Jump to content

User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive 34

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36→Archive 40

Draft:Malaysia to Amnesia

If you're rejecting Draft: Malaysia to Amnesia for not meeting requirements, then how the Malaysia to Amnesia meeting requirements and tagged with notability? And how that was moved into mainspace without submitted to draftspace or afc? Kirubar (talk) 08:03, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Robert McClenon, was trying to help -- VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 07:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Sunny Hinduja

The result was delete on 2019 but now as in 2021 the actor is a part of various notable projects. I request you to verify the article once again. And there is a redirect edit of 'sunny hinduja' to a movie project. If the result was delete then is it good to make a redirect to a project page. (talk) PangolinPedia 15:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Joseph Chetrit (linguist)

Hello If I understood right, your review today says: "Improvements have been made, but the issues previously identified are still present. Article relies heavily on non-independent sources." The sources I used are not non-independent - they are the university or other Hebrew sources materials that are not his own. I don't really know what should be done now. I think it is reliable with the sources I gave, Please advice. Please let me know which sources you find as non-independent. Thank you.Orlysi (talk) 14:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

User:Orlysi I didnt review the draft. That was a year ago. I moved-renamed the draft. It is waiting for a new review. ,McClenon mobile (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard

Thank you for your swift handling of the IIHF request I made in the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. I would just like to respond to a couple of things in your comments. I am not "forum shopping", I put this issue forward in good faith at RFA where two users suggested this belonged as a DR. I was not aware that I should wait for the conclusion there if it was inappropriate, I assumed it would be rendered null and void as such with immediate effect. The only reason I didn't list the users involved, which I diligently listed on the RFA page, is that I notice now that I overlooked the input field where users are supposed to be listed seperated by a comma. I just saw my own name and assumed this was sufficient. This is unintuitive in my view, but a simple mistake on my part, not done on purpose. For you information, I have already opened a RFC. Is there a problem with that, do you think? --Jabbi (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

To be clear. I am happy to withdraw and follow the suggestion you made at the RFA page. You do know your way around here. --Jabbi (talk) 00:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry

Hi Robert, I wanted to tell you that yesterday (before you tell me it's forbidden) I asked other Wikipedians to review the draft "Ezequiel Matthysse". And that I did not know that this was prohibited on wikipedia, forgive me for my mistake and please if you see another request of mine to review the draft, set the date well first please, I promise that since you notice me (now) I will not do the mistake I made, I'm really sorry, thanks for understanding Emat20211 (talk) 05:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Emat20211

Thanks!

I already deleted the section "personal life (viral video)" in the draft "Ezequiel Matthysse", thank you for your notice and recommendation, I hope that now the draft is fine :) Emat20211 (talk) 05:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Emat20211

Request on 13:30:45, 1 June 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by YNovakovic


Dear Robert,

Thank you for reviewing the article I've submitted for Afripedia. You have rejected the draft article and suggested I merge it with an already existing article: Afripedia Project. However, the subject of the article Afripedia I submitted and the already existing article Afripedia Project are not the same.

The already existing article Afripedia Project is an initiative organised by Wikimédia France, Institut Français, and the Agence universitaire de la Francophonie and "aims to expand offline Wikipedia access in French-speaking Africa, and encourage Africans to contribute to Wikipedia".

The Afripedia article I have suggested is a completely other initiative, a documentary series, as well as a platform that aims to bridge the gap of employment of diverse talents in creative industries across the globe. It is also run by different people and it is an active project, 2010-now, unlike the Afripedia Project.

To clarify this ambiguousness, the form

This page is about Afripedia. Not to be confused with Afripedia Project.

should help. I have resubmitted the article with the added form, please see if that solves the issue raised.

Many thanks,

User YNovakovic

YNovakovic (talk) 13:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Testpage

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Testpage, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 🐍Helen🐍 20:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I ask you for an advice

Can you explain to me which are the links that you say should be removed in Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse so that the article looks good? Could you give me more instructions so that the article looks good? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thevikingovikingo (talk • contribs) 18:46, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Thevikingovikingo - No. I do not intend to rewrite your article for you. If you want advice for new editors, you may ask at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse

Hello, I do not understand why the draft Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse has not yet been published, I have reviewed it and the article is fine with all its references, and the sports notable in this article is that he was amateur world champion of the WBC.

(I already know and understand that the article is waiting for the review and you have to be patient, but what I go to is that they review it and they always say that it is wrong, and I reviewed it lately and the article is good. Also in the Discussion page Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse is clear that there is no relationship with the subject of the article and no conflict of interest, along with the explanation of sports notability.

Emat20211 (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2021 (UTC)Emat20211

User:Emat20211 - Some editors have been waiting for four months for their drafts to be reviewed. Your draft has already been reviewed. Is there a reason why you think that either you or your draft are so special that they must be reviewed ahead of all other drafts? If so, please explain what your reason is for thinking that you are different and privileged. You have already been blocked once for making too many demands for a review. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
You say that you are not being paid. At this point, I no longer believe you. Paid editors make unreasonable demands more often than good-faith volunteer editors. You are likely to be blocked again, this time as a paid editor, if you do not stop harassing the reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Wired Productions Draft

Hello Robert - thank you for your feedback.

I understand one of the companies team originally tried to create with support from a couple of our community mods and understand all feedback that it reads too much like a product catalogue/sales text. Not the intention at all. The company just wanted a Wiki page due to the nature of our games and our notability increasing. Disclaimer, as per my page, I am a paid employee of Wired Productions. I have sought advice as you suggested, and I'm also very aware of your time given so far, so before I submit and I wanted to see if there was anything else you would advise. I completely removed all content and started from scratch, other than who the company is and the list of games that have been released. I looked at some of our peers, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curve_Digital for this more simple and topline information. Kind regards (NeilDavidB84 (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2021 (UTC))

User:NeilDavidB84 - You ask whether I have any more advice. No. I do not generally give advice to paid editors or corporate editors except to maintain a low profile and comply carefully with the disclosure requirements. I said that the company probably is notable as a publisher of video games, and it still is probably notable. However, your efforts to get an article on the company approved probably mean that you will wait much longer before you get an article accepted. My advice is to do nothing. I know that you are not likely to accept my advice. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


Hello. I'm sorry if I've offended you in any way. I've hopefully taken on board your comments, and my follow up before submitting again was to see if there was anything else I could do as more than wanting the page to be live, I wanted it to just be a wiki page / not be seen as propaganda or full of marketing BS. The page I've stripped right back to just when the company was founded and the games releases. thank you for your help (NeilDavidB84 (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2021 (UTC))

Articles for creation

I'm just informing you that I pinged you at AFC, but it didn't send. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

User:WikiCleanerMan - I am finished discussing at AFCHD and here. I have suggested Deletion Review. You may instead move the draft into article space, but that may get either a G4 or another AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Move Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse a Ezequiel Matthysse

Thanks for the notice sir! Could you move Draft:Ezequiel Matthysse to the article Ezequiel Matthysse please? Or give me instructions? Thank you Thevikingovikingo (talk) 20:26, 3 June 2021 (UTC)Thevikingovikingo

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Sanyogchourasia/Sanyog Kumar

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Sanyogchourasia/Sanyog Kumar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:37, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

This one is sillier than most. It appears that I have confused it by having moved an earlier version of the page into draft space five years ago. Duh. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:50, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Re-drafting from Mainspace to draft

Hi @Robert McClenon: How goes it? Would you happen to have any idea of what the latest consensus is, regarding drafting articles from mainspace to draft. Specifically this: Emily McWilliam. Seven of the 13 references are WP:SPS and three others are court reporting or dubious value. It has been some months since I've been at NPP. Possibly even a year. scope_creepTalk 18:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

User:scope_creep - I am not aware of a consensus. What I think comes closest to a consensus is that an article may be moved to draft space if the reviewer thinks that it is not ready for article space. However, if it is then moved back to article space, it should not be moved to draft space a second time, because double draftification is move-warring. If you do move an article to draft space, explain to the other what you want done. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:44, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Our Lady of Medjugorje draft

Thank you for creating a sandbox of this page for me personally. Would it be possible to create a sandbox of the actual page where each section has an edit button. Please delete the one that is there. thanks Red Rose 13 (talk) 20:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Red Rose 13 - Exactly what do you want in the sandbox and why? Each section does have an edit button. What is the problem, and what do you want? Robert McClenon (talk) 08:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I had the wrong page bookmarked. I see the correct one now and it does have edit buttons on it. Thank you! I book marked it.Red Rose 13 (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Isn't it required in WP:DRN to notify all involved parties?

Instead of using my talk page as to discuss an article, please use Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran. That's what article talk pages are for. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi Robert,

Something happened recently that I consider deceptive. @Stefka Bulgaria: started Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#People's_Mujahedin_of_Iran. But he failed to notify me about it. I have been a party to this dispute for a while (see Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#Meeting with Tariq Aziz). There was also ongoing discussion simultaneously happening at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#Sentence in the lede that I was taking part in. Then you closed the DRN request as "agreed to". Stefka then pretended that this meant consensus had been achieved. This seems like an abuse of process. Doesn't DRN require that all parties to a dispute be notified? In the future, someone could WP:FORUMSHOP by quietly starting a discussion at WP:DRN, not tell all parties, and then just pretend that "there is consensus". This doesn't seem right.

Note the page in question is under a special Wikipedia:Consensus required sanction, which El_C and Vanamonde93 are quite familiar with.VR talk 00:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not getting involved here; given that talk page discussions here always result in an impasse, going to DRN is perfectly fine. Whether the appropriate processes were followed there is not something I'm going to bother with, though I will note that pinging only a subset of the participants is not a good look for you, Stefka. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
@Vice regent: Can you show where you participated on my proposal prior to me posting at DRN? Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 18:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Stefka, I'm very close to topic-banning you solely for that comment. I don't care when which users joined a specific discussion. A consensus building exercise is meaningless if interested parties aren't invited. It is utterly implausible to argue that Vice regent and others were not interested parties. Are you going to DRN to build consensus, or to attempt an end-run around a talk-page impasse? That's a rhetorical question; don't answer it. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Stefka Bulgaria, User:Vice regent, User:Vanamonde93 - It appears that I made a mistake either in opening the DRN thread or in closing it as resolved. However, it also appears that there is wikilawyering and stonewalling going on in order to try to make consensus impossible, including objecting to RFCs. It is obvious that the next step is an RFC. I am willing to work with the parties to formulate an RFC, but otherwise have no interest (although I might become interested in having some of the parties topic-banned if the gaming continues). Let me know if you want help with an RFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Robert McClenon, yes, absolutely, there's a lot of stone-walling going on; but we've reached the point where the most egregious examples of it have been sanctioned, and my choices as an admin monitoring this are more or less TBANing everyone involved, or just sitting on my hands. Warnings have done diddly-squat. Feel free to help the protagonists formulate an RfC, but I'm not going to be holding my breath for a conclusive result. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Robert McClenon the problem with RfCs on that page is that most of the participants vote along WP:BATTLEGROUND lines. In at least 2 cases Stefka proposed text in an RfC that violated WP:V yet he kept receiving "support", "support", "support"... Eventually admins had to intervene and stop this (Diffs here). So either all of Stefka's supporters didn't bother to read the RfC before voting on it, or they were all comfortable violating WP:V - I honestly don't know which is worse. In another case, a user supporting Stefka flat out admitted that he didn't bother reading the RfC before voting in favor of Stefka. This is why discussion is preferable to RfCs.VR talk 02:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Vice regent - You state that discussion is preferable to RFCs when the participants !vote along battleground lines. Do you mean that you actually think that if your side continues to bludgeon the discussion long enough, they will persuade and win; or do you mean that discussion that ends in stalemate is better than an RFC because it accomplishes nothing? There should be discussion before there is an RFC, but you seem to be saying that discussion should continue until it reaches consensus. What do you think should be done if discussion is inconclusive? Also, do not use my talk page to criticize the conduct of other editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:07, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
If discussion is inconclusive, it should be moderated, then it will work. Look at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran#Iran-Iraq war: Vanamonde93 moderated that discussion and we finally made a breakthrough. Prior to that discussion there had actually been an RfC that ended in "no consensus" (Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran/Archive 39#RfC about removing contentious content from the lede). So RfC failed to achieve consensus, but moderated discussion helped achieve a breakthrough.VR talk 04:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
  • I was coming to ask why the DRN result had been allowed to be reverted and saw this. @Robert McClenon: you have it spot on. There are editors on the MEK talk page that are wikilawyering to prevent RFCs from being started. They are the same editors that bludgeon them to the point that nobody wants to close them (which inevitably lead to closing in "no consensus"). That's been the trend on the MEK talk page since I have been involved there (and the main reason why I became involved). If the DRN result has been nullified, then let's start a RFC. And yes please help us monitor the RFC to prevent this sort of GAMING from sabotaging them. Idealigic (talk) 07:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Vice regent, User:Idealigic - Discuss article content at article talk pages. That's what they're for. Discuss conduct of editors in editing article content either at article talk pages or at noticeboards. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Issue regarding drafts

You keep putting on your notes regarding draft pages of unreleased films to "wait until they release." I am honestly getting concerned with your methods of review. It's one thing to say to get enough info to be notable, and it's another to say to wait until released. Iamnoahflores (talk) 16:52, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Iamnoahflores - Most unreleased films become notable when they are released. The drafts that I decline with that notation are drafts that were submitted before they were notable because they had not yet been released. The criteria for notability of unreleased films are poorly written, but only a few films become individually notable before they are released. The large majority of unreleased films that are submitted before they are ready to be reviewed will not be notable until they are released. If you have questions about any specific film that I have declined, you are welcome to discuss it on the draft talk page. That is what draft talk pages are for. If you have any general questions about film notability guidelines, you are welcome to discuss them at the film notability talk page, and they should be discussed there, because the guidelines are poorly written. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Chicago 15 (protest group)

Hi. It's been a while since I edited this article, which I had found in draft. I saw your comments and agreed. I removed the offending OR sentences, cleaned it up and moved it to article space. I recall that the sourcing was enough to sustain notability. Let me know if you have other thoughts on the article. Thanks, --- Possibly (talk) 07:56, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Possibly - I agree. You forgot to add a hatnote to the album. I had left a comment on the draft saying that a hatnote should be added. I have taken care of that. Robert McClenon (talk) 08:07, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Pir Muhammad Khan

Thank you for letting me know about the redirect. I checked that page and can assure you that both pages are about different people. The existing page 'Pir Muhammad Khan' redirects to the page of Pir Muhammad Mirza, who was a Timurid ruler, while my draft article is about a senior Mughal official. The titles of Timurid rulers includes 'Mirza' but not 'Khan', so 'Pir Muhammad Khan' is a misnomer for the Timurid ruler and can be safely used as the article name for the Mughal official. Uchiha Madara 17 (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

"Afripedia" and "Afripedia Project" are two unrelated projects

A friend contacted me in relation with you having declined their submission of Draft:Afripedia, for which you're proposing a merger with Afripedia Project. He asked me to contact you because this seems to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding. These are two separate, fully unrelated projects with no connection to each other than the similar name. Afripedia Project is an intra-Wikipedia project about increasing Wikipedia use and awareness in francophone Africa, now defunct, based in metropolitan France. Draft:Afripedia is a (non-Wiki) encyclopedic database of African creative professionals, still active, based in Sweden.

There may be other issues with the proposed article (tends towards advert, may need language review) but it's a separate subject that seems to meet notability guidelines and deserves to have a page. Birdseeding (talk) 13:10, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dowsing 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 07:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Draftifying articles to User space

Hello, Robert,

I look at CSD categories and User:JJMC89 bot/report/Draftifications/daily and I wanted to ask you why you move articles into your own personal User space rather than Draft space. I've never seen an editor do that before unless they were taking responsibility for revising an article and I don't know whether you have asked the page creators about this. I don't see why you wouldn't use Draft space for developing articles that you didn't create. For example, you moved Izuku Midoriya to User:Robert McClenon/Izuku Midoriya and then had that page deleted, erasing the page history. I don't see any other editors doing this so I hope you can offer an explanation. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Liz - Yes. I will explain as soon as I am at my desk and my computer. McClenon mobile (talk) 02:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Liz - Yes. Those are not articles, but redirects. They are redirects to another article, when a draft was submitted that was ready for acceptance, except that the redirect was blocking the move, so that a round-robin move is needed to accept the draft. I then accepted the draft, which moves it into article space, and the redirect that was now in user space could be G6d. I could instead move the redirect into draft space, and would have to disambiguate it somehow, since there already is a draft. In either case, the redirect will then be G6d. The usual approach to a redirect and a draft that needs to be done if the reviewer is not a page mover is to tag the redirect for Move. This approach has two minor disadvantages. First, obviously, one waits a few hours for an admin to delete the redirect. Second, more subtly, the admin who deletes the redirect then completes the move of the draft into article space. This would seem to be what the reviewer was requesting. So why is it a slight complication? Because often the admin does not have the AFC script, and just does a Move, and maybe some cleanup. In fact, the AFC script does a considerable amount of housekeeping, and having an admin move the page into article space seems to be the right thing, and is almost the right thing, and there is still cleanup by the reviewer. So that is why I do a round-robin move rather than just tagging the redirect for CSD. If you would prefer that I move the redirect to draft space with a special tag, I can do that instead. I said that I would explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Hyojung

I would appreciate any feedback you have on this? Draft:Hyojung --Btspurplegalaxy (talk) 03:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Help: Draft:Scott Ferguson (musician

Hi Robert McClenon, Thank you for helping to disambiguate Draft:Scott Ferguson (musician), however can you help me by moving it to Draft:Scott Ferguson (record producer) instead?? It was my novice page creation mistake and that was my original intention. That title is most accurate, due to the nature of the content. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by DTLA357 (talk • contribs) DTLA357 (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft : Yalgaar

Hi i saw your comments on my Draft Yalgaar u said that topic is not notable please review this again there are enough indipendent, reliable sources like The Indian Express, Republic world, The Economic Times and many more sources talking about this thanku. Ramesh012 (talk) 07:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Dirichlet Character

Thanks.

I didn't realize I was attempting to create a new page. My intention was to have someone review my draft, mainly for Wiki standards (I'm out of practice editing) rather than for content (this submission is, IMO, a big improvement over the existing article) and then replace the existing article. A number of years ago, posting as Virginia-American, I replaced several math articles, including Quadratic Reciprocity and Arithmetic Function.

I put a note in the talk page for Dirichlet character with a link to the draft article. Curious what the editors following that article have to say.

James in dc (talk) 04:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User:James in dc - Why were you using a different account than you are now using? Robert McClenon (talk) 13:12, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
User:James in dc - I looked at the sandbox article on Arithmetic function and the main article. It appears that what you did was to add sections to the existing article, and that neither you nor anyone else replaced the article. Replacing articles is not normally done. I also looked at the articles on Quadratic reciprocity in article space and in your sandbox, and I do not see any replacement, but a history of edits. I would suggest that, if there are articles on mathematical topics that should be expanded or replaced, you discuss them with other mathematicians at WikiProject Mathematics. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again. I could have sworn I'd replaced those articles; I know I completely re-wrote them.

James in dc (talk) 15:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Gerda Arendt - Does this belong to someone else? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Gerda Arendt - Okay. I figured it out. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Motörhead 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 18:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard 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 06:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

merging draft with article

Your routine message says: "This appears to be an expanded version of an existing article on C11orf49. Articles for Creation is not used to request that a newer version of an article replace an existing version, even if the newer version is more complete. You may edit the existing article, and you can discuss the edits at the article talk page, Talk:C11orf49." Whatever advice we might want to give the newcomers, the best way I know to preserve the edit history is to accept the draft version under a variant title, and then merge or replace from the draft version, giving the link. Can you see anything wrong with that? DGG ( talk ) 19:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User:DGG - I hadn't thought of accepting a draft under a variant title. That seems like a good idea. The draft and article that you mention seems familiar, but I think it is one that I dealt with a few weeks or months ago, in a different highly technical field than the one that I just replied to with almost the same message. Did you mean to be referring to C11orf49, or to Dirichlet character, or both? I will comment more on your comment shortly. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
yes, you and others have used that advice before, and I've always meant to ask you. This was just the most recent time I saw it-, and it was months ago you said it--I saw it now in checking imminent G13 deletions. I didn't mean to discuss the article here. DGG ( talk ) 06:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Editing news 2021 #2

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Junior contributors comment completion rate across all participating Wikipedias
When newcomers had the Reply tool and tried to post on a talk page, they were more successful at posting a comment. (Source)

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

  • Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
  • The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Detroit Will Breathe

Deny?: That article in mainspace was a copy of the draft that did not preserve history as a move would do. this is a mess made by "experienced" editors not the original editor that asked for the review. —¿philoserf? (talk) 19:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Commented here with some detail. I am about to go seek out the correct promotion process and how to fix this mess. Draft talk:Detroit Will Breathe —¿philoserf? (talk) 19:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
FTR: Requested the move fix here: Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests —¿philoserf? (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft: 2021 British Grand Prix rebsubmission

I have rebsubmitted my draft article for the 2021 British Grand Prix and done so exactly a month before the race to avoid a topic bsn as you warned me about if it was resubmitted more than a month in advance. Please take a look--Engine V10R (talk) 11:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

AfC Donald Wolf

Firstly thanks for taking the time to look at Draft:Donald Wolf yesterday. Batternut (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Draft talk:Donald Wolf#Notability. Batternut (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Nikola Karev DRN

First- sorry for accidently archiving part of your talk page- I self-reverted. I haven't had coffee yet and meant to hit edit. Second- I don't mind moderating the Nikola dispute, I read the talk page in question yesterday, but wasn't able to read the article until this morning (the talk page was.... a lot), but I don't mind handling it if you don't want to- I know you've done a lot of the big contentious ones lately. Nightenbelle (talk) 13:22, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Nightenbelle - Thank you. I hadn't noticed the accidental archiving. Your mention of archiving did cause me to check the history of my talk page, and I see that posts made in April are now being auto-archived by a bot. I had set that up in April to archive posts that are more than two months old, so the auto-archiving is working as coded. So that is good. I don't know what sort of stimulant bots rely on.
If you are willing to handle the Nikola dispute, that is appreciated. As I noted, there are five editors, and so far only two of them have made statements. Any discussion with two or three of them will be useful for setting up an RFC, and at this point I don't expect the other editors to reply, so all that can be done is to set up an RFC. Yes, that is another dispute where some of the editors apparently repeat the same statements too many times. I have found that the best way to handle such a dispute is to tell the editors to start with a concise statement. This often gets a long statement. The next step is to tell the editors again to be concise. After all, if the dispute is resolved by an RFC, the RFC should include one or more concise statements as to what the question is. So if you want to handle that dispute, thanks.
The Sri Lankan Civil War dispute has been archived without action. I think it will come back, and it is now a dispute that the community failed to handle, so it may go to ArbCom. In that case, ArbCom will likely argue over whether the editors should be topic-banned or site-banned, and I do not expect survivors.
I am working on an album notability dispute at Deletion Review. Music disputes, both pop music and classical music, can be very unpleasant. I suppose you recall the dispute over the sexuality of Frederic Chopin, which ended in No Consensus, but one of the editors has been banned. (If they couldn't agree about Chopin, they should have put on a recording of Beethoven or Liszt.)
It seems like summer has made people extra snippy. Yeah I'll work on an RFC with the participating editors- I probably won't start it until later this afternoon or evening, but I'll get it taken care of. Nightenbelle (talk) 14:54, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Nightenbelle - I think it is the stress of the pandemic that has made people difficult, but music disputes are always very unpleasant (and ought not to be so unpleasant, as opposed to disputes due to nationalism, where editors are fighting edit-wars because there is a history of wars). Robert McClenon (talk) 02:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:45, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Omlet Arcade

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

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Liz - Thank you for using Twinkle when it strikes again. At least this time it didn't say that I could request to save the draft that I don't remember moving from a sandbox to draft space. Did it also notify the creator of the sandbox? Robert McClenon (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

New AfC approval, Johnny Swaim copyvio

Johnny Swaim AfC was approved yesterday, almost bereft of citations. I tagged several sections, which brought only a few citations... so I tagged each "fact" with the cn tag, an a few more citations were supplied. Then I noticed the table in the Head coaching section had this statement in lieu of a citation: "Provided by CBB at Sports Reference: View Original Table Generated 6/21/2021." Unfortunately, both those sites have the copyright notice, "All rights reserved."

Is RevDelthe the next step? Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:07, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to Primefac I have been enlightened about WP:NONCREATIVE and the table is restored. I'd still appreciate your take on the AfC approval with so few citations. I'm relatively new at AfC approving roles, but I thought we required better sourcing? or maybe I'm just an old curmudgeon? Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:30, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth II 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 22:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:F. Murray Abraham 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 01:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:F. Murray Abraham 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 07:30, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "Wikipedia proposals" 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 13:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Robert, thank you for taking the time to go through a draft I submitted for review, as well as an article I created.

Concerning my draft, it was denied approval on grounds of notability, or a lack thereof. 1) There is significant coverage of the subject, multiple articles about numerous exhibitions and events, interviews.. The sources are secondary, independent of the subject, and reliable. They're some of the most reputable and well-known fashion publications (Vogue, Harper's Baazar, Glass Magazine). I have just uncovered some articles published by BBC and The Guardian that might help.

As a creative professional, Surridge's work has been a substantial part of significant exhibitions including multiple Milan and New York fashion weeks, receiving critical acclaim. He is highly regarded as a designer and one could argue that he's played a major role in what multiple high-end fashion houses have been putting out these past two decades.

I believe he meets the notability standards for a creative individual. What would you advise me to add to the article?

Concerning my article "MISBHV"

The issues brought up were 1) notability and 2) article may be written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view.

1) Again, there is significant coverage of the subject, multiple articles. The sources are secondary, independent of the subject, and reliable. They're some of the most reputable and well-known fashion publications (Vogue, Complex, Highsnobiety, WWD, Flaunt Magazine, Love Magazine, DAZED). It is a very well known brand.

2) Yes, I am a fan, but I was unable to find anything in the article that seemed subjective or promotional. "The duo earned its stripes within the fashion scene" might not be formulated the right way, but it was by no means meant to be subjective. Is that what I should change? What in the article isn't neutral?

Once again, I appreciate your time!

Requesting feedback on Draft:Moghbazar Blast 2021

Hello there @Robert McClenon I have created a draft on this recent event Draft:Moghbazar Blast 2021 mind having a look at it? Thanks Suryabeej   ⋠talk⋡ 07:45, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

DRV formatting

Hi Robert, hope you are well! I made these minor changes to your extensive DRV contribution, only because the headers were causing some formatting issues. Hope this is OK, let me know if any issues. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 23:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Daniel - Okay. I didn't know that subheaders caused a problem in DRV. They don't cause a problem in MFD or AFD, for instance, but MFD and AFD are organized by filename, rather than by day. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:33, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Andreas Müller-Pohle feedback

Dear Robert, thank you for adding the templates re the legibility of the lead and the hagiographic language to my machine translation of Andreas Müller-Pohle from the German and French WP articles. In response I've re-written the lead and moderated the 'fan-speak' and unsupported claims. Can you check please if there are other issues. I am working through to add proper referencing and have included a template re the list of exhibitions which require references and sorting into solo and group shows as is a norm on artist bios. I appreciate your attention to detail, Jamesmcardle(talk) 01:27, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Some basic questions:

I have serviced several Dell Inspiron 3668s used in an industrial environment. This is a really good PC.

In order to give you better advice I would like to know the following:

You say "What games? What streaming videos? Streaming videos are Generation X or Y stuff. I just have a lot of browser windows and a lot of Word documents and Access databases open." This is good. Your computer is at least 10x faster than it needs to be for doing that. It also has a reputation for reliability in an office environment

Questions:

  • Microsoft Office or LibreOffice? Latest versions or something older?
      • I am using Microsoft Office, and it is my intention to use the latest version, because when I am prompted to pick up upgrades, I pick up upgrades.
  • Latest version of Windows 10 or something older?
      • It is my intention to use the latest version of Windows 10. My PC gets restarted at night occasionally.
  • What browser?
      • All of them. I use Firefox for Wikipedia, because it has a feature that if I have a very large number of tabs, they are all standard width, and I have to scroll through them, rather than shrinking them all to fit on the screen. I haven't decided whether I want to use Chrome or Opera to read the news and to browse web sites, and sometimes I use one and sometimes the other. I occasionally use Microsoft Edge. I know that I shouldn't have three of them open at once, because then I run into a problem with memory. As a former computer performance analyst, I know that memory is far more often what constrains performance than CPU speed.
  • How are you backing up your data? Are you doing complete system backups or just the data?
      • I have a 1 TB detachable storage device. I have backed up the entire system, but normally what I do is to back up the data. At this point the detachable storage device has 760 GB in use and 240 GB free, because I have multiple backups of the data on no particular schedule.
  • Original hard drive? How close to being full is it?
      • Yes, original hard drive. 139 GB in use. 778 GB free. After all, I am not storing video on it.
  • Is your monitor plugged in to the VGA port or the HDMI port?
  • Do all the tests at [ https://www.dell.com/support/home/en-us/product-support/product/inspiron-3668-desktop/diagnose ] complete without errors? Anything giving you trouble? Flaky DVD or floppy (assuming you use them)?
      • I haven't tried, but will. I have not had any flakiness with the flash drives.
  • Are you able -- or do you have a friend who is able -- to open up a computer case and put in a new video cards or hard drive? Or is there a PC repair shop in town? At the very least someone needs to blow out the dust once in a while.
      • No as to opening the case or having a friend open the case. Yes, there are multiple repair shops available.
  • Are you budget constrained? is $20 too much to pay for an upgrade?
      • I can manage $20. But for what?
  • Are you in a position where having your PC break down would be a disaster or just an inconvenience? If it absolutely has to work, I usually recommend getting a spare (they run around $300 used) and switching between them every couple of months.
      • I would feel like having it break down was a disaster, except that I would then use my laptop, which I otherwise use for occasional travel and for Zoom.

--Guy Macon (talk) 00:38, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Since you said, in response to someone else, not to ping you, I will not ping you. I am inserting my replies. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the answers. I want to give you the best advice I can.
I am going to think about this some more, but here are my preliminary thoughts:
  • I have a bad feeling about downgrading the video drivers. If the new version is buggy, the older version is likely to be buggy in different ways. I am thinking a video card would be a better solution. One that will do everything you need costs around $16 with free shipping. If we choose wisely (I love pouring over hardware reviews) , the new hardware will have rock-solid video drivers.
  • That PC came stock with a writable DVD drive. If your PC has one you could pop in a rewritable disk and save your most important work there. That would give you three backups at a minimum cost. You could even keep a DVD in your car or at work in case the building burns down taking all your backups with it. Or you could do the same with a cheap USB thumb drive.
  • The only other issue I can see is that you are depending on a glass disk spinning 7200 revolutions per minute with a head flying a few millionths of an inch from the surface. [1] See Head crash. A solid state drive would be far more reliable, put out less heat, would be silent, and would have no moving parts to wear out. a 500GB drive would cost around $50 new and you could keep your existing mechanical drive (your Dell has a place to mount both) as drive D:. That makes it super easy to move your data to the new C: drive. In this configuration drive D: would not spin up until you needed it, so it should last practically forever. (Same with your external drive; it spends most of the time powered down instead of spinning and wearing out the bearings).
More later. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on PC Configuration

This section will be supplied within 24 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Guy Macon - I will ping you after all. Thank you. The advice that you have given me is useful with regard to a different concern than I had originally written about. I had originally been asking about what was causing DWM.exe to consume several megabytes of memory and slow the system down due to swapping. My questions were what was causing this, and whether it is safe to kill DWM.exe and let it respawn. I was told that one cause of the memory saturation might be bugs in the video driver. The advice that you have given me isn't about that, and your advice seems to be to leave the video drivers alone.
The useful advice that I see is to get a solid-state device installed in my PC, which will be more reliable than the rotating device. I think that I will do that within the next few months. I do have a question about drive letters. If I get the solid-state device, then it becomes the C: drive, and the existing device becomes the D: drive. Is that correct? Does that mean that the DVD drive becomes the E: drive? (Yes, I do have the DVD drive. I have used it as a CD-ROM drive to load software. Will putting in a second disk cause the flash drive to become the F: drive and the external disk to become the G: drive?

Thank you for the analysis. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:14, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Corporate notability

Hi Robert and thanks for reviewing the article. Could you please be more specific on what changes should be made? Any links on this topic with precise examples. Thank you! Goldstriker (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

About [[History merged to 2021 Ginetta Junior Championship]]

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give [[:History merged to 2021 Ginetta Junior Championship]] a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Draft:2021 Ginetta Junior Championship. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

User:JJMC89 - Now I am confused. Twinkle strikes again in that it gives a useless warning message when I didn't do anything, or at least nothing applicable. Can you tell me what I did that caused me to get this weird message:? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:20, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Nothing you did. I mistakenly chose the wrong G6 in the menu. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:33, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Emma Heesters

Hey Robert McClenon please help me to improve it, thanks a lot for giving me advices.--Abhilasha Will (talk) 15:49, 3 July 2021 (UTC)


Deprodding of Draft:Rok A Fela

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Draft:Rok A Fela, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! There was a warning note not to PROD drafts, only articles --Tautomers(T C) 19:21, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:In the news 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 14:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geodoawraphy request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox UK place on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Economy of Taiwan 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 17:30, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:23, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Women in Red

Hi there, Robert, and congratulations on commemorating your first edit day, way back in 2005. As you spend much of your editing time on reviewing articles, you might be interested to know that Women in Red is currently trying to help reduce the AfC backlog and encourage editors who have failed to write successful articles about women to seek our assistance. It would be useful if you could draw our attention to any borderline cases which you think we might be able to help with. Keep up the good work. I realize how important it is to review articles from new contributors but we should try to encourage them to maintain their interest. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Javier Iturriaga del Campo

I have considerably improved Gral. Iturriaga's article with history and sources. Please, review it.

Greetings. --Carigval.97 (talk) 19:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robert_McClenon/Archive_34&oldid=1042550671"