss was the existing article. I felt that I was trapped in the situation where what I communicated the first time was not what I meant, and where it was apparently impossible to re-explain. Maybe now I have explained, and maybe I will still have to explain four more times. ] (]) 20:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hey Robert! I had submitted the Dilshad draft for review. Thanks for reviewing it. I hope it isn't wrong if I "argue" for my "case" :D | |||
| I had earlier made '']'' which was passed by {{U|Frayae}}. I believe the Dilshad one matches that one's "quality". Also, {{u|Largoplazo}} had commented on the Dilshad draft that "It's definitely better, nice". That was what made me confident enough that it would pass the review. How do you think I can improve it till it becomes eligible for an article? Your suggestions would be a great help. Cheers! — '']'' 05:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Disambiguation link notification for January 21== | |||
| An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] ( | ). | |||
| (].) --] (]) 08:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==] nomination of ]== | |||
| <s>] | |||
| A tag has been placed on ] requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under ], because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Misplaced Pages's goals. Please note that ]. Under the ], such pages may be deleted at any time. | |||
| If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by ] 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 ]. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=User%3AArav+Sri+Agarwal%2Fsandbox|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request ]. <!-- Template:Db-notwebhost-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 16:44, 21 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| </s> | |||
| Sorry, you got twinkled since ASA c&p'd another copy over the redirect you left. ] (]) 20:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - Oh. That sandbox. Oh well. ] (]) 21:11, 21 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your draft article, ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the ] submission or ] page you started, "]". | |||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia ], 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 {{edit|Draft:Intersection|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 get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at ]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages! <!-- Template:Db-draft-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 11:01, 22 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Request on 16:29:27, 23 January 2020 for assistance on ] submission by HumOutcomes == | |||
| {{anchor|16:29:27, 23 January 2020 review of submission by HumOutcomes}} | |||
| {{Lafc|username=HumOutcomes|ts=16:29:27, 23 January 2020|declinedtalk=Draft:Aid_Worker_Security_Database}} | |||
| <!-- Start of message --> | |||
| In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can . An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. | |||
| <!-- End of message -->] (]) 16:29, 23 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. <!-- Template:Db-draft-deleted --><!-- Template:Db-csd-deleted-custom --> <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 05:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Hello, this is in reference to the article you recently denied ] I've left a comment/question on Teahouse, If you'd like to review. Thank you. | |||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| Sorry, Robert, but I don't get it. ] and ] ''is'' about two different people from opposite sides of the country. I'm not sure why you thought they were the same I don't get the "but there is an article with that title"--sure, but if I (or ] decline something, there is no need to even check if there is something in mainspace. In fact, I thought there was some automated thing that checked for that, but it doesn't matter. I guess you're criticizing Jamiebuba and me for that?{{pb}}That the ''article'', in your opinion, makes some kind of valid claim to notability because it has a filmography (I don't think that it does) is irrelevant here--unless you were ''really'' trying to say that because the article is on a notable subject, the draft should be notable as well and should thus be merged. Maybe, but they were on different topics, so when you declined it saying "the subject of this article already exists in Misplaced Pages", that was not correct. Thank you, ] (]) 22:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| If you have some time, this has been the subject of some strife and discontent.-- <b>]]] </b> 17:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I am not exactly sure what you don't get. I made one mistake, and that was thinking that they were the same person. I think that everything after that follows. I hope that you are not trying to beat me up for having made one mistake. The existing article, in my opinion, does establish ]. That guideline says that a person may be considered notable if {{tq|The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions}}. I saw, and still see, a filmography that lists three underscored films, that is, films that are the subject of articles, and the actress had roles in those films. Since I thought that the subject of the draft was the same person as the subject of the article, I thought that additional information about that person could be merged into her article. That is what I meant. I think that is clear enough. I think it is also clear enough that I made one mistake. I hope that you are not trying to beat me up for having made one mistake. If you think that the actress does not pass ], you are of course free to nominate her article for deletion, and I will probably !vote Keep, but I don't think that is the issue. I am not sure what you don't get. I am not trying to continue to argue that they are the same person. When you said that they are different people, I agreed with your decline of the draft. ] (]) 20:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| ::] - I have given the user an additional warning for ] of ]. I haven't reviewed the draft in detail but agree that it should be reviewed by a neutral editor. I have looked at the ] thread. If the editor in question is indeffed, it will leave the draft to be available for review in a few weeks or a few months by a neutral editor. ] (]) 04:36, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ::I |
::I did have a question about why you and Jamiebuba either did not notice that there was already an article with that title or did not disambiguate the draft until after I had tagged the draft for merge, but that is a secondary question that I am willing to pass over. ] (]) 20:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| :::Robert: I still don't get why you are questioning anyone's thoughts over the actual actress, ]; they are irrelevant here. I'm not trying to beat anyone up, but you seem to be beating a dead horse. I think that you thought that the other reviewer and I must have seen that article and yet decided to decline the draft, when it seems clear to me that neither I nor the other reviewer saw that article and declined the draft on its own merits, or lack thereof. Nor do I understand all of . I didn't see any yellow banner with a message, and I'm assuming that the other editor didn't either. I don't know why that happened, maybe some bit fell over. BTW I agree that a draft with additional information could be merged into an existing article. ] (]) 20:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::I thought that I wasn't going to review it, but I see that a previous article on the actress was already deleted after a deletion discussion, and that was sufficient for me to decline it with a warning that I am ready to nominate it for deletion if it is resubmitted again without evidence that it satisfies a ]. Also, I agree that the editor should be blocked for the personal attacks of yelling vandalism. I do not have an opinion on whether the block should be for 72 hours or indefinite. ] (]) 04:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Thanks, Robert. I thought it best to draft again under the circumstances rather than move right to AfD. Creator is overwrought.-- <b>]]] </b> 12:28, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== What counts as a secondary source? == | ||
| Guess: a source not directed to the release of the film such as a part of a book about it. ] (]) 07:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| Hello Robert. Please see ]. The . Reading the DRN gives me the impression that one particular editor was most of the problem. Any comment is welcome, ] (]) 17:31, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :] - Reviews are secondary sources. A newspaper account of production is a secondary source. There is seldom ] or production itself, although there are often teasers saying that production has started or finished. There are only a few secondary sources about unreleased movies, which is one reason why they very seldom meet ]. ] (]) 04:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:46, 22 January 2025
 Archives |
| Index |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 7 sections are present. |
| Other archives |
|---|
| Problem Archive |
| Famekeeper Archive |
| FuelWagon Archive |
| Jack User Archive |
| John Carter Archive |
| PhiladelphiaInjustice Archive |
| 78 Archive |
| DIRECTIVEA113 Archive |
 | If this page has been recently modified, it may not reflect the most recent changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes. |
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Honorific nicknames in popular music on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Misplaced Pages talk:Short description on a "Misplaced Pages 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.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Saving Grace (Philippine TV series)
How is still considered too soon if the series will release next week on Prime Video.
Source: https://trendrod.wordpress.com/2024/10/29/julia-montes-sharon-cuneta-comeback-series-saving-grace-heads-to-prime-video-this-november/ 122.55.235.127 (talk) 02:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- It will release next week. It hasn't been reviewed. Notability is based on significant coverage by reliable sources, such as reviews. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Now, that is starting to make sense. I was going to ask that IP user about when it is ready for resubmission, and I'm the one who created the draft article. So, we need to wait until after the show airs next week to resubmit the draft article for review, and we have to provide additional reliable sources besides ABS-CBN, which is considered an original research, as references when expanding the article before that. JRGuevarra (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- It will be hard because there are times a series or a movie is out but only ABS-CBN is the only source not a lot of additional sources. It's only often you get these addtional sources. :( 122.55.235.127 (talk) 06:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Now, that is starting to make sense. I was going to ask that IP user about when it is ready for resubmission, and I'm the one who created the draft article. So, we need to wait until after the show airs next week to resubmit the draft article for review, and we have to provide additional reliable sources besides ABS-CBN, which is considered an original research, as references when expanding the article before that. JRGuevarra (talk) 04:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- It will release next week. It hasn't been reviewed. Notability is based on significant coverage by reliable sources, such as reviews. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Palestine-Israel articles 5 arbitration case opened
You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Earth 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.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Brocade River Poems (She/They) 15:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- User:BrocadeRiverPoems - Thank you for notifying me. I have no opinion at this time on whether the article should be deleted, because I have not at this time done a source review. I have no opinion on whether RocketKnightX is associated with the sockpuppets and sockpuppeteers and have no plan to file a sockpuppet report. However, I do have an opinion that RocketKnightX has exhausted the patience of the community. I have proposed that they be banned. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates
You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA
. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:
First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.
Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Backyard Skateboarding Info
What detailed information about Backyard Skateboarding is shown on the Backyard Sports page? The only information is just stating its title. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:81AC:1F5C:3345:46D5 (talk) 22:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Court of the Lions on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Weather 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.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Misplaced Pages talk:Please do not bite the newcomers on a "Misplaced Pages 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.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:New Horizon
Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "New Horizon".
In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. Liz 21:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, User:Liz - This was even sillier than many of the G13 messages that I get. The G13 messages are often because I disambiguated a draft, which creates a redirect of which I am the creator. But in this case it says that I created the redirect in 2020. Well, well. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
RfC
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
The RfC that you started, about the composer of the opera I look forward to see today: I believe it should be mentioned on the projects Composers, Classical music and Opera. It seems not well known that, while the former two still have a guideline against infoboxes, it was dropped from project Opera in 2019. - My story is about the opera. Happiness and sadness under music, travel pics under places (unfinished). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
I come to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Today it's a great woman, soprano Sigrid Kehl, and I found a 1963 Christmas Oratorio detail. 10 years earlier than that cycle, Bach wrote seven cantatas for the 1724 season, based on seven songs, - my focus this year. Expect three stories for the three days they celebrated in Leipzig ;) - Enjoy the season! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Thomas Sewell (neo-Nazi) on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive
| January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Top AfC Editor
|
The Articles for Creation Barnstar 2024 Top Editor | |
| In 2024 you were one of the top AfC editors, thank you! --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
Your draft article, User:Dsflyerds/sandbox
Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "sandbox".
In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. Liz 21:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025! |
|
Hello Robert McClenon, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Abishe (talk) 22:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Dealing someone's personal attack in edit summary
Hi there Robert, I found this discussion you open a decade ago and I just want to get some advise on how you deal it because I'm having the same situation. See their recent contributions. 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 03:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- You also did this to me a few months ago, you're joke with your summary but i never complaint to anybody. Oh my god. Aidillia 04:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- User:D.18th, User:Aidillia - Please discuss your issues in a civil manner. It appears that there is an issue about a K-pop group. I don't see a personal attack, although maybe I missed it. Be aware that personal attacks in edit summaries are even more serious than personal attacks on talk pages, because they can only be deleted by admins. What is the issue? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- I created this redirect page of an upcoming group then the other user created a draft of it then suddenly edited and copy paste the contents from their draft to the redirect page I created then published it after that they moved it to other space in WP to have ownership of content. 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- User:D.18th, User:Aidillia - This sounds childish. There is now a redirect from Close Your Eyes (group) to Project 7. There is also a draft at Draft:Close Your Eyes (group). The draft is not ready for article space, and both of you can work on improving it. When will the band first either perform and be reviewed or release an album or single that will chart? You can both collaborate. If there is any more quarreling, I may have to file a report at WP:ANI, which might result in both of you getting logged warnings or short blocks. If you don't have a different idea for how to divide the labor, each of you can research the history of some of the band members. Misplaced Pages is big enough for both of you. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- I created this redirect page of an upcoming group then the other user created a draft of it then suddenly edited and copy paste the contents from their draft to the redirect page I created then published it after that they moved it to other space in WP to have ownership of content. 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- User:D.18th, User:Aidillia - Please discuss your issues in a civil manner. It appears that there is an issue about a K-pop group. I don't see a personal attack, although maybe I missed it. Be aware that personal attacks in edit summaries are even more serious than personal attacks on talk pages, because they can only be deleted by admins. What is the issue? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2024 December 27#Clock/calendar
Your bludgeoning accusation to me at the DRV for Clock/calendar is a bit off-topic so I'm responding at your talk page. I really don't like repeating myself, but I did so in response to your comment because you mentioned It isn't clear what if anything the appellant wants to change in the outcome.
That was a very confusing comment to me because I felt that I had been very clear in that regard. So I succinctly explained what needs to change in this outcome for your own clarity (along with addressing the red herring policy forum suggestion). That you followed it up with accusations of bludgeoning is perhaps even more confounding. I disagree that I am making a very high number of comments and making the same arguments over and over again. Bludgeoners always have to have the last word
, which is not an accurate portrayal of my participation. In fact, Compassionate727 got the last word in both of my other responses. So I now ask you: please explain from your point of view how I am bludgeoning or withdraw your accusation. -- Tavix 16:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Killing of Brian Thompson on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Robert McClenon!
Robert McClenon,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages.
𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
January music
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). - I saw a lovely opera by Rimsky-Korsakov, - see here. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123, my story today 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. Dada Masilo will be my story tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
... and today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Today I had a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who just became GA, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:ONE Championship on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Capital accumulation 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.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
DRN
Hi Robert, hope you’re doing well. Letting you know that I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages and I’ll be doing some bits and pieces over at DRN from time to time. I’ve seen a thread about DRN and its effectiveness (closed, since October last year) but it raises some good points that I think should be considered, as our DR processes have changed since I first created DRN 12 years ago. I’d be keen to hear your thoughts too. Speak soon, Steven Crossin 18:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Greetings, User:Steven Crossin. I will provide some thoughts about dispute resolution within the next 48 to 72 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Some Thoughts on DRN
You, User:Steven Crossin, refer to a thread on the effectiveness of DRN that has been closed since October. I assume that you mean a thread at the DRN talk page that was in August, and, two months later, in October, the originator withdrew it. I completely missed it in August, because I wasn't watching the DRN talk page at the time. I probably wouldn't have said anything in defense of the continued existence of DRN that would have added to what was said. The originator provided some interesting statistics, and I think in good faith missed the point in a few ways. He overestimated the community time that was lost on the misplaced filings. More importantly, he assumed that the filers of the misplaced filings would have somehow found more constructive solutions on their own, when we know that many editors, especially new editors, don't have a clue what to do about a dispute, and can use advice, and he failed to attach value to having a place for volunteers to give advice. I think that one effect of a proposed shutdown of DRN that was not mentioned is that more disputes would go to WP:ANI as a place of first resort, if DRN was eliminated as a place of first resort. Some of those disputes might then go to article talk pages, Wikiprojects, or RFCs, but there would be hard feelings from the WP:ANI thread. I don't think that the originator thought his idea through.
I think that one change to DRN could be to recognize that it has at least two functions in dispute resolution. The first should be as a help desk for advice and possibly quick assistance in answering where to take disputes. The second would be for mediation. The current description of DRN is that it is an informal place that is an early stop in disputes. What other than RFC, WP:ANI, and ArbCom are later stops? When DRN was established, there was MEDCOM. Was there also MEDCAB, or did DRN follow the dissolution of MEDCAB?
Some of the disputes that we listed as closed because they belonged somewhere else may be successes if we think that directing a user to the right place is a success.
What else did you have in mind as the changes that you say there have been in dispute resolution since DRN was created?
I will have more comments, but I think that I should post these now so as to ask you to explain which changes in dispute resolution you were thinking about, and whether you have any specific ideas. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- So, I've given this a lot of thought over the past few days, and talked about this with quite a few people to get their thoughts on the current state of DRN, and of dispute resolution in general. I'll go in a little bit of a random order to address your thoughts, as I think we are aligned in some ways on how DRN should operate, but vary on perhaps our approach. So, let me give you my (somewhat unstructured thoughts). Way back when in 2011 when I created DRN, it was really designed as a 3O+ - handle content disputes in a relatively lightweight fashion with minimal structure or bureaucracy, and acknowledged the fact that existing dispute resolution processes at the time (which were predominantly MedCab, which I closed after DRN was created and effective), and MedCom (which closed much later) usually had one DR volunteer to many involved editors, which could cause mediator burnout (it required focus from one person over an extended period of time). By creating a relatively unstructured noticeboard (as other noticeboards are), it would allow a many-to-many relationship between dispute resolution volunteers and editors, reducing this burnout and aiding prompt resolution. To me, dispute resolution on Misplaced Pages made sense where disputes had somewhere else to go other than DRN (and not just RFC, and I'll get to my thoughts on that shortly). By having MedCab and MedCom closed, DRN has morphed into a one-stop shop for most content disputes, which is not what it was intended to be (the Autism dispute currently open is a prime example). So now, I consider what's working well at DRN and what I think needs to be improved. DRN 100% should remain a noticeboard that we can direct issues to more suitable forums (in a way, act as triage/traffic control), but in my view, with a less strict adherence to rules than is done presently - the overarching idea behind DRN was to keep it lightweight and super informal. I've mediated some disputes where I have found putting in ground rules and structuring conversations is beneficial, but this is something I've evaluated on a case basis rather than a universal approach. An example of a dispute where I took this approach is here, and while it did spin off to a talk page mediation, I found that the approach I took garnered a fair bit of success, and I relied on overseeing the conversation and steering it was more effective than breaking up conversations into sections and largely restricting users to their own section (e.g. like ArbCom).
- Now, the question in some degree becomes, what is the impact that happens due to this structure. Reflecting on my original design of DRN, and myself as a DR volunteer, I take the Autism dispute as an example, and due to all the conversation being in sections, I can't actually follow the conversation between editors, and that makes it challenging for me as a volunteer to provide additional assistance to the dispute. I'd like to discuss the idea working with you to return DRN to it's original style, and see if that has an impact on the volunteering effort. I'd also like to discuss the use of the term "moderator" as I think what we historically do at DRN is more in line with "mediation" which is a little more involved in shaping the conversation where traditionally, moderation is more about enforcing rules than leading the conversation. I'm also considering reopening MedCab, and referring larger disputes there. Let me know your thoughts - as our main volunteer to DRN, I'm keen to have an open conversation with you on how we can improve our processes. If you're interested in having a chat via email or Discord, I'm happy to do so as well, but of course also happy to chat here. Speak soon, Steven Crossin 05:05, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Robert, just following up the message above. If you’d rather not discuss the above, that’s fine too, just let me know. Thanks, Steven Crossin 18:40, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Wait Until 21 January
User:Steven Crossin - I will reply in more depth no later than 22 January 2025. I have two higher priorities at this time. The first is unpacking all of my household goods in a new townhouse (well, new for me). The second is writing about the national tragedy, to distribute it no later than 19 January 2025, while I know that I still have freedom of expression, and before I have any specific wrongs to comment about. I am not choosing not to discuss. I am choosing to discuss next week. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- No worries at all, we all have busy lives! I moved a couple of years ago and unpacking was a nightmare so I completely get it! I'll await your reply. Steven Crossin 19:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
A Few More Comments
User:Steven Crossin - It is now 21 January 2025 in North America.
My reading of your comments is that you are identifying two main issues. The first has to do with lightweight versus heavier-weight dispute resolution processes. The second has to do with the degree of control exercised by the volunteer. I think that I will focus at this time on lightweight and heavyweight dispute resolution processes, and first will provide some preliminary remarks, and will then say that I think that two tracks for content disputes, a lightweight track and a heavier track, should be defined.
You mention that you originally started DRN to be a lightweight process, not that much heavier than Third Opinion. I can see that there had been no lightweight process for disputes with more than two editors, or for disputes where one editor disagreed with the Third Opinion. I know from when I worked more Third Opinions than I do now that those cases are eventually resolved as the Third Opinion had been, with or without blood. That is, the outcome on content is almost always consistent with the Third Opinion, and the outcome on conduct depends on whether the editor who is in the minority is reasonable.
At the time that you created DRN, the only lightweight dispute resolution process was Third Opinion, which was not available if there were already three editors involved, and there were two heavier processes, MedCab and MedCom. I wasn't editing at the time that there was MedCab, so I will try not to say much about it. MedCom was the last step for content disputes, and had some strings attached, such as that it was a self-perpetuating committee, had discretion on what cases to take, and had a provision that its proceedings were sealed. However, it did exist, and so a DRN volunteer who saw that a dispute would not be lightweight could say that it should go to MedCom.
I recall a few unpleasant persistent disputes that eventually went to ArbCom, including War of the Pacific, and Motorsports. They were small compared to the cases that ArbCom usually handles, but they really did need to go to ArbCom. Sometimes the community can handle otherwise intractable content disputes that are complicated by conduct, and sometimes it can't. That is a reminder that there should be at least one stop for difficult cases before they go to ArbCom.
I wasn't editing at the time that MedCab went away, and I don't really know why it went away. I was editing actively and working at DRN when MedCom was abolished. I understood the stated reasons why it was abolished, but I disagreed with the conclusion that it should be dissolved, and I never understood the real reason why it was abolished, which I inferred was political. One reason was that they were very few qualified mediators, sometimes only one or two, and the second reason was that there were very few cases going to it. I think that part of the problem was that there were high qualifications for mediators to qualify, and that a solution would have been to expand the panel by accepting more people. So what I don't know is why the proponent of ending MedCom proposed to end it rather than to improve it.
After MedCom was abolished, I had to handle heavy-duty cases such as the list of Italian political parties, where part of the problem was that anything that was agreeable to one of the parties was unacceptable to the other. Maybe I should have failed that dispute before I did, but at least with that record the community had an easier time deciding what to do, which was to topic-ban both parties. I had to ignore the idea that DRN was for cases that could be resolved in two to three weeks. I thought that those cases would otherwise probably go to WP:ANI, which is the wrong place for content disputes. Sometimes someone takes a look at the dispute, and says, "Content Dispute", which is true, but not helpful unless there is a way to resolve stubborn content disputes. Sometimes someone takes a look at it and sees conduct issues, which there usually also are, and it winds up with sanctions, when it would have been better to focus on the content issue and ignore the conduct.
Maybe those are preliminary thoughts. The underlying issue is that there are both lightweight content disputes and heavyweight content disputes, and one size fits all is an illusion. We need a variety of procedures for dealing with content disputes. I don't have a strong opinion on whether that means two noticeboards, or one noticeboard with two or more tracks. If you are saying that we should have two tracks somehow, I think I agree. The lightweight track should be volunteer assistance, and the heavier track should usually, but not always, be mediation. The Autism case is an example of a heavy dispute that is not really mediation so much as guided discussion. It doesn't really fit any particular model, and is really something that I thought I should do by ignoring the constraints.
You also mentioned the possibility of restarting MedCab. If you are saying that DRN can be restored to dealing with lightweight issues, then one of the options should be to decide that the dispute should go to MedCab. I sort of like the idea of DRN being a big tent with various services, including, "MedCab: A Service of DRN", but it can instead be separate.
So, if you are saying something to the effect that we should have two tracks for dispute resolution, one lightweight and one for longer disputes, I agree. If that isn't what you are saying, then I misunderstood you. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:58, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Here is an afterthought. I have no interest in using Discord. I have never used Discord, which I understand is a chat facility, and do not see a need to learn to use it. I am ready to use email, which I have been using for forty years, which is longer than some people have known it existed, but I would prefer to use it only if there is a privacy reason for using it, such as naming names. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:45, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
A donation for you!
|
This cool penny |
| Thank you for all the work you do at DRN. Here's a penny portraying King Offa of Mercia as a donation. Tarlby 00:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC) |
- A penny from Offa of Mercia that is authenticated to be approximately 1250 years old and so authentic would be worth far more than a penny. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Merge tag
You have added this to Evan Funke but I think that it has been complete. Can you review it or is it okay if I remove it? VECCHIASFLOGLINA (talk) 11:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:VECCHIASFLOGLINA - I don't own the merge tag. If you have done the merging, you may use your own judgment in reviewing it and removing the tag. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Closing a dispute resolution request
You closed the request because I submitted it as an ip. Before submitting the motion, I searched to see if it was allowed for ip's to submit motions and found nowhere that it was not allowed. Can you please provide me with the link that confirms that your motion is correct? 188.4.120.7 (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- I suggest that you provide me with a link that says that I am not allowed to close a DRN request from an unregistered editor with a shifting IP address. It might be easier to register an account. If you disagree, you can also post an inquiry at the DRN talk page or Village pump (miscellaneous). Robert McClenon (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ιf something is not forbidden, it is allowed. You can't make up new rules yourself. 188.4.120.7 (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Robert, I'm afraid I disagree with your thoughts here, I've commented on the posting at WT:DRN and re-opened the dispute which I will happily handle. Steven Crossin 02:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:Steven Crossin - Okay. I won't handle the dispute, but if another experienced volunteer is ready to handle it, that is all right. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Beuys (disambiguation)
Hello, Robert McClenon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Beuys".
In accordance with our policy that Misplaced Pages is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Misplaced Pages, and happy editing. Liz 05:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Draft:Caitlin McCarthy (activist)
Sorry, Robert, but I don't get it. Draft:Caitlin McCarthy (activist) and Draft:Caitlin McCarthy is about two different people from opposite sides of the country. I'm not sure why you thought they were the same I don't get the "but there is an article with that title"--sure, but if I (or User:Jamiebuba decline something, there is no need to even check if there is something in mainspace. In fact, I thought there was some automated thing that checked for that, but it doesn't matter. I guess you're criticizing Jamiebuba and me for that?
That the article, in your opinion, makes some kind of valid claim to notability because it has a filmography (I don't think that it does) is irrelevant here--unless you were really trying to say that because the article is on a notable subject, the draft should be notable as well and should thus be merged. Maybe, but they were on different topics, so when you declined it saying "the subject of this article already exists in Misplaced Pages", that was not correct. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:Drmies - I am not exactly sure what you don't get. I made one mistake, and that was thinking that they were the same person. I think that everything after that follows. I hope that you are not trying to beat me up for having made one mistake. The existing article, in my opinion, does establish acting notabiity. That guideline says that a person may be considered notable if
The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions
. I saw, and still see, a filmography that lists three underscored films, that is, films that are the subject of articles, and the actress had roles in those films. Since I thought that the subject of the draft was the same person as the subject of the article, I thought that additional information about that person could be merged into her article. That is what I meant. I think that is clear enough. I think it is also clear enough that I made one mistake. I hope that you are not trying to beat me up for having made one mistake. If you think that the actress does not pass notability, you are of course free to nominate her article for deletion, and I will probably !vote Keep, but I don't think that is the issue. I am not sure what you don't get. I am not trying to continue to argue that they are the same person. When you said that they are different people, I agreed with your decline of the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC) - I did have a question about why you and Jamiebuba either did not notice that there was already an article with that title or did not disambiguate the draft until after I had tagged the draft for merge, but that is a secondary question that I am willing to pass over. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Robert: I still don't get why you are questioning anyone's thoughts over the actual actress, Caitlin McCarthy; they are irrelevant here. I'm not trying to beat anyone up, but you seem to be beating a dead horse. I think that you thought that the other reviewer and I must have seen that article and yet decided to decline the draft, when it seems clear to me that neither I nor the other reviewer saw that article and declined the draft on its own merits, or lack thereof. Nor do I understand all of this message. I didn't see any yellow banner with a message, and I'm assuming that the other editor didn't either. I don't know why that happened, maybe some bit fell over. BTW I agree that a draft with additional information could be merged into an existing article. Drmies (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:Drmies - I am not exactly sure what you don't get. I made one mistake, and that was thinking that they were the same person. I think that everything after that follows. I hope that you are not trying to beat me up for having made one mistake. The existing article, in my opinion, does establish acting notabiity. That guideline says that a person may be considered notable if
What counts as a secondary source?
Guess: a source not directed to the release of the film such as a part of a book about it. DareshMohan (talk) 07:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- User:DarsehMohan - Reviews are secondary sources. A newspaper account of production is a secondary source. There is seldom significant coverage or production itself, although there are often teasers saying that production has started or finished. There are only a few secondary sources about unreleased movies, which is one reason why they very seldom meet film notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)