User talk:Dclemens1971

DYK for Anglican Journal

On 11 August 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anglican Journal, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 151-year-old newspaper lost its journalistic independence in 2026 and became a corporate communications organ? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anglican Journal. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Anglican Journal), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Good article nominations RfC

Hi Dclemens1971,

There is an ongoing Request for Comment (RfC) at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/August 2026 RfC, which you may be interested in because in the past year, you have nominated or reviewed more than one good article nomination. This message has also been sent to all subscribers to the Good Article Gazette. The RfC contains many proposals (33 at the time of writing), which are split into the following categories: nominators, reviewers, reviews, volunteer roles, reviewing initiatives, and others. However, you are more than welcome to add any proposals of your own that you wish to put to the community.

By the end of September, all the proposals will have been closed by an uninvolved editor, either as a consensus for one of the options or with no consensus. At this point, editors will be invited again to develop these proposals into coherent policy and implement them.

Thank you for your contributions to the good articles project, and I look forward to your input! (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 16:02, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Elijah Jang-Whan Kim

On 15 August 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elijah Jang-Whan Kim, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Diocese of Seoul under Bishop Elijah Jang-Whan Kim funded the planting of an "Anglican forest" in desertified areas of Mongolia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elijah Jang-Whan Kim. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Elijah Jang-Whan Kim), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:03, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you

I just noticed the nom you posted here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jonas_Allooloo/GA1.

Thank you for this! Deborah.artemis (talk) 09:20, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for creating the article @Deborah.artemis! Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive

September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2026, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin at a particularly important time for NPP. The backlog has now passed 30,000 unreviewed articles, a level that has been described in current NPP discussions as exceptionally high and potentially difficult to overcome through normal reviewing alone. Backlog drives are one of the few measures that have historically produced a noticeable reduction in the backlog, so the participation of as many active patrollers as possible will matter this month. If you can review during September, please make articles your priority. Every article that is reviewed is a meaningful reduction in the backlog. With the queue at its current size, even a relatively small increase in the number of articles each patroller reviews can add up to a substantial difference over the course of the month. This is a hybrid drive, so redirect reviewing is still included. Redirects can be a useful way for newer patrollers to get comfortable with NPP and can help people build up to reviewing articles. However, the main goal of this drive is to tackle the article backlog, and experienced patrollers are particularly encouraged to spend as much of their available reviewing time on articles as they can. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. If you have been thinking about doing more NPP, this is an especially good month to jump in. Whether you can review a few pages or hundreds, every review helps. And if you are already an active patroller, please consider whether you can put in some additional time during September to help bring the backlog back under control. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm in the UK

The pubs have just closed in the UK. What you say? no more alcoholic beverage ever? No the pubs have closed. Not for ever, who would think that? That would be silly, they will obviously open tomorrow morning. They were going to post the news on Wikipedia but it took weeks to review the text and at the final moment someone changed it again.... they thought the pubs were closing forever. I like your work. but is it ever possible that the words chosen are the way that people want it? I look at the queues and see someone go down the list and change every hook. Wow! This hooks have been tweeked and prodded and adjusted and just before they are published someone decides that although I wanted to say this... I actually wanted to say that.... I wanted to emphasise something. Doss it matter? someone will decide the words I wanted to use. They will close the editting! Do I want to debate the subtleties of the meaning of "close". No. Do I want to close the meaning of close for ever ... yes. <rant/> Roger aka Victuallers (talk) 22:18, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

I've probably tweaked this hook too much, sorry and no offence intended. I'll go ahead and pull it. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:21, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

That makes no sense. You tell me you have made a change. I comment on it so you pull it? I do not understand at all. Victuallers (talk) 22:26, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

I do not fully understand your comment, but it appears from what I have read that you are upset by the changes I made, so I have proposed a change in the nomination instead. As an aside, there were many spots around the world where bars were fully closed by authorities during COVID, not just had their hours limited, and that's why I suggest language that aligns with the source. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:28, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

If it has to be your words then go for it. I'm just arguing for a bit of restraint in general. Victuallers (talk) 22:30, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be my words. The nom is there for someone else to promote if they are happy with the approved language. I am suggesting some ways in which the hook fact can be rendered more clearly, a pretty normal process at DYK. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

The difference between your wording that takes into account the general understanding of the word during COVID and the wording that was there is, I think you might agree, a bit small. I don't mind the change in wording per se.... what I wonder is whether subtle changes in wording are actually necessary. I'm not upset. This happens far too frequently to get upset about. I guess I should do as usual and just accept that hooks are subject to micro-change. Use your words. It is the normal process. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 22:46, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Rob Nichols

I removed much of the trash off of Rob Nichols, is there anything I missed? Any other articles I should look at? Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 09:04, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Nope, nothing beyond what's mentioned on my user page. Thanks for doing the cleanup. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:10, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! The ABA thing was less bad. Polygnotus (talk) 13:26, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Your request for adminship

Hi Dclemens1971, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations! Also, well done for achieving a spot on WP:RFX200 - impressive!

As always, the administrators' reading list is worth reading and the new admin help pages are most certainly available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment prior to applying them elsewhere on the project. And there are plenty of fellow admins to ask for help from if you require it. Good luck! Acalamari 00:08, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Acalamari. Excited to continue helping this community. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:13, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Well deserved! now, get back to work on DYK queues :p GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 00:19, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Congratulations! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:54, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

• Felicitations If you haven't already been there do take a look at and bookmark WP:ADMINGUIDE. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:33, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
• Congratulations! It's always nice to see new admins around. FaviFake (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
• Congrats. And good on you editing the main page already. Be in touch if you have any questions. Schwede66 20:54, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

  @GreenLipstickLesbian @Hawkeye7 @Ad Orientem @FaviFake @Schwede66 Thank you all for your kind and encouraging words! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:05, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

• Hello there! I know I’m a little late, but congratulations on successfully becoming an administrator on English Wikipedia! Wishing you all the best in your new role.RΣGΔRDS, CPT ΔβHIIMΔΠUSΣ∇ΣΠ _{(TΔLҜ / CΩΠTRI)} 05:04, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Congratulations

Excited to see how this closed. I'd forgotten check end date and then happily saw you close something as delete in my watchlist. Enjoy the new "work". Star Mississippi 22:00, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

• Congrats!! Hope to see you do great work!! ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 05:09, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

We bring you...

...the repaired(?) admin baton!

When we were delivered this storied artefact, it was split in twain. We won't name any names, of course, but we did notice a small nest off in the distance... Fortunately, with the broken fragments came a prophecy. The storied lands of revision histories before the dawn of MediaWiki beckoned. From our adventures, we industrial workshop, a powerful spell, and a broom made from high-quality horse-tail hair. A tireless month of work with a talented magician (pictured) yielded our repaired baton. We don't quite know what it's saying (just that it's music to our ears), but our magician friend has said that it is quite the orator. He says that the baton is passing on a message, found written in ancient texts and among scattered oracles. We hope that you can learn to understand its message, and to pass on its wisdom to your own students. Godspeed, Dclemens1971! MCE89 (talk) & Staraction (talk · contribs) 04:32, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @MCE89 and @Staraction! Hopefully I won't have to hold onto it for too very long. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

And a barnstar for you!

		The Administrator's Barnstar
		For updating the Main Page on your very first day as an administrator! Congratulations for your courage, and may the reforged admin baton bring you strength in your endeavors! Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 08:50, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on DYK Mercure.

Appreciated. Thanks. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

"No actual error was alleged"

In your edit summary, you state exactly what the alleged error is. ~2026-46833-99 (talk) 14:16, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

What you stated, and what I summarized, is not an error. It is an editorial issue and thus inappropriate to be raised at ERRORS. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

If you believe it is the wrong venue, please state the correct one. ~2026-46833-99 (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Chapel of the Apostles

Hello! Your submission of Chapel of the Apostles at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HerBauhaus · talk 15:41, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

"He who does not keep peace shall lose his hand."

	The axe of responsibility
	Shiny new tools might be used to mete out justice, mercy or a dose of reality. Let us commit to not losing our cool when using them. Our only armor is the entire community's trust. We wear it for each other, each new contributor, and each new generation to come. May you ever be the community's champion. BusterD (talk) 16:00, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Closing of AfD/UIML

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/UIML

I didn't bundle it. I put a comment on AfD for someone else to nominate it. And now you closed it for being bundled. This is clearly a bureaucratic failure by you guys and not me. ~2026-46598-60 (talk) 15:03, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-46598-60, you have misread this. I didn't close it for being bundled; I closed it for lack of consensus, noting that one participant did not think it should have proceeded as a bundled nomination, which is part of the driver of the lack of consensus.

Your request was for three pages to be deleted. You didn't say in your request you wanted three separate deletion discussions. If you wished to nominate them for deletion unbundled, you were welcome to create an account and nominate them yourself. Otherwise I'm afraid you'll need to accept the constraints that apply to temporary accounts.

There was no bureaucratic failure here, and indeed I think it is unseemly to criticise another editor who helped you out by fulfilling your request. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:12, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes there was. Those three pages were unproded all by one singular person without explanation on why they are notable who didn't show up. And now they become undeletable because no one cares about those articles, so no one will engage in discussion about them. If it wasn't for this one guy stalking my prods, he wouldn't have even cared those articles he unproded for the sake of it. " think it is unseemly to criticise another editor who helped you out by fulfilling your request." That's why it's on your talk page and not his. I'm not criticizing him. ~2026-46598-60 (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

There was no consensus in the discussion so I closed it as no consensus. The articles are not undeleteable, but you may need to create an account to nominate them the way you'd like them to be nominated without asking someone else to do it for you (and wait the appropriate WP:2MONTHS). There was no error here, but if you don't like the outcome of this discussion you may open a conversation over at WP:DRV. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

2 months aka never. You increased the workload so far that it is simply not going to happen. ~2026-46598-60 (talk) 05:58, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-46598-60 I assumed you wanted to create a bundle nominations because the three reasons you gave for deletion referenced each other, such as by saying "another working draft". That Sentence wouldn't have made sense if I had split it from the others.

If you wait two months, you can request the deletion again and I'll do it, this time specifying that you want the articles to be nominated separately. FaviFake (talk) 06:28, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@User:FaviFake I'm not blaming you. It's alright. Like whatever. Thanks for helping me out. I'll just give up on it and forget about it. ~2026-46598-60 (talk) 06:33, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Or you can simply wait two months.... FaviFake (talk) 07:38, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

What, no mop? No T-shirt?

Comes with zero fringe benefits

Mops are a dime a dozen around here, but the T-shirt is really a keeper. Congratulations. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:15, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Bri, I will "wear" it with "pride". Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:17, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For review of article on castes in Himachal Pradesh Himankshu (talk) 17:12, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Tennessee Bicentennial Rap

On 1 September 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tennessee Bicentennial Rap, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tennessee's official bicentennial rap was described as "an unlistenable novelty song"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tennessee Bicentennial Rap. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Tennessee Bicentennial Rap), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Launchballer 12:04, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Questions regarding News Portal

Does Cineuropa a RS for movie review news? Nomadwikiholic1 (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

@Nomadwikiholic1 Looks like it's a database site that includes some reviews. I'd be cautious to make sure the review is actually attributed to the site. WP:WPFILM and WP:RSN are good places to check for previous discussions and ask if you don't see a discussion there. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:38, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Sure, I'll ask this in the WP:RSN. Nomadwikiholic1 (talk) 08:34, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Vibe (2026 film)

Just FYI, I knew this would happen once the AfD for Vibe (2026 film) was closed. You can see the steps at gaming in the edit history. CNMall41 (talk) 19:04, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Messy, but that's not substantially identical to what was deleted, and thus not eligible for G4. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:17, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Unreliable sources on Ruapuna Speedway

Hi,

Thanks for your note regarding unreliable and not enough sources on Ruapuna Speedway. Can you please expand which sources you are concerned with and this can be discussed. As far as my understanding goes, the page had been submitted from draftspace to the mainspace via the month long reviewing process, in which reviewers were happy with the sources given.

If there are sources that you feel don't meet the requirements I'm happy to hear it so the page can be improved.

Cheers. ConcordeAAIB (talk) 05:42, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

@ConcordeAAIB see WP:YOUTUBE and WP:FACEBOOK Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:21, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Pančevo City Stadion

Hello, I see what has been done but it is not clear to me what the article should contain to achieve the described level. I have looked at hundreds of similar articles and still the same thing. Please do not refer me to the pages about importance, but write to me directly what is needed and I will do it. This is the city's athletic and football stadium, until recently the only one in the city and has been the only one since long before the World War until today. So the unimportance of the stadium is not clear to me. Thank you Laslovarga (talk) 11:42, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Laslovarga. I can't comment on other pages, but what's required for any page to pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines are sources that cover the subject in depth and in detail and that are independent of the subject. In this case, that would be sources that cover the stadium itself, not just match coverage or team coverage that mentions the stadium. Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:32, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Laslovarga (talk) 12:37, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Follow-up on refimprove tag (Luiza Andaluz)

Hi, I just wanted to follow up regarding the refimprove tag on Luiza Andaluz. Since I’ve added multiple sources and expanded the references section, I’d appreciate it if you could let me know whether further improvements are still needed, or if there are specific areas that require additional citations. Thanks again for your time. Best-- Saji • talk 17:20, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like every paragraph is appropriately cited. Thanks @Sajjadmrt! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:19, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

'Soft redirects' in mainspace

Hello–regards on the newly minted mop! Today, I fixed four pages you converted to redirects. I may also have done this to pages that you have converted in a similar manner in the past.

Please take a look at WP:SOFTBLAR; plain (i.e. non-specialized) soft redirects are not used in the mainspace. Also, less importantly, rcats are not used on soft redirects (ibid.).

Warmest regards, — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 04:32, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Godsy, thanks for the note. What were the pages you needed to clean up? Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:03, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, VizagKendriya Vidyalaya No. 2, Vizag, Harinavi DVAS High SchoolHarinavi DVAS High School, Shillong CollegeShillong College, & Don Bosco High School, HojaiDon Bosco High School, Hojai. Results of discussions that you closed; your edits to the mentioned pages were automated. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 12:29, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

@Godsy Thank you, yes, these were done with XFCcloser, whose instructions use the language of "soft redirect" to describe a redirect that may be reverted without discussion because there was neither quorum nor any objection. Thanks for flagging that using that option creates an issue in how the redirect is formatted. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

DYK for Chapel of the Apostles

On 9 September 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chapel of the Apostles, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the cross-bracing trusses and geometric windows of the Chapel of the Apostles (pictured) were said to evoke a "multifaceted diamond"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chapel of the Apostles. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Chapel of the Apostles), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Launchballer 00:02, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Anniversaries notes

Out of curiosity, but as I'm not sure if it could be an actual error, I'll ask here, if you don't mind. In Selected_anniversaries/September_9 there is a "Notes" section, that mention two blurbs that "should not appear", but they actually currently are:

Residence Act appears on July 16, so Washington DC should not appear in the same year

Invasion of Poland appears on September 1, so Battle of Hel should not appear in the same year

Los Angeles appears on September 4, so California should not appear in the same year

It is something worthy mention, or those "notes" are purely optional opinion of some kind? Also weird enough is that only "Invasion of Poland" part is being true, other two articles not appeared on a given days (though both were in "staging area"). ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-48732-95, sorry, I am not a regular at OTD, just an admin who happened to check ERRORS when you posted. I'd suggest asking at WT:OTD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:23, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for bother, and thanks for a hint, will do. ~2026-48732-95 (talk) 02:30, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haakon VIII's swearing as King of Norway

Letting you know that the subject of this AfD, which you closed as a snowball merge, is currently up for deletion. J947 ‡ ^edits 05:14, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Is the idea behind the notification somehow that the consensus in the AfD was something other than merge? Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:17, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Not in my eyes. The idea is that no merge has been carried out – nor, it appears, will it – despite the consensus you found in the AfD to the contrary. J947 ‡ ^edits 05:20, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I guess. I don't really have any interest in this subject and assumed interested editors would quickly carry out the merge since that was the strong consensus. If no one was interested enough to carry out the merge, it's up to interested editors to figure out what's next. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2026 (UTC)