User talk:Dclemens1971/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Hello, Dclemens1971

Thank you for creating St. John's Parish (Quincy, Illinois).

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for creating Church of the Holy Communion (Dallas). User:Bruxton, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for contributing to the project!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bruxton}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bruxton (talk) 23:33, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Anglican Network in Europe. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Richard Lipka. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 04:11, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my reversions; didn't see you maintained the correct text on the front end. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

No worries! Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Who are you? I see you added William Jenkins to the ACNA Bishops list. I’m just wondering who put his name there. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KDJ3517 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Bishop Seabury Anglican Church. User:Reading Beans, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Reading Beans}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Reading Beans (talk) 05:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Parish Church of St. Helena. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating this article! Hopefully you will keep creating more!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Ted Follows (bishop). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article! Hopefully you can write more. Good day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 10:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Re: your putting Joni in Category:American Reformed Episcopalians - I'm wondering whether you have evidence that she has belonged to that denomination in recent decades? It would hardly be fair to put her there just because she was brought up and confirmed there, and later expressed apprecation of the pastor who had served her church back then. I think that for some years she was at Grace Community Church, but by 2013 she was a "former member" - see Strange Fire Conference: Joni Eareckson Tada - but was evidently still on good terms with Grace's pastor John MacArthur. In fact in 2006 she had written that she was "a PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) church member now" - see Turning Evil on Its Head, and by 2017 she had been at a PCA congregation for "more than two decades" - see More than inspirational. In the light of this I will reverse your edit unless I hear back from you in the next couple of days. PeterR2 (talk) 19:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Anglican Church of the Good Samaritan is a very good article. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 03:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

What is your basis for deleting his speaking engagement from November 2020 and corresponding archive.org link with his biography and other featured speakers? Loose canon (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

It lacks context for why it is relevant or significant. For all articles, and BLPs especially, information must not only be sourced; it must have context for why it is included. See WP:CHERRY. Please discuss on Talk:Foley Beach, not here.

I also suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:BLPCOI. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on St. Paul's Cathedral (Valparaíso). User:Netherzone, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for creating the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Netherzone}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Netherzone (talk) 03:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I didn’t add this drawing because I’m not sure the licensing is correct since it’s an artist rendering with no credit given. Do you think it’s free to use? APK whisper in my ear 22:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Since it's been uploaded to Commons, I default to "yes," unless a user wants to challenge the validity of the license. The uploader is listed as "Christendom College" so it would be likely to be a college-owned image uploaded according to the terms of the CC license. Obviously the copyright arrangements between the illustrator, architecture firm and client would be unknown so I would assume the uploader is licensing the image in good faith. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Owain.davies, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, List of Reformed Theological Seminary people, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Reformed Theological Seminary people.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Owain.davies}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 10:18, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on John Stephens (bishop). Bastun, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hi Dclemens, nice work on your new article. I would suggest adding it to appropriate Wikiprojects, such as Biography and Anglicanism, and adding a 'photo' needed' template. Good job!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971. Thank you for your work on Sione Uluʻilakepa. Moriwen, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Appreciating your good work on Anglican articles like this one! I'm usually over on the Catholic articles myself, and it always bothers me how much less coverage there is on other denominations.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Moriwen}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

— Moriwen (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of recipients of the Order of Jamaica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Howard Gregory.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting the false information about my resignation. Most appreciated. Did the Anglican Communion Office ask you to correct that?

Again, thank you. 200.68.170.59 (talk) 21:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

No. I have no affiliation or communication with the Anglican Communion Office or any related body. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi there!

The federal Judiciary just gave a sentence that suspends the government opinion that Treviño is the legal representative and Primate based on gross irregularities and violation of canon law in the "election" of Treviño back in 2022. Therefore legally Moreno is the Primate.

Where can I send you the backing document?

My email jc.martin at hot mail dot com 200.68.169.88 (talk) 21:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

To make a change to the Wikipedia page, we would need independent, reliable, secondary sources -- ideally reporting in news/media outlets -- instead of judicial opinions (which would be original research) or Facebook links. If you have any links you can share, English or Spanish, I will take a look. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Let me ask the lawyer...how to upload the document or create a link... It is not a legal opinion, it is a sentence issued by a federal judge. 2806:2F0:7521:F4E9:5490:7F02:696C:B3D8 (talk) 06:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to review these articles in AfD, especially taking the time to disambiguate between the references to the parent company vs. the exchange. I know that must've been nontrivial effort on your part. I've also incorporated the journal article that you identified into the MIAX Pearl article. Cara Wellington (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Participating in AfD is labor-intensive if we do it right! Thanks for the kind words. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens1971, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for reviewing my Jeff Johnson article. I noticed you deleted a significant chunk of my edits due to copyright violation. I put this on the article's talk page, but the Archives West finding aid is CC0, meaning it is public domain. I added the text back because I do not believe it constitutes a copyright violation on Wikipedia. Mathieulalie (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mathieulalie I see that now in the endnotes. The article does not follow the WP convention for noting the use of open license material - see instructions here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Adding_open-license_text_to_Wikipedia. Also, I am going to give some time for you or other editors to add more independent, secondary sources, but right now the sources in the article don't support notability for the subject. I would anticipate sending this to Articles for Deletion for a discussion in the next couple weeks if appropriate sources aren't identified. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Could you please explain what specifically the article needs to achieve notability? According to the Wikipedia notability guidelines for biographies, there must be multiple independent reliable sources. I believe the article meets that standard, as I have included excerpts from his biography on the finding aid and multiple articles about him from independent sources. The only time the article relies on primary sources are in quotes or paraphrased quotes. Mathieulalie (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Mathieulalie Quick walk through the footnotes: 1/5. Oral histories and personal papers are primary sources (Johnson talking about himself), which cannot be used to verify notability. (If someone else wrote the bio of him, then maybe that's different but it would depend on who wrote the bio, and the default conclusion from the site's language is that the bio originated with him.) You can use this to verify uncontroversial facts but not for notability. 2/7. Ballotpedia is a user-generated source and questionable for notability. 3/9. The Stand is non-independent as a publication of the organization Johnson led and thus unusable for validating notability. 6/8. NW Labor Press is the equivalent of a trade publication, which doesn't go toward notability. See WP:TRADES. Only source 10, the News-Tribune piece, constitutes significant, independent, secondary, reliable coverage of Johnson. Some of these sources can be used to verify information, but only one points to notability and we would need to see more like that. Please review WP:GNG and WP:NBIO for more. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. To clarify about the biography from the finding aid, it was not written by Johnson himself, it was written independently by the staff of the Labor Archives of Washington and University of Washington Special Collections (as was everything else in the finding aid). Does that make it qualify for notability? Mathieulalie (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Likely not. First, the source would need to specify the author. Second, I would question the independence of the anyone at the Labor Archives of Washington as a source for this topic, since the organization that Johnson led is listed as a major funder of the archives and Johnson was himself a director of the organization (https://labor.washington.edu/labor-archives#about). The more I look into this, the less likely this subject can be proven notable using the Labor Archives biographical material. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971,

I was wondering why you converted this article to a redirect when we also have a valid article at 2026 Asian Games. Are the Para Games somehow less important? That AFD you are basing this decision on occurred 6 years ago and this event is now only 2 years away. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:49, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Are there multiple independent, secondary, reliable sources on it yet? Didn't see any in the 2026 Asian Para Games article (or elsewhere, as I'd expect for an event still two years in the future). I do see those sources for the 2026 Asian Games so it makes sense there's a free-standing article. It would be customary to at least have a discussion on the talk page before reverting a decision made at AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens1971,

I have a draft thats pending review about a Grade 2 listed building in the UK. Under WP:GEOFEAT, any listed heritage building is notable. I have followed instructions of a previous reviewer to alter the text to be about the building more rather than the boarding house, and he has asked for a second reviewer. Perhaps you can help? Thank you very much, especially for your review of my article Lumina Shanghai. Daftation 🗩 🖉 10:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Reply to your message about WP:NPROF. You said that the student-run paper would not qualify as a notability requirement, but #6 in the specific criteria says otherwise. Am I misinterpreting that? I might be Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 13:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Yoblyblob Number 6 at that link says "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society." That would be university president, which he wasn't? Did you mean to link something else? The governing policy on student-run media is at WP:RSSM, where it says: "However, given their local audience and lack of independence from their student body, student media does not contribute to notability for topics related to home institutions." That is, a student paper cannot be used to say a person at that institution is notable. Hope this is helpful. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens,

Another question on the draft again - I've looked through tons of documents now, even paper archaeological reports of the Grove from 1986, I cannot find any accounts on when it is built. According to the listed building entry of the Grove, it shows it is built in the mid 18th century, but according to the documents I am reading, the building is referred as a different building to the original, but it never says what year it was constructed. Should I just go for the listed building entry and say it is built c.1750? Daftation 🗩 🖉 17:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Ive also added a few secondary sources which should push up the notability. I will cite some paper sources later. Daftation 🗩 🖉 17:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens,

Thanks for your failed verification tag. I have now found some evidence that the building date is actually unknown, cited in the introduction. I don't know if this is enough for it to be moved to the article space. There is literally nothing out there that tells me the date of construction. Is it possible if you leave a comment this time if it still isn't ready on what needs to be improved? Thanks, and sorry for bothering you about this draft for so long. Daftation 🗩 🖉 19:15, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello Dclemens,

I just added substance to the article Draft:American history wars that you removed a few days ago for lack of evidencing. Maybe you could take a look and see if it is sufficient? If there's anything else you want me to change or add, let me know. I didn't remove anything already there, and some of that may need tweaks.

Thanks! User409584302 (talk) 02:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that you nominated Voice Of Life for deletion. Instead of wanting it removed, just improve it... Aikolugbara (talk) 09:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:AmericanBankersAssociationLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of female Anglican bishops, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of New Westminster.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 530 B Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Story.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		This award is given in recognition to Dclemens1971 for accumulating at least 500 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dclemens1971,

You were the nominator of this AFD discussion. You should not have closed the discussion unless you were withdrawing your nomination. Please do not do this again in the future. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry @Liz - it looks like I misunderstood the speedy keep provision for non-admin closures and I see my mistake now. Won't happen again and I appreciate your bringing it to my attention. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

You mentioned in an AfD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nana Wanjau that you were unable to access a Gale database. Perhaps you could access Gale databases through your local public or college library. If you live in one community and work in another, you might be able to get a library card in the community where you work in the event that your work community's library has access to online databases that your home library does not. I mention this because public libraries sometimes offer access to non-residents who work in their community. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! I just wanted to say my thanks the comments you'd left on the draft I had been writing for PAR Technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PAR_Technology

Given that your comments were direct, specific and helpful, I was able to use your advice to fundamentally re-write the article to be a bit more short and succinct.

Thanks again! LeLiPAR (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diocese of the Great Lakes (UECNA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of the Great Lakes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Qaline was a prominant Somali artist, musician, and singer. If you unhaby with this article, delete of all them 154.115.222.186 (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I came across this in New Page Review, reviewed the sources and did a WP:BEFORE search a determined this subject does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

(“There’s an inner circle of the Michael Jordan(s) of signature-gatherers. I’m not trying to toot my own horn, but I am one of them.").

Please tell us what makes you an MJ of petitioners?

Thank you Alympia Firnanda.Reena (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@Firnanda.Reena: It was in quotation marks because I was quoting Arenza Thigpen's comments on himself. I never said that about me; please read carefully! Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

This is what the editor is referring to, I'm guessing. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arenza Thigpen Jr. (2nd nomination) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens1971, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! – Joe (talk) 12:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Joe! Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:14, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens1971, I want to discuss having a skeptical approach to editing wikipedia. ( if there is a more appropriate place to have this discussion then I'd be happy to discuss moving this there. )

My view as someone with more than a passing interest in preserving the history of a schoolyard game is that it benefits wikipedia to record encyclopaedic knowledge across the broad spectrum of human experience.

I do like the skeptical approach generally but I do think it has its limitations and can at times be detrimental to encyclopaedic knowledge where it seeks to discredit a kids schoolyard game for example. In comparison, a skeptical approach of a wikipedia page contributor who benefits from listing their business details on the page they created on the other hand is very useful and helpful in maintaining wikipedia standards.

Let me know your thoughts perhaps? Rockycape (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

There's lots of useful knowledge in the world. Wikipedia is one place where it can be collected, but only under certain circumstances. I don't doubt that you and/or your kids play some variation of a recess game called "down-ball," but what we've asked you to do in the AfD discussion is to provide secondary, independent, reliable sources to validate this claim. The sources you've provided indicate that the term refers to other games or to the game downball, not some other game. You've also offered your personal experience and videos that you have personally uploaded. Wikipedia's core policies include no original research and verifiability, which means we need more than what you've provided. It's not "skepticism"; it's the way this site is built and anyone who wants to come into this community needs to play by those rules. Those are my thoughts. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Dclemens1971 - can you provide any further direction on what level of proof/evidence is acceptable? What are your thoughts on the proof/evidence of the existing page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopscotch? Is there another existing page that you think demonstrates sufficient proof/evidence? Rockycape (talk) 03:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

If you cannot tell the difference between the sourcing on Hopscotch and the sourcing on your "down-ball" page, I do not think it will be productive to continue this conversation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

There is no need to be rude and I don't appreciate it. Rockycape (talk) 03:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

It is perfectly fine for an editor to state that the utility of a particular conversation has been exhausted. I do not see any rudeness here, just a commonsense attempt to save valuable time of all editors involved. Викидим (talk) 07:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Remember that you too were once a newcomer. Treat others as you were treated (or, probably, wish you had been treated) when you first arrived. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers Rockycape (talk) 22:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

See my reply to you at User talk:Викидим#Improve, don't remove. One more advice to newcomer: try to keep each discussion in one place, see WP:MULTI. Викидим (talk) 00:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

As of today the Down-ball AfD and Down-ball article has been deleted without warning. There was no consensus reached and the AfD had recently been re-listed to gain consensus. Back to the drawing board I guess. If I create this page as a draft is that acceptable to Dclemens1971 ? Rockycape (talk) 02:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

My page Down-ball existed for about two weeks before it was deleted. That's not a lot of time for a newcomer to get their article up to scatch. Now time I would have spent getting the article up to scratch is being diluted by trying to navigate the AfD and now the Deletion Review. Another Editor kindly informed me the Deletion Review would be likely decided in a week. Rockycape (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rockycape Please don't claim to be a newcomer; we can all see that you have been active on Wikipedia since 2018. You appear unwilling to receive feedback from a variety of other editors who have all engaged with you in good faith, and you have bludgeoned discussions at AfD and on user talk pages trying in vain to make the same point without reference to others' perspectives. I don't think it's productive for this conversation to continue at this point. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm certainly a newcomer in regard to my experience in that it's my first time participating in a AfD and now a Deletion Review. My experience is limited to creating a page back in 2018 and now a page in 2024 both of which are on the record. I get concerned when you speak as "we" so perhaps peak for yourself Dclemens1971. Happy to leave this particular discussion there as per your preference. Rockycape (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

"We ... all" is an inclusive we here. Everyone (including you) can check the history of edits indeed. So Dclemens1971 does not speak for any particular group here, just makes a factually correct statement. Викидим (talk) 00:27, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

You may want to read Wikipedia:NOTEARWIG. Earwig is wonderful, but it has some pretty severe limitations. Hopefully you find this helpful in the future! In the end, I did end up referring Desert fortresses of Judaea to copyright problems pending presumptive deletion after finding that some material had been blatantly lifted from one of the PDF sources. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 03:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up @GreenLipstickLesbian. Appreciate the PSA. Dclemens1971 (talk) Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dclemens1971, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.

This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:

• Add Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers to your watchlist to follow NPP-related discussions
• If you use Twinkle, configure it to log your CSDs and PRODs
• If you can read any languages other than English, add yourself to the list of reviewers with language proficiencies

You can find a list of other useful links and tools for patrollers at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Resources. If you are ever unsure what to do, ask your fellow patrollers or just leave the page for someone else to review – you're not alone! Hey man im josh (talk) 11:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Hey man im josh! Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

You will see that I accepted this. I left a rationale on its talk page. I have also warned the creating editor about ownership of articles.

Thank you for your work to seek to break the deadlock.

I have also found the creating editor almost impervious to advice. I hope they will adopt a more collegial approach over a very short time 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent Thanks. I voted "redirect" only, as the content and sources worth saving have already been merged and it will be a cleaner wrap on the page. The editor can carry on the debate about how much detail to include on the talk page for the church. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

I think they will carry it on for some time. 😇 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Dclemens1971: As you are a long time editor, I want to solicit your opinion about whether I should mention the following information in the ongoing Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Blanes tree discussion.

While browsing the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. David Marx, I noticed the sudden appearance of a new editor who is the only person to support Blanes tree's deletion request: Likisa. When they created their sandbox page shortly after registering last month, Likisa publicly identified themselves in their edit as an "alt of Bloxxer"—an editor still indefinitely site-blocked for misbehavior and for being a sockpuppet of Wagner, likewise indefinitely blocked for abuse and sockpuppetry. Wagner has over 60+ indefinitely blocked alts. See Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Wagner.

Again, it's curious that this brand-new alt account with barely a few edits, created by an editor who has been indefinitely blocked 60+ times for misconduct and sockpuppetry, suddenly appeared to support Blanes tree's deletion request. Should I include this information in the ongoing incident report or do you think this would muddy the waters too much? — Flask (talk) 03:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@Flask Mildly suspicious but not dispositive, and the original situation is resolved. If you want to report likisa, I think the best forum is SPI. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're wondering, yes. I'm a alt of Bloxxer. I will say that this is not a sockpuppet. Instead i just fix red links a lot. I may not be that much active. Likisa (talk) 12:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

It's a bit funny, but, yeah. I'm not a sockpuppet of Wagner. I head of that military thingy called Wagner, but not a actual Wikipedian User (lmao) And 60+ times? I don't remember it LOL.

Also, i apologize for doing that "One Piece is based off a true story" troll. ButcherDoom was just a account I WANTED to get it banned, so theres's that. I will admit it. Likisa (talk) 12:33, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Blane's deletion request, but he is pretty heckin stupid, outside of it. My user page was clearly bad and i contradict all of it. Bloxxer was a account created by me i think, but i'm not like a Albert Einstein. I will say that, i didn't know that Bloxxer was a sockpuppet account created by Wagner. Likisa (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I forgot what time i made the Bloxxer account, lol. Likisa (talk) 12:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Flask...

Wagner and his socks have not edited here since 2012-2013, and I think it is pretty unlikely they would come back after 11 years and edit in a completely different topic area (video games for Wagner, but Turkish articles for Likisa; just compare the contribs). Likisa also seems to be ESL and so what they meant by alt of Bloxxer could have been BloxxerWhat instead, as they claim in their unblock request. That was simply lost in translation. Them being BloxxerWhat would fit better, as BloxxerWhat also has interest in subject matter related to Turkey.

I'm not sure if @PhilKnight confirmed this by CheckUser, but an SPI case wasn't opened when it should have been. Not really ideal to make blind accusations like this without evidence. If the sockpuppetry was indeed confirmed by CU, then I apologize. But personally, I think the case would fall flat on its face because there simply aren't compelling diffs that would imply WP:DUCK behavior to connect Likisa to Wagner and his socks.

I'm sorry, but until it is proven otherwise, this was simply a bad block based on unfounded accusations. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 02:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

@Flask @That Coptic Guy @Likisa As I said above, I don't think there was anything dispositive here and I was only pointing out that SPI is the place to raise that question, not AN/I. I have no opinion on this block and would appreciate it if users could move this off my talk page to a different forum. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)