I hope you are well. Over the past six months, I’ve noticed that you have nominated several of my articles for deletion. I’m reaching out to better understand your reasoning and how I might improve my contributions to Wikipedia. Could you please share specific feedback on what issues you’ve found with my articles? I’d appreciate any guidance you can provide to help me align with Wikipedia’s policies.
@24eeWikiUser: My reasoning is spelled out in my AfD nominations: reasonably often you create articles about individuals and companies that do not meet notability guidelines. Specifically, when you are creating an article, you need to check first for multiple examples significant coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. You rely very heavily on Q&A interviews, press releases, lightly rewritten press releases (i.e. WP:CHURNALISM) and WP:TRADES publications, which are rarely considered independent sources. Also, your articles on people tend to read like resumes, and Wikipedia is WP:NOTRESUME. On the ones I've nominated for deletion, I really have no sense of what the person is notable for; these ones all seemed like WP:RUNOFTHEMILL business executives. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971: Thank you, sincerely, I want to express my concerns about the decisions you’ve made regarding my articles. Over the past six months, you’ve been the only editor nominating my work for deletion. I sincerely find it challenging to retain an article once it’s proposed for deletion.
I understand the requirements of WP:SIGCOV and always strive to write on topics that I believe are suitable for stand-alone articles. My focus is on creating detailed biographies, which require significant effort and time. I would kindly ask you to consider using other tags—such as notability, copy edit, or multiple issues tags—before resorting to a proposed deletion. This approach would allow for improvements rather than immediate removal.
What I find particularly confusing is that some of the articles you nominate for deletion had already been marked as reviewed. Upon reviewing your contributions, I’ve noticed that about 25% (9) of the articles you nominated for deletion in the past six months were mine, while I’ve only received one other deletion nomination from another editor. This pattern feels unfair to me.
I hope you can understand my perspective, and I’d appreciate it if you could clarify or consider a more balanced approach moving forward.
@24eeWikiUser, forgive my delayed reply as I've been traveling. I have no idea where you found the numbers you claim. If you look at my contribution history page, I've nominated 175 articles for deletion since 23 May. Of those, just 7 were articles you created. That's 4%. I came across your articles as a new page reviewer, and many I marked as reviewed because there are sufficient sources. There is nothing that prohibits any editor from nominating an article for deletion, even after a new page reviewer has approved it. Sometimes page reviewers make mistakes or interpret sources/guidelines differently. I can't speak for other editors, but I consider a small but meaningful share of your articles not to meet notability guidelines. I don't want to discourage you from creating biographies, but I do think it would be helpful for you to consider my points above before deciding to start one. I think my approach is balanced and reasonable and I see no reason to change it, particularly not on the basis of inaccurate math. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the clarification regarding your approach to reviewing articles and your contribution history. I acknowledge that different interpretations of sources and guidelines can lead to differing outcomes. While I aim to ensure my edits aligns with notability guidelines, I’ll take your feedback into account and continue improving. 24eeWikiUser (talk) 04:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just letting you know that I declined your WP:A10 nomination of Patrick Treacy (physician) because there's an ongoing merge discussion and the article contains possible mergable information - The article is more detailed than the existing article, so it's better to let the merge discussion finish to determine what content should be saved. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me!03:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dclemens1971! I noticed you marked the article Kashinath Seth Bank as reviewed around the same time as nominating it for speedy deletion. Although articles nominated for deletion via AFD may be marked as reviewed, articles nominated for speedy deletion should not be. In the case of AFD articles, if they are kept, they will clearly meet NPP's standards; conversely, if an admin declines a CSD, the article may not meet those standards and could be draftified, brought to AFD, or PRODed. I have gone ahead and deleted the article, but I wanted to let you know about reviewing such articles for future reference. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dclemens1971 - I saw that you recently BLARed Dry Fork, Utah as non-notable and I would like some advice. As part of my unreferenced pages monitoring I came across Oak Creek, Utah, created by the same editor, which seems similarly non-notable. However, I am by no means an expert on the geography of unincorporated communities in the U.S. and would be grateful for any advice as to appropriate sources to try. Nothing immediately useful comes to light on Google, and I can't find the feature in USGS which I see is used as a source in similar articles. Thanks in advance for your help! Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 13:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SunloungerFrog I think you are on safe ground to WP:BOLDly BLAR that article (I would recommend to Sanpete_County,_Utah#Unincorporated_communities). Unincorporated places are not presumptively notable under WP:NGEO and are thus required to meet WP:GNG, which requires secondary sources beyond GNIS/Google Maps/database sources. If it's contested (I doubt it will be as the page creator is blocked), no harm in proceeding to a deletion discussion, or maybe the BLAR triggers another editor to find sufficient sources before restoring. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please take this to WP:AfD. It's located (not literally but figuratively) at the intersection of Think of the children and A Whole Bunch of Wikipedians are Neurodivergent. If that's not potentially controversial, then I don't know what could be. Also, Merry Christmas! Bearian (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joe Roe Thanks for the note. To clarify the sequence, I came to PERM to search for an unrelated archived request, and while there I saw her request and the discussion at the top. I recognized the editor's username from the previous AfD where I had observed a confused/misguided understanding of source analysis, particularly for a new page patroller, and so I decided to do a spot check. Not following anyone around! Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joe Roe And I'll ask here rather than go off-topic at PERM, but I am curious about your comment about draftification. The MoveToDraft script has It needs more sources to establish notability as a standard reason for draftification, and the reasons for draftification at WP:DRAFTYES are "not limited to" to the three reasons currently listed. I have indeed draftified articles within the 90-day window if their sources do not indicate that the subject is notable. If this is against consensus, there should be probably be clearer instructions at WP:DRAFTNO and the script should be updated. What are your thoughts? Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. That is indeed a much less worrying timeline.
Yes the discrepancies between the draft script and WP:DRAFTIFY is a long-running problem. There's two sides to it. One is the script itself, which has a slightly odd list of reasons but which only the maintainer can change. The other is that the list at WP:DRAFTYES is missing some common reasons that have an unclear status w.r.t to community consensus. I've suggested that we organise an RfC to add these, but haven't got around to doing so yet.
WP:DRAFTYES is not exhaustive, as it says, so there's nothing wrong with people draftifying for other reasons as long as they are not on WP:DRAFTNO and are otherwise consistent with policy. I personally have never been able to square the script's it needs more sources to establish notability option with WP:NEXIST and WP:REFBOMB, but others disagree. My comment on WP:DRAFTYES above was specifically in the context of reviewing others' reviewing, i.e. it's fair enough to draftify things for reasons not on the list, but not to criticise others for not doing so, if that makes sense. – Joe (talk) 13:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@24eeWikiUser: I responded three weeks ago to your accusation above. I came across your articles in my feed in the course of routine new page reviewing, and several of them I marked as reviewed and did not nominate for deletion because I determined they met the standard (diff, diff, diff, diff). Hounding is a significant violation of Wikipedia practices and norms, and I would appreciate it if you would provide diffs that substantiate your accusation instead of repeating it. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:55, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971, I repeated after Joe because, even 4 days ago we were discussing on my talk page about your nominations to pages I wrote. It might not be hounding but without being careful, some acts can be considered as one. 24eeWikiUser (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seasonal greetings:)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!
Hello Dclemens1971, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing,
— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dclemens, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. May your heart and home be filled with all of the joys the festive season brings. Here is a toast to a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year!.
Hello Dclemens1971, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Pbritti
Hello Dclemens1971, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
