User Talk: Robert McClenon

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{bots|deny=Muninnbot}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
| age=1440
| archiveprefix=User talk:Robert McClenon/Archive
| numberstart=32
| maxarchsize=75000
| header={{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minkeepthreads=7
| minarchthreads=3
| format= %%i
}}
{{archives|search=yes}}
{|class="wikitable"
! Other archives
|-
|Problem Archive
|-
|Famekeeper Archive
|-
|FuelWagon Archive
|-
|Jack User Archive
|-
|John Carter Archive
|-
|PhiladelphiaInjustice Archive
|-
|78 Archive
|-
|DIRECTIVEA113 Archive
|}
{{purge box}}

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Cascadia movement'''  on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 04:30, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Arbitration Case opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchroCat ↗. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchroCat/Evidence ↗. '''Please add your evidence by April 15, 2026 at 23:59 UTC, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchroCat/Workshop ↗. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction ↗. For the Arbitration Committee, DatGuy<sup>Talk</sup><sub>Contribs ↗</sub> 09:58, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri'''  on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 19:32, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Lists of wars involving the United States'''  on a "History and geography" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 14:31, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Zionism'''  on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 07:30, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Republic Movement'''  on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 11:30, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London Transport'''  on a "History and geography" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 16:30, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:United States embargo against Cuba'''  on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 17:31, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Dispute

Hello I saw that you closed the dispute discussion for Rıza Kayaalp ↗ due to the other editors not answering and one being partially blocked. I have also tried third opinion resolution but that was not possible as a third account (the temporary one) joined into the dispute. I think having another editor to look at it regardless would be helpful, as I have tried to explain on the talk page the counting of medals in that there was no 2015 European Wrestling Championships and that it was incorporated into the 2015 European Games, and as you will see the medal is already accounted for under that and there are no 13 European Championships gold medals listed, only 12 in the infobox. When I tried to explain in the edit summaries, I was personally attacked here ↗ and here ↗, so a third/fourth opinion would be helpful, as if I edit it boldly to correct it, it would just be undone. Another editor corrected the total from 13 to 12 here ↗, but a temporary account again changed it back a few days ago here ↗. Reaper1945 (talk) 23:20, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
::User:Reaper1945 - I will take a look within 24 hours and let you know what I think. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
:::User:Reaper1945 - I count 12 gold medals in European championships in the detailed portion of the infobox. There appears to be some sort of double-counting to get the 13. I have changed the number of European championship gold medals to 12, which changes the total medal count to 52. If a temporary account changes it again, then you or I can each restore the 12 once, and then, if necessary, request semi-protection of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:13, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
::::Thank you for the help, I appreciate you taking time out of your day to look at the issue and helps towards fixing it. Like you said, if temporary accounts keep changing it, semi-protecting may be necessary. Reaper1945 (talk) 01:25, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::Another temporary account has changed the number once more and I reverted and referred to discuss changes on the talk page. As you said revert once, and if necessary semi-protection. Reaper1945 (talk) 05:07, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
::::::User:Reaper1945 - I have reverted the edits again and have added to your request for semi-protection. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Your submission at Articles for creation ↗: sandbox (May 10)

<div style="border: solid 1px #FCC; background-color: var(--background-color-warning-subtle, #fdf2d5); color: inherit; padding: 0.5em 1em; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">'''Draft declined'''{{pb}}50px|left ↗Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation ↗ has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.{{pb}}
<nowiki> </nowiki>'''Feedback'''{{pb}}The reviewer, HitroMilanese, left the following feedback:
{{divbox|gray|3=This draft duplicates another submission, Nadya T. Bliss ↗, currently submitted for review. To save time, we will review the other submission only. Any future edits or improvements should be made on that submission, not here.|}}

'''Next steps'''

Edit User:Nevans77/sandbox to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.

When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the '''Resubmit''' button.

If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted ↗.

'''Need help?'''

For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know ↗.

You can ask for help at the <span class="plainlinks" >[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=User:Nevans77/sandbox '''Articles for creation help desk''']</span>, or on the <span class="plainlinks" >[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HitroMilanese&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Nevans77/sandbox '''reviewer's talk page''']</span>.

'''Scam warning'''

If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia ↗.

<b style="color:Green; font-family:Times New Roman">Hitro</b><b style="color:#FF00FF; font-family:courier; font-size:small"> talk</b> ↗ 09:46, 10 May 2026 (UTC)</div>

{| style="margin: 0.4em 2em;"
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
| alt=Teahouse logo ↗
| <div style="background-color:#e1e6db; color: #393D38; padding: 1em; font-size: 1.1em; border-radius:10px;box-shadow:-2px -2px 1px #8e8a78;">Hello, '''Robert McClenon'''!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the '''Articles for creation help desk ↗'''. If you have any ''other'' questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the '''Teahouse ↗''', a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! <b style="color:Green; font-family:Times New Roman">Hitro</b><b style="color:#FF00FF; font-family:courier; font-size:small"> talk</b> ↗ 09:46, 10 May 2026 (UTC)</div>
|}
Category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC ↗
::User:HitroMilanese - If you look in detail at the history, you will see that I resubmitted it. I am not sure why I resubmitted it. If you were trying to avoid creating busywork for me by deleting the notice, it didn't do that, because I receive an email when a message is added to my user talk page. So if a message is added to my user talk page and then deleted, I still receive the message, and will look at the history. You couldn't avoid it. It may in this case be my fault because I did submit the sandbox for review, which was not useful because the sandbox is behind the draft. Thank you for trying to simplify my job. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:10, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

AELECT questions

Hello {{u|Robert McClenon}}, I noticed that you asked identical questions of all the candidates at AELECT. Thank you for participating in the AELECT process, and contributing to the community's assessment of these candidates. However, when candidates are faced with large numbers of non-tailored questions, it presents an unfair asymmetry of effort. Candidates aren't required to answer all of these questions, but they do tend to feel obligated to, which is a poor use of their time and readers' time when the questions are not individually relevant. For example, given Ca's extensive involvement in LLM cleanup, I'm not convinced asking about LLMs told us anything new about them; it might have been more useful to ask something more targeted like, "Do you anticipate that admin tools will affect any of your LLM cleanup work?" In future elections, I'd like to suggest that you pose questions case-by-case -- perhaps explaining why the question is relevant to that particular candidate, and checking to be sure they have not already addressed the topic. Thanks again. <span style="color: #6703fc">~ le <small> 🌸</small> valyn</span> (talk) 20:33, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you, User:LEvalyn - I partly agree and mostly disagree. I see that there is now discussion at WT:Administrator elections ↗, and will discuss there. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:10, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

<div style="border:2px solid #90C0FF; background:#F0F0FF; width:99%; padding:4px">

Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}},

thumb|400px|New Page Review queue November 2025 - May 2026 ↗

'''Backlog update'''

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

'''2024 and 2025 NPP Awards'''

74px|left ↗{{no ping|JTtheOG}} was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.
{{no ping|Hey man im josh}} and {{no ping|MPGuy2824}} won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

{{no ping|BoyTheKingCanDance}}, {{no ping|Rosiestep}}, {{no ping|SunDawn}}, and {{no ping|Vanderwaalforces}} were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame ↗ for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

'''January–February backlog drive'''

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to {{no ping|JTtheOG}}, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

'''May backlog drive'''

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026 ↗.

'''PageTriage'''

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed ↗ to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket ↗ if you're interested in following along.

{{refbegin}}
'''Reminders:'''

You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord ↗.

Consider adding the project discussion page ↗ to your watchlist.

To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here ↗.

{{refend}}
</div>

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

RfC closure

Hi, {{ping|Robert McClenon}} This RfC ↗ has now run its course. Discussion wrapped up over a month ago, and there is now a clear consensus (YES votes + arguments). Could you please close it and implement the decision? According to WP:CR ↗, I can do so myself right now, but I'd sincerely rather another editor do it. (The closure requests noticeboard can only be used if consensus is unclear, etc.) Israell (talk) 09:04, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
:User:Israell - Closed and done. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:52, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
::Thank you very much, Robert! Israell (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Andy MarCom/sandbox

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

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

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia!  DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 18:26, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Arbitration Case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson ↗. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson/Evidence ↗. '''Please add your evidence by June 1, 2026 at 23:59 UTC, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson/Workshop ↗. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction ↗. For the Arbitration Committee, <span style="color:#C01933">'''~delta'''</span> <sub>{<span style="color:#003366">'''talk'''</span> • <span style="color:#003366">'''cont'''</span> ↗ • 🇰🇷 ↗ • 🎢 ↗}</sub> 22:19, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Rite2kiran/sandbox

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗

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

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy ↗, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply {{edit|User:Rite2kiran/sandbox|edit the submission}}, and remove the {{tlc|db-afc}}, {{tlc|db-draft}}, or {{tlc|db-g13}} code.

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia!  DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 13:26, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Earthquake light'''  on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 19:30, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

You may be eligible to vote in the U4C election

<section begin="announcement-content" />
I am contacting you because you previously voted in elections related to the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ↗. You may be eligible to vote in the current U4C election, which is open now and closes on 2 June 2026. You can find out more about the candidates and the election on the election page on Meta ↗, and from there you can access the vote itself. Your participation in these elections is important to the governance of Wikimedia communities, and your time spent learning about the candidates and voting is appreciated.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) ↗ (talk ↗)<section end="announcement-content" />

Keegan (WMF) ↗ (talk ↗) 17:16, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation ↗ review on Yucca torreyi ↗

<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">

50px|left ↗

Hello Robert McClenon. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation ↗ review on Yucca torreyi ↗ is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Yucca torreyi ↗ will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

</div>

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Moliere Dimanche'''  on a "Biographies" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 17:30, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy'''  on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 19:30, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for participating in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2026_May_20#20_May_2026 ↗. Utfor (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stephen Joseph Rossetti ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert McElroy ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Looking to get involved at WP:DRN ↗

Hello! I was looking to get involved as a volunteer on dispute resolutions. However before I do I want to know if it is appropriate for volunteers to comment on what they view as a ''behavioral'' issue by one of the parties rather than purely on the content. Specifically I felt that one of the edits made by one of the parties in [{{SERVER}}/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#SCUM_Manifesto this dispute] may have been done purely to make a WP:POINT ↗, and wanted to let them know that this didn't help the ongoing content dispute (in addition to giving my opinion on the content)
Amatmilen (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
:User:Amatmilen - First, I will be glad to have another volunteer at DRN. Second, different volunteers may have different styles, and you don't have to mediate in the same way as I do. Third, if you think that an editor has been editing in a disagreeable or nonconstructive fashion, and you think that cautioning them is more likely to help than to hinder, go ahead and caution them. Use your judgment as to what you think will work, where working is defined as not making the dispute any worse. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:59, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:List of best-selling video game franchises'''  on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 17:30, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Draft: Joseph Cohen (philosopher) ↗

Hello,
How do we proceed with a draft article? Who can review it and make a decision?
Jeffgriffinsignal (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Category talk:19th-century Irish philosophers'''  on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 16:30, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Flavan-3-ol

I've become embroiled in a dispute at flavan-3-ol ↗ about whether mention should be made of a large nutritional study, "cosmos". I see no likelihood of agreement between the parties involved, one of whom has managed to get themselves blocked. I would like to try dispute resolution, but I notice that the dispute resolution process requires that there are no preexisting discussions, including requests for comment.

Procedurally, one of the problems at flavan-3-ol is that the parties previously involved have already started no less than three RfC's on the talk page, none of which have gone anywhere. There was also an ANI discussion that led to Ggck2 getting blocked, but that's closed. Given your experience, do you think the RfC's prevent a mediated dispute resolution? My view is that they're not really proper RfC's, just talk-page sections that have been rather arbitrarily titled RfC, with little hope of anyone assessing the outcome and closing them, but if they count, I assume I'll have to request closure and hope someone is willing to do it? Elemimele (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
::User:Elemimele - I will take a look within a few hours (either in about two hours or about seven hours). Robert McClenon (talk) 18:35, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
:::User:Elemimele - I have looked at the article talk page, and then had to look at it in more detail. You didn't say that the RFCs were all opened in 2022, and ran for 30 days in 2022, and have been sitting on the article talk pages for four years. I don't consider them to be ongoing discussions. They can be ignored. I haven't reviewed the recent discussion that resulted in an editor being blocked for undisclosed conflict of interest ↗, but that doesn't interfere with mediation. I will review the dispute in more detail, but the four-year-old RFCs that have been overlooked can continue to be ignored. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
::::Thanks, I'm sorry, I didn't actually check the dates which was stupid of me. I should have been more thorough. Elemimele (talk) 09:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Always precious

frameless|right|upright=0.5 ↗
Ten years ago, you ↗ were found precious. That's what you are, always. - Perhaps you can translate in the Ravel discussion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:38, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
:Good evening, User:Gerda Arendt. It is always evening somewhere on a spheroidal planet. I infer that you are referring to the discussion at Talk:Maurice Ravel ↗ about whether to include an infobox for Maurice Ravel ↗. I don't think that adding one more opinion would help. I am willing to prepare a Request for Comments ↗ on whether to include an infobox. Since there is no guideline on whether composers should have infoboxes, that seems to be the least contentious way to resolve what will always be contentious. I am willing to prepare the RFC either with a draft infobox to be included in the RFC or just on the question of whether there should be an RFC. Were you asking about that composer infobox question? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:20, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
:: {{User QAIbox
| image = White hydrangea, Idstein.jpg
| image_upright = 1.3
| bold = story · music · places
}}
:: I was asking about the discussion but not to add an opinion but to translate. Tim, who used to be my friend, which makes it harder, says he doesn't understand my English. In my English, saying that adding a composer's list of works is dishonest, accuses all the people who find it a good neutral way of pointing at their achievements (compared to picking works) of dishonesty, which hurts. But perhaps my English is wrong. I didn't want a translation of "suppress" but find it too strong a word for intentionally omitting "occupation=composer" when "works=List of compositions" is given, making it redundant, unless we want to add pianist and conductor, which would need to be discussed. The best way of discussing infoboxes I saw so far was by discussing the parameters individually, as for W. B. Yeats ↗. - The whole thing would not have been needed if Tim had not reverted the addition of an infobox by someone whose name I had not heard before, dismissing it as clutter. Perhaps you could just have a private talk with him that the majority of users and readers doesn't feel it's clutter, and therefore even if he feels it is, he could accept the interests of others. Which would end the socalled infobox wars. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
:: Yesterday was the former German Unity Day, installed when unity was just a dream. I had a story to match, and today, it's another one, with music by Bach ↗ and Mendelssohn ↗ to match, - a DYK hook 15 years ago, which seems like from a different world. - I noticed some progress in the composers' infobox matters: the edit summary of the next one reverted didn't mention "clutter". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
:: Ravel: please announce the RfC to projects Classical music, Composers and Opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
:::Users:Gerda Arendt ↗ - Thank you for the reminder of which projects should be notified. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:57, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Ayyubid dynasty RFC

Hello Robert, I wanted to check in regarding the RFC on the Ayyubid dynasty ↗. It has now been open for nearly three weeks with limited outside participation, which was also the outcome of the previous RFC I filed on this topic. I wanted to ask whether you have a sense of when you plan to close it, and whether you intend to offer a closing assessment given the limited response. I am comfortable with either moderated discussion or your direct assessment if outside participation remains low. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
::User:Nobedarê Dunav - I will look at it and answer your question within 12 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:59, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
:::User:Nobedarê Dunav - It was 36 hours. The RFC will run for about five more days before the bot deactivates it. If I were closing the RFC, I would close all three questions as No Consensus. I have another idea. If you would prefer that the RFC not be closed as No Consensus, I can study the questions again, and then can offer my opinion while the RFC is still open. I will think about that further. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:29, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
::::That sounds good. I'd rather have your assessment than a default No Consensus close, given how little outside participation there's been. Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 05:49, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::Hello Robert, since the RFC will hit its full month in a few days, what happens next? Will you be closing it yourself, given that you also moderated the dispute, or would it go to an uninvolved closer? And once closed, am I right that we'd then edit the Origins section to reflect whatever consensus is found, with the closing summary as authority for that? Nobedarê Dunav (talk) 12:01, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Retraction

I recently left a reply to your comment on Ravel. Although in my haste to respond I did not believe my comments could cause offense, I have been alerted to the potential for such implications by other users. If I in anyway implied or stated that you have been unfair, duplicitous, or obstinate in your actions regarding this matter, I sincerely apologize and retract any statement that could cause offense. Thank you for your understanding in this matter. Barbarbarty (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
:I don't think that an apology is necessary, User:Barbarbarty. I didn't think that you insulted me or cast aspersions ↗. I know that people sometimes disagree about how work should be done, and Wikipedia is an electronic workplace. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:34, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Wikipedia talk:Superfluous bolding explained'''  on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> <small>(replacing <span class="plainlinks">Yapperbot ↗</span>)</small> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 12:30, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson ↗ closed

An arbitration case, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson ↗, has been now closed. The final decision is available at the link above.

The following remedies have been passed regarding this case:

{{user|TruthGuardians}}, {{user|TheWikiholic}}, {{user|Guitarjunkie22}}, {{user|Jimcastor}}, and {{user|MraClean}} are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.

{{user|TruthGuardians}}, {{user|TheWikiholic}}, {{user|Israell}}, {{user|Episteme Aletheia}}, {{user|Guitarjunkie22}}, {{user|Jimcastor}}, {{user|Mr Boar1}}, {{user|MraClean}}, {{user|Never17}}, and {{user|PinkSlippers}} are indefinitely topic banned from Michael Jackson ↗, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.

{{user|NE0mAn7o!}} is warned that future misconduct in the Michael Jackson ↗ topic area will result in restrictions under the Michael Jackson community contentious topic ↗.

For the Arbitration Committee, <span style="color:#C01933">'''~delta'''</span> <sub>{<span style="color:#003366">'''talk'''</span> • <span style="color:#003366">'''cont'''</span> ↗ • 🇰🇷 ↗ • 🎢 ↗}</sub> 21:16, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

: Discuss this at: '''{{slink|Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard|Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Jackson closed}}'''

Add on

Look, I was being ignored by these people when I tried to discuss the issue. That is why I got so upset because it felt so unfair. I don't appreciate your reply when you don't understand the situation and how I felt ignored. Mind your business ILoveSport2006 (talk) 08:38, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

{{ombox
| name = First Edit Day
| image = 50px ↗
| imageright = 50px ↗
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(to right, #a1ffce, #faffd1);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big><br />Hi Robert McClenon! On behalf of the Birthday Committee ↗, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit ↗ and became a Wikipedian! <span style="font-family: Bradley Hand ITC;">'''CAPTAIN RAJU'''</span><sup>(T) ↗</sup> 10:40, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
}}

Happy First Edit Day!

{{ombox
| name = First Edit Day
| image = 50px ↗
| imageright = 50px ↗
| style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(300deg, AliceBlue, LavenderBlush 30%, LavenderBlush 70%, AliceBlue);
| textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center;
| plainlinks = yes
| text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big><br />Hi Robert McClenon! On behalf of the Birthday Committee ↗, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit ↗ and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
}}

Happy First Edit Day!

{| style="width: 80%; margin: 4px auto; padding: .2em; border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: Yellow;"
|style="text-align:center"|50px ↗
|style="text-align:left" width="100%"|Happy First Edit Day, '''Robert McClenon''', from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee ↗! '''Have a great day!''' <span style="color:Green;">☘︎☘︎☘︎'''ALEX'''Hammeke</span> (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 20:50, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
|}

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Power Mac G4 Cube'''  on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 23:30, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Dispute resolution - fractional reserve banking

I am sorry to say I am completely baffled by your comments when closing the dispute resolution process.

You said "The filing editor has not responded to the moderator in a week." But this is not true. I responded to all questions put to me in less than 24 hours. In your last statement you asked "My question for the '''other editors''' is whether they are willing to work with the filing editor to rewrite the lede section, or whether they disagree."... There was no question for me. I was simply waiting for the "other editors" to reply... Maybe I put my replies in the wrong place (I was very uncertain) and that triggered some automated system to incorrectly state that I was not responding.
::User:Reissgo - Insulting the moderator by implying that artificial intelligence ↗ was used is not likely to increase the chance of reopening the dispute. I provide headings for statements by the moderator and by the editors, which are usually ignored, because most editors reply below my statement, but I do not insist that the statements be in the proper place, only that they be signed. Maybe I will add language to the rules to emphasize the importance of signing the statements, but that is not the issue here. I do see that you did propose a rewrite of the WP:LEDElede paragraph ↗, and there was no reply from the other editors. Do not insult the moderator, User:Reissgo. It is not helpful. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

:I did not think you used AI. I simply thought there may be a Wikipedia script along the lines of "IF filing editor types in box A, THEN ping notification to moderator"... I was worried that I had typed my response in the wrong place and you might not have got the ping. No suspicion of AI at all. Reissgo (talk) 05:18, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

You then said "If the filing editor wants to rewrite the lede paragraph, there are two ways that they can approach the task. First, they can make changes to the wording. These will almost certainly be reverted, as they should be, because what the filing editor is proposing is a different mathematical model than is described in the current article." - You are mistaken. The first sentence is actually NOT reflected in the rest of the article.

I have regularly and repeatedly attempted to make my case on the talk page and it feels like nobody will debate the facts. They will only employ wikilawyering, threats, made up rules and stonewalling. If you compare the quality of the sources I rely on to the sources they occasionally produce, it is like a machine gun to a water pistol. The current first sentence on the FRB page is A) false B) unsupported by the literature and C) Not even corroborated in the rest of the page. Reissgo (talk) 09:05, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::User:Reissgo - On rereading, maybe I didn't word my closing statement well. Maybe I made the wrong statement as to why DRN was not making any progress. It is clear that there was no possibility of discussion. I agree that the underlying problem was that the other users were not responding, and my closing statement wasn't clear in who was non-responsive, but I wasn't trying to assess blame, but only to state that progress could not be made (and it could not have been made if I had worded the close differently).
::User:Reissgo - You did provide an alternate lede paragraph ↗. If you wish, I can prepare a Request for Comments ↗ to replace the current lede paragraph with your draft lede paragraph. Is that what you are asking for?
::I may be willing to consider reopening the DRN discussion. I would recommend that you not request that, because I don't think that the other editors will comment. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
:::Indeed I will not make a request to reopen. I agree there is unlikely to be a timely response from Avatar317 (who has not edited anything on Wikipedia for over ten days now). But I would urge you to reconsider your closing comment that stated that my suggested new lead should be rejected on the grounds of being contradicted by the main article. This is not the case. In the main body you will see a sentence "Banks typically make loans by accepting promissory notes in exchange for credits they make to the borrowers' deposit accounts" which is exactly the concept that I am advocating. Indeed if that exact sentence was prefaced by "fractional reserve banking is a system in which..." and then put as the first sentence of the article, I'd be perfectly happy. Maybe I should try it! Reissgo (talk) 05:55, 7 July 2026 (UTC)
::Do you want me to prepare a Request for Comments ↗ to replace the lede paragraph with your draft? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:31, 6 July 2026 (UTC)-
:::That's kind of you but not right now thank you... I wish to gather my thoughts and come back to this later. Reissgo (talk) 05:59, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Clarification on reply

What is this you said to Spartaz? '''closing early to protect the appellant from the appellant.''' Can't you see how rude that sounds? Why is that comment deemed okay? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::User:ILoveSport2006 - The early close was meant to protect you from yourself, and it is clear that you did need that protection. It appeared that you were about to make some comment that would result in at least a short block. However, you went ahead and continued discussing, and you did incur a short block. So what I was writing was correct. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::Do not argue about your mental health as a reason why other editors should behave differently than they do. Participation in Wikipedia is voluntary. Wikipedia is a volunteer electronic workplace, and if the normal electronic discussion is hurtful to you, you may withdraw from it. Your questions were answered, even if they were not answered in the way you would have wanted. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
::You will come off block in about 24 hours. I advise you not to come off block by arguing, or you are likely to be blocked again. I also advise you not to request unblock before the block expires.
::If the type of electronic conversation that is typical in Wikipedia is hurtful to your mental health, then Wikipedia may be the wrong voluntary electronic workplace for you. We try to follow the fourth pillar of Wikipedia ↗, which is that civility ↗ is required. We won't treat you any better or worse or differently than anyone else. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Your Articles for Creation ↗ review on Columbia Bank ↗

<div style="border:solid 1px #9accf6;background:#f1f9ff; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #000; margin: 1.5em; width: 90%;">

50px|left ↗

Hello Robert McClenon. This is a reminder that your Articles for Creation ↗ review on Columbia Bank ↗ is still marked as ongoing for over forty-eight hours. After seventy-two hours, Columbia Bank ↗ will be returned to the review queue so that other reviewers may review the draft.

If you wish to continue reviewing the draft but need more time before the bot returns it to the review queue, you can place {{tlx|bots|deny{{=}}TenshiBot}} on the draft so you can continue your review. Also, if you do not want to receive these notifications, you can place the same template on your talk page. TenshiBot (talk) 09:39, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

</div>

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

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Flag of Egypt'''  on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 20:30, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗Your feedback is requested  at '''Talk:Antioch International Movement of Churches'''  on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment ↗. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>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 ↗.</small> <div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> SodiumBot (botop|talk ↗|contribs ↗) 01:30, 9 July 2026 (UTC)