User talk:Cllgbksr

Hi and apologies!

Hi there, I wanted to apologize for my hasty revert on the Twitter page edit this morning--that'll teach me to edit before I've had my first cup of coffee! Very sorry about not reading the edit history more carefully. All best, Innisfree987 (talk) 23:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: Evening Innisfree, I'm working on another article. Draft:Darrell C. Scott Feel free to contribute if you have time. Ton of secondary, reliable sourced articles. Welcome any feedback on what I've put together so far as well. Cllgbksr (talk) 03:44, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cllgbksr, my hands are pretty full with some entries I'm working on for the women's history month project, but I see you have several editors weighing in on the draft so I think with their counsel, you should be in good stead. Beyond that, my main suggestions are the one I mentioned previously about participating at AfD to get a good sense of how the notability standards are typically interpreted, or, additionally, you might enjoy doing more editing on topics that already have entries but may been posted without adequate sourcing--a great contribution to the encyclopedia (both for the information and for avoiding the need for an AfD) and can be easier/less frustrating than sometimes-difficult process of creating new entries from scratch.

Hope that helps--happy editing! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Wayne Dupree for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wayne Dupree is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Dupree until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sorry. I tried, but nothing turned up more than a passing mention. Let's hope someone else can do better than the job I did at looking, eh? – 🐱? (talk) ^{(ping me!)} 20:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@What cat?: I want to resubmit the Wayne Dupree article with the Newsmax Top 50 Influential African American [1]reference for lede that was published after you nominated it for AfD. Before I engage closing admin User:Bishonen [2]wanted to see if you have any objection to article being re-submitted.Cllgbksr (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Cllgbksr, as I understand it, the way to do it is via Wikipedia:Deletion review, not by recreating the article. If you do simply recreate it, it may be speedy deleted per WP:G4. Bishonen | talk 04:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Just read the link you provided. Appreciate. I'm new to WP (less than a year) and will appreciate any help from you on how I do that, resubmitting to deletion review. Since the article is gone how can Dupree article with the new references be reviewed? Am I just submitting the name of the article and reasons asking for review? Cllgbksr (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don't think you meant to invoke that template above, merely to ping What cat?; I fixed the ping for you, but I see you have now removed the whole thing; never mind, then. I'm actually no more used to deletion review than you are, but I see it says in the instructions that "Admins participating in deletion reviews are routinely requested to restore deleted pages under review and replace the content with the {{TempUndelete}} template, leaving the history for review by non-admins." I don't intend to participate in the review, unless somebody shouts for me, but I might as well have a shot at the indicated undeletion, and save them requesting it from some passing admin. OK... that looks all right. Here it is. People can now see everything, including all the versions and changes, via the history. Yes, now you submit the name and the reasons per the instructions, meaning that you use the template — scroll down the deletion review page till you see the yellow stuff. Just the kind of template I hate. Hope you don't have trouble with it. Bishonen | talk 15:43, 2 March 2017 (UTC).

thanks @Bishonen: for retrieving the article history to link too... will scroll to the yellow stuff, hopefully can figure out then will submit name and reasons.Cllgbksr (talk) 16:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

You'll have to get to it fairly soon, or I'll have to delete the page again. I mean, it says "an appeal has been made at Deletion Review", it's getting awkward. Bishonen | talk 10:55, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Went to the yellow stuff as you advised, what's holding me back is where to put the tag and where does the discussion actually begin? It's confusing.Cllgbksr (talk) 15:29, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

What tag? You're supposed to fill in this

{{subst:drv2 |page= |xfd_page= |reason= }} ~~~~

with the page name and the AfD page and your reason, paste it at the top of the discussions — if you click on "Follow this link to today's log" on the DR page and paste it in, it should automatically be placed right — save, and then paste <noinclude>{{Delrevxfd|date=2017 March 3}}</noinclude> at the top of the AfD page itself. It doesn't much matter where you put that, as long as it's nice and visible. Just below where I wrote "The result was delete" seems like a good place. By "tag", do you mean the template for informing me about the discussion? Forget it, I'm already extremely aware of it. I agree the instructions could be clearer. Maybe there would be more deletion reviews if they were. If you still have trouble, we may have to ask User:RexxS to come and do it for you. Bishonen | talk 15:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen:, probably best if User:RexxS does it, then if he can point me where I'm to place cursor to type my explanation as to why the appeal is being made, I'd appreciate it. Sorry I'm having problems navigating this. Cllgbksr (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)  Done Easiest to just do it, although I don't think the sources are sufficiently focused or independent to show notability. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 March 3 if you wish to comment further. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:19, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@RexxS: Thanks. I'm now going to this page and under last entry will type my summary for the appeal [3]Cllgbksr (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@RexxS: Another user is asking the page you directed me too - be deleted?? [4]Cllgbksr (talk) 18:21, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

It's that other user who is in the wrong place. I saw that, and thought of removing it and telling them to go to AfD, which would be the right place for them, but then I thought there are probably regulars at DR who'll do it better than me. Believe me, you're in the right place. Bishonen | talk 18:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

(edit conflict) That's because that page is where all of the deletion reviews started today, March 3, are placed. The other editor wants to see the Template:AMD Radeon RX 5xxM deleted. He's in the wrong place anyway.

Please look on that page for the heading "Wayne Dupree", just under the heading "3 March 2017". A little to the right of the heading "Wayne Dupree" is an [edit] link. Please click on the word "edit" there and when the edit box has opened up, please type your statement starting on a new line after the rest of the text in that box, remembering to sign it with four tildes: ~~~~. I'll keep an eye on the page and fix it if you make a mistake. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@RexxS: Thanks RexxS. Appreciate your help. Appeal statement written. Thanks for your help as well Bishonen. @Bishonen:Cllgbksr (talk) 19:32, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

No problem, Cllgbksr, but I see you mention the nominating user quite largely, and link to their comments on social media, without naming or pinging them. I've alerted User:What cat? on their page. Bishonen | talk 19:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen: You're right, should have added User:What cat? and pinged. My mistake. Apologies. Cllgbksr (talk) 20:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Bishonen: Can I edit my statement in deletion review? I did not reference WP notoriety guidelines as it applies to Dupree for the review. Cllgbksr (talk) 18:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

In case 'Shonen is busy, here's the answer: it is generally considered unwise to edit a statement after somebody else has replied to it, as it may make a nonsense of their reply. You could WP:REFACTOR your statement, but I'd advise simply making a new post underneath the last one labelled "In support of review", or something like that and focus tightly on the notability (hopefully not the "notoriety") guidelines. Hope that helps. --RexxS (talk) 19:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not busy! You're just too fast for me! Anyway, what RexxS said, Cllgbksr. Bishonen | talk 19:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen:, @RexxS: Thanks! Cllgbksr (talk) 19:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Darrell C. Scott (March 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Darrell C. Scott and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 02:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: You're kidding right? This one WaPo article alone, is big league secondary and significant coverage of subject. [5]Cllgbksr (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Darrell C. Scott has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Darrell C. Scott. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 03:19, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: I read it... still laughing...Cllgbksr (talk) 03:26, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Darrell C. Scott (April 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Yashovardhan Dhanania was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Darrell C. Scott and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Yashovardhan (talk) 09:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Cllgbksr, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Yashovardhan (talk) 09:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Darrell C. Scott has been accepted

Darrell C. Scott, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Yashovardhan (talk) 12:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Article Mel Bernstein

@Dodger67: Thank you for your help on the article. Cllgbksr (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Laura Loomer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Laura Loomer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laura Loomer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Black Kite (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Laura Loomer and references

Please do not add spaces after a sentence and before a reference, nor between references. They are supposed to come immediately after the period or previous references for the same statement. ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 23:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Crash Underride: I will do that. Never hesitate to send me a message if I make those type of mistakes again. I welcome constructive criticism. Thanks for letting me know.Cllgbksr (talk) 23:43, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Be warned, I use a lot of sarcasm and / or humor. lol. ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 00:35, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@Crash Underride: Haha! That's great! I'm the same way. Look forward to it!Cllgbksr (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

A heads-up

I saw your comment about writing. I try to be a better writer too.

I started running the grammarly add on, to my browser. It gives advice. Mind you it is great on suggesting changes to spelling, punctuation, and some grammar. It can't help with suggestions that require genuine comprehension. But its free.

Oh, for what its worth, not leaving an opinion in an AFD, because you started the article? I have never seen anyone make that choice. I am fine with you changing your mind on that.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 11:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: Appreciate the input. The investigative portion of finding online news articles is the easy part for me, writing the article with proper grammar and in a way that flows and easy for the reader to follow - is where I run into problems. I just spent an hour on the Loomer article trying to clean it up. Do you have a link for the "grammarly add on"? I'd like to see how that works. Also as it relates to me not leaving an opinion on my own article when it's in AfD, I assume you're referring to my post below the AfD notice where I said I wouldn't vote? I felt by voting on my own article it could expose me to another user calling my vote out as me possibly being biased as it's creator. So I took the road of the populous deciding and recused myself. Does that make any sense? Cllgbksr (talk) 14:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your recent contributions to Laura Loomer. Now, please stop thanking me for every edit. Excessive thanking can be annoying and is occasionally taken the wrong way. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@DrFleischman: Roger that on the "thanking". Will no longer thank you or other editors for every edit. Been an editor less than a year, still trying to figure out the proper protocol. Also I like how you restructured the page. It flows better now. Been thinking of adding a photo of Loomer to the article so the reader can put a face to the subject, but Wikimedia commons does not have a photo of her. Any suggestions? Cllgbksr (talk) 17:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Kaczynski

If you decline to work in good editorial faith, you'll need to discuss your proposed addition on the article talk page; there is no consensus for the wording of your addition, which does not reflect a balanced and NPOV reading of the article source in question. Please open a thread on the article talk page and discuss your proposal. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I already opened the thread. Cllgbksr (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Caroline Heldman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caroline Heldman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Heldman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheValeyard (talk) 22:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Check the sources, please

Hi. I checked the source for Laura Loomer "strolling" into a polling station and could not find any reference to the way she walked, so I changed it back. If you have another source, just add it and revert my change. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Laura Loomer

Greetings again, Cllgbksr. I just changed the 'descriptive label' of two sections of Laura Loomer from "stunt" to "incident." "Stunt" strikes me as POV and, possibly, a little weaselly, ie too slanted. I detest Ms. Loomer, but always prefer neutral terminology. Regards Tapered (talk) 04:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cllgbksr. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Mel Bernstein) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mel Bernstein, Cllgbksr!

Wikipedia editor Gaioa just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Not very notable, but indeed notable enough. Many mixed sources about this local madman ensure his right to a Wikipedia article.

To reply, leave a comment on Gaioa's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thankful for cooperation, thankful for Wikipedia, Gaioa (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Gaioa: Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for your input on the Bernstein article. The "madman" reference cracked me up. LMAO. The man's obsession with weapons is definitely off the chart.Cllgbksr (talk) 18:53, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wayne Dupree

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.

A tag has been placed on Wayne Dupree, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. SmartSE (talk) 17:10, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Smartse: I clicked on the button marked "contest this speedy deletion" and made notes on the Wayne Dupree talk page as to why it should not be speedily deleted. Cllgbksr (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I saw your note before it was deleted, but there is no way that this pushes him over the threshold of WP:BIO. A) it's far from a reliable biographic source and B) the subject is about dating, not Dupree. SmartSE (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Smartse: It's apparent it's going to take a full profile article on Dupree from an extremely reliable source like WaPo or NYT to meet your interpretation of WP:Bio standards. It's not a personal shot against you but it's no secret WP leans left politically and it seems they don't want conservative Dupree to have a page. Cllgbksr (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Well yes, we require in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources - that's WP:BIO - not my interpretation. Him being conservative has absolutely nothing to do with it so please do not insinuate that it does. SmartSE (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@Smartse:Just odd he had a WP page for 8 months with less references, then his account was vandalized which drew attention to it and then it was nominated for AfD. Same week he was voted 50 most influential African American by Newsmax. Just odd how that all went down. I'm not accusing you of anything nefarious. I understand WP:BIO policy. Just saying it seems the glass is always half empty with Dupree when it comes to interpreting the substance or sourcing on articles regarding him. Not to mention he's been on CNN, MSNBC and Fox multiple times as a contributor, cable networks viewed by millions, yet he does't pass muster for a WP:Bio. Cllgbksr (talk) 18:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cligbksr, the in depth coverage does not have to be from NYT or WaPo. Center-right media are also RS such as Fox News or Washington Times. May I suggest that you ask the closing admin to WP:REFUND to your userspace (userfy) and when a source or 2 pop up you'll be ready to move to article space. I noticed you create well-written articles. Perhaps this may be of interest DYK for Newbies. I am watching this page – Lionel^(talk) 09:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lionelt: Thank you for your input. I apologize for the delayed response. I've been off WP for a while. As to Wayne Dupree, it's been a battle getting his article to stick on this site. Was live for 8 months and went to AfD. Will review the link you provided me. Appreciate.Cllgbksr (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@What cat?: I added a WaPo article to lede that gives Dupree a fair amount of coverage, want to resubmit the Wayne Dupree article that can be viewed in my Sandbox. Wanted to get your input before I submit the article. Want to avoid someone nominating it for speedy deletion if they think it's the same article with sourcing as before.Cllgbksr (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Wayne Dupree has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Wayne Dupree. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:14, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wayne Dupree (August 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wayne Dupree and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wayne Dupree, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Wayne Dupree

I undeleted the previously deleted article and its talk page and moved them into your user space at User:Cllgbksr/Dupree draft 1 and User talk:Cllgbksr/Dupree draft 1, left a note about that at Draft talk:Wayne Dupree#Readiness for mainspace. – Athaenara ✉ 04:31, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Wayne Dupree (November 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Frayae was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wayne Dupree and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wayne Dupree, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 22:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cllgbksr. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cllgbksr. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dupree draft 1 (January 1)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: There already is a draft on this person at Draft:Wayne Dupree, AND there is also a history that an article on this person was deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Dupree. Neither this draft nor the earlier draft appears to overcome the conclusion of non-notability. Resubmitting this draft, which appears to be a copy of the previous one, is not useful and appears to be an attempt to game the system.

I am rejecting this submission. If anyone thinks that the subject is notable, they can request that the deleted article be undeleted for comparison, or they can ask for Deletion Review.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

• @Robert McClenon: Accusing me of "gaming the system"? Not cool. If you want to know why I submitted it, my motive, by all means ask first instead of casting aspersions. Cllgbksr (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

• • Regarding Duprees "lack of notability" for inclusion, your own words re: Draft:Wayne Dupree. "I'm going to go ahead and accept this BLP of a controversial commentator. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:11, 28 August 2018 (UTC)". So what changed to make Dupree less notable since August 28, 2018? Cllgbksr (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Cllgbksr - There had already been a deletion discussion, which is why I then reversed my decision before I accepted the draft. I then declined the draft on 28 August. Since then, you will see that I have been requesting that you provide a copy of the deleted article for comparison. Is either of the two drafts substantially different from the deleted article? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

The place for further discussion is at the Miscellany for Deletion discussion page. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Wayne Dupree. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:41, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

User:Cllgbksr/Dupree draft 1

Hello, Cllgbksr. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, User:Cllgbksr/Dupree draft 1.

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 by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:24, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Wayne Dupree concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Wayne Dupree, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Wayne Dupree

Hello, Cllgbksr. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Wayne Dupree".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! HasteurBot (talk) 05:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)