User talk:Dclemens1971

Query about Michael Breen page

I don't understand why you're suggesting the page for deletion. Breen is the CEO of a nonprofit and previously headed a think tank, both of which have their own Wiki entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purplewriter (talk • contribs) 14:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Please review the criteria for notability under WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Notability is not inherited by virtue of the organization someone is affiliated with but must be independently established by reliable secondary sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I reviewed it, and disagree with you -- it is notable when someone, for example, is invited to testify at a congressional hearing and when someone is listed by secondary sources as an expert in his field -- but will try to find a couple more secondary sources. Purplewriter (talk) 17:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

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

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

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

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

Bishop Julio Cesar Martin

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

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

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

Hi there!

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

Where can I send you the backing document?

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

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

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

MIAX

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

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

New page reviewer granted

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

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

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

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

Clarifying copyright for Jeff Johnson finding aid

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

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

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

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

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

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

2026 Asian Para Games

Hello, Dclemens1971,

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

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

Draft: The Grove, Harrow School

Hi Dclemens1971,

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

Question from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Stanaland

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

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

Draft: The Grove, Harrow School

Hi Dclemens,

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

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

Date of building for Draft:The Grove, Harrow School

Hi Dclemens,

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