Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dclemens1971

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Dclemens1971

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) Final: (207/1/2) - Closed as successful by Acalamari at 00:07, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Monitors:

Nomination

Dclemens1971 (talk · contribs) – Dclemens came to my attention roughly two years ago and, in that time, I've enjoyed watching them grow into the editor that they are today. Through their work at NPP and AfD they've shown patience, thoughtfulness, and an understanding of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Taking it a step further, they've shown an understanding of the community's expectations regarding content, authoring and contributing to a number of articles, including 13 good articles. In addition, they have moved 1,800+ pages, used the page curation bar nearly 7,000 times, and made over 2,200 patrols. Throughout it all they've shown an excellent temperament and willingness to learn. Their body of work is impressive, but what I respect and appreciate most about them is their integrity and character. I feel confident in their ability to realize their potential as an administrator, if the community sees what I see and is willing to grant them the toolset. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Co-nomination statement 1

I'm one of the editors Dclemens refers to in his response to Q3. (You may notice that josh and I descended on that AWOT notice suspiciously quickly. We had already planned to ask, and then Pppery beat us to it!) Here's what I said a year and a half ago: Dclemens is the kind of person who can look at a backlog and decide "well ok, I guess this needs help, I'll learn how to do it", and that's an important kind of skill and personality [for an administrator] to have. I was planning to highlight his thorough and collaborative AFD participation in my potential nomination statement. I stand by that, but now I can add something more personal, about Dclemens's integrity, conscientiousness, and care for this project. Reading the email he sent me, fessing up to the COI and apologizing, still stands out to me as a particularly heartening and affirming Wikipedia Moment^TM. Much digital ink has been spilled on the negative aspects of Wikipedia's "backrooms culture". Here's someone who was converted by it, from an instrumentalizing approach to editing, to a real contributor, then to patroller, and, if the community agrees, to administrator. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 02:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Co-nomination statement 2

DYK is always in need of more admins to keep the trains running and handle error reports, so it's always a delight when a competent, prolific editor steps up and shows that they're willing and able to help. We have exactly that in Dclemens1971, who has proven himself to be more than capable of handling a mop in the 11 months since he started helping at DYK. He's promoted over 650 hooks to the prep areas (making him the most active prep builder in his tenure by a healthy amount), done the final queue checks on more than 300 other hooks, and nominated around 67 hooks of his own. I've reviewed a lot of Dclemens' prep building work in the queues and I've seen how he does the final checks, and I'm consistently impressed with his eagle eye for verification, reliability, and interestingness issues. In discussions, I've always found Dclemens to be polite, reasonable, and open to feedback. As a member of ArbCom, I read the disclosures that Dclemens talks about in A3, and I am more than happy to vouch for him – it takes a lot of bravery to come clean, and I am convinced that he's not the same editor he was four years ago, when he was less a part of the community. Dclemens1971 is eminently qualified for adminship on the strength of his DYK work alone; with asilvering and Hey man im josh laying out all of the other ways Dclemens can improve the project with a mop, I'll be supporting him enthusiastically and without hesitation. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:42, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination. I have in the past edited pages related to my then-employer (see answer to Q3), but I no longer do so and will not edit for pay in the future. I have in the past used four other accounts, the oldest dating to 2006, with a combined total of approximately 900 edits. These accounts are retired and have been disclosed to Arbcom. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:21, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?

A: While I've edited Wikipedia on and off for two decades, it was the project's backrooms that turned me into a Wikipedian.

In December 2022 I discovered AfD after seeing a banner at the top of an article and clicking through. As I learned more about AfD, I participated more and I began to understand notability and verifiability, two considerations I'd never really paid attention to before. I began to notice the little pings I'd get when someone marked an article of mine as reviewed, and in 2024 I began to explore what I might do as a new page patroller and articles for creation reviewer. NPR led me into the world of sockpuppetry investigations and realizing how much of a mess sockfarms can create if they're not caught. Later that year, I began to explore GAs and made my first nominations and reviews there; in early 2025, I discovered DYK and became active there. Everything I learned from participating in various backrooms helped me become a better and more prolific content creator, too.

At every step, I've realized how important administrators are to the smooth functioning of the project – taking actions that ensure community consensus is carried out, ensuring quality control in high-visibility spots like the main page, and making sure volunteers can work in a civil and constructive environment. When my nominators reached out to me earlier this year with the offer of a nomination, I decided that – with the community's consent – I would be able to help as an admin.

To start, I would likely focus on DYK admin tasks, closing discussions at AfD, processing speedy deletion requests, and actioning requests for permissions. I could see getting involved in other areas as backlogs emerge (perhaps page protection, SPI, copyright, AI cleanup), but I'll seek advice from more experienced admins in any new areas. My goal would be to balance admin volunteering in areas of the project where I'm already active with continuing to do the content creation and improvement work that I truly love.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: My favourite thing to do is to create and improve content, whether it's creating new articles on notable topics, updating existing articles or expanding stubs. Some of my favourite content creation has been outside of my primary subject matter expertise, such as a state park in Washington, a pioneering British surgeon in Africa, or translations into Inuit language, or improving existing content like Middle judicatory, which I rescued from deletion and eventually raised to GA status. I'm especially proud of my work at DYK, where I have promoted nearly 700 articles to prep areas and where I proposed and developed new content for a special set marking the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Declaration of Independence and helped facilitate a special set on topics related to indigenous peoples. Beyond content, I'm proud that through my new page reviewing I've encountered several prolific and competent editors whom I've successfully nominated for autopatrolled status (examples: , , , , , , ). Getting that stamp of approval sends a message of appreciation to content creators for their hard work building the encyclopaedia (and helps to reduce the NPP backlog).

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: Yes, since I work in conflict-intensive sections of the project like DYK, AfD and new page review, and no, it generally doesn't cause me stress. My strategy is to depersonalise, focus on content or behavioral issues, and let personal attacks or aspersions roll off my back unless they're particularly pointed or persistent (in which case I'll communicate directly with the editor making the attacks before seeking outside intervention). I also strive to maintain a posture of learning at all times. For example, earlier this year I promoted a hook at DYK that turned out to be quite controversial. I was grateful to the editors who pointed out how I and others should have applied different policies to the process to reach a better outcome.

For many years, I had been a casual editor of Wikipedia and treated the project as an instrument -- a place where I popped in to make edits, and then popped back out. Some of those edits related to my then-employer. Once I began to get more active in the project, I realized the extent to which conflicted editing violates core pillars of Wikipedia like NPOV, and ceased editing about my employer. But I didn't disclose my past conflict of interest at that time, in part because I thought I could continue to fly under the radar, participating in this project quietly – but now in a helpful way. But what I came to realize the more I volunteered and got involved was that Wikipedia is not an instrument. It's a community. And I've come to respect and admire my fellow editors, even though I've never met them.

The most stressful experience I had on Wikipedia came shortly after I received an AWOT notification in January 2025. All the kind words onwiki and offwiki that followed showed me that I hadn't flown under the radar as much I thought. Learning that I had earned the respect and trust of my fellow editors was heartbreaking in a way, because I knew I had not always followed Wikipedia's policies. I belatedly disclosed my past COI and also disclosed my history to Arbcom. I was nervous that I might be blocked, and waiting until I learned that Arbcom was not going to block me was the most stressed I've been about this project. I had consciously become a Wikipedian, and being able to stay part of this community means a great deal to me. That's why I am willing to accept the opportunity to do more to serve it as an admin – and why I look forward to remaining part of this community, regardless of the outcome of this RfA.

---

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions are disallowed, but you are allowed to ask follow-up questions related to previous questions. Make sure to use level-five section headers, not boldface.

Optional question from Shushugah

4. You already have my support, but I couldn't help noticing that a significant majority of your biographies focus on men, with some exceptions such as Anne Bayley. Of course, this partly reflects broader historical and sourcing biases. At the same time, Wikipedia has an opportunity to be especially attentive to notable subjects who have received less coverage, including through efforts such as WP:Women in Red.

How do you reflect on this imbalance in your own editing, and what do you think you and other editors could do to help narrow the gender gap in content creation?

A: Thanks for the question and for your support. The imbalance reflects the fact that for biography I have worked mostly on Anglican topics, and women have held clergy roles in Anglican churches only recently in historical terms. (Even now, some Anglican churches do not ordain women bishops, and in most churches women are underrepresented among clergy.) If you look at my much smaller pool of non-clergy biographies, the ratio of men to women is more balanced. While sourcing is also a challenge, especially for historical women, one thing that helped me create more (and better) biographies of women was getting access to resources like Newspapers.com and The Wikipedia Library, and I'd encourage Wikipedia to publicise these resources more and make them more widely accessible to editors in addition to further support for initiatives like WIR and Women in Green. With continued access to these resources, I expect the ratio in my own content creation will grow more balanced over time. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Optional question from Daniel Case

5. If you were to yourself nominate someone for adminship within a year after getting the tools, are there editors you would feel well suited for it (you don't have to identify them)? What qualities in them do you see as making them worthy of adminship?

A: There are absolutely some editors whom I consider very well-suited for adminship, and that is generally because (1) they demonstrate a high degree of competence, (2) they are great content creators who are also willing to toil in unrecognised maintenance work, and (3) they are patient toward newcomers and willing to mentor. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:33, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Optional questions from BusterD

6. Is there any special reason you chose to run at RFA instead of the upcoming AELECT?

A: As someone with a history of COI editing, I expected that at least some editors would have concerns (see neutral section). Not knowing how many editors would have those concerns, or to what extent, I wanted to know how voters were considering and responding to the disclosure I made in A3. Only RfA would provide that transparency. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

7. As an incoming sysop, how do you feel about the current system for Admin recall?

A: I'm glad there is a system in place and I think it helps ensure admins use their tools—as they should—within the bounds of policies, guidelines, and the community's consensus and expectations. I'm sure there are tweaks that could be made, but I haven't focused in depth on the nuts and bolts of the current system. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

• Links for Dclemens1971: Dclemens1971 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Dclemens1971.

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.

Numerated (#) "votes" in the "Support", "Oppose", and "Neutral" sections may only be placed by editors with an extended confirmed account. All other comments are welcome in the "general comments" section.

Support

1. As nom. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 02:25, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
2. as nom :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:25, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
3. Staraction (talk · contribs) 02:25, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
4. More than qualified EaglesFan37 (talk) 02:27, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
5. Rand Freeman (talk ⬩ in solidarity) 02:28, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
6. MCE89 (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
7. Firm support. I knew this was in the works and looked into the candidate's history. They've had a bit of a learning curve but they will be the better admin for it. Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:33, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
8. Support! I know Dclemens through DYK, where his work is tireless and of a high standard, and where he's been at the forefront of several community pushes for backlog reduction and thematically coordinated sets. Like leeky, I don't find the past COI editing concerning today, and think that his transparency about it several years after the fact shows integrity on his part. I'm very excited to see him running! —⁠TechnoSquirrel69 (talk) 02:54, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
9. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
10. I cannot count how many times I thought you were already an admin just because how great work your works are. Very Strong Support. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:08, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
11. Support! zzz plant (talk) 03:09, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
12. Support not much to say that wasn't said above. Every time I've stumbled across Dclemens they've been doing good work. I trust the same will be true of their admin work. -- LWG ^{talk (VOPOV)} 03:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
13. Support - trustworthy editor. PhilKnight (talk) 03:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
14. Support, established and trustworthy. ScalarFactor (talk) 03:39, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
15. Support Great track record at DYK. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 03:49, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
16. Support I emailed last year telling that that I would support them at an RFA or AELECT if they wanted to do either. Seeing this pop up on my watchpage really made my day. They have a clue about what's going on, they're smart, sensable, and I am excited to enthusiastically support them in this endeavor. Dr vulpes (Talk) 03:58, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
17. {{subst:thought you were one}} :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
18. support - Dclemens191 is an editor I enjoy both disagreeing with and working with -- he recently did a lot of the work on Our International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples set, and was wonderful throughout. no concerns from me! GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 04:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
19. Support this is how I learnt that they weren't one already In solidarity, nil ^nz 04:25, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
20. Support - Over 300 articles to date and counting, great patroller, 12 years experience, would make a great admin. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 04:33, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
21. Support – Dclemens is, in my personal experience – which includes having had the pleasure of reviewing their GAN Deception Pass State Park – a highly competent editor who knows how to communicate and cooperate with other editors. Has my full confidence. –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 04:40, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
22. Support Very happy to see this day! I've reviewed a couple of his GANs and he has been a joy to work with. Very patient with everybody, especially newcomers. I'm confident he'll use the tools well. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:43, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
23. Support Somebody I was surprised to learn wasn't an admin already! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:44, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
24. Support! good candidate for adminship. Rasel ‍Hasan ^Talk 04:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
25. Thank you for volunteering. ~ In solidarity 🦝 Shushugah (talk) 04:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
26. I've been impressed by this editor's consistently thoughtful contributions to WP:ERRORS; we could always use another pair of wise admin hands tidying up the Main Page (where all the key templates are fully-protected and can only be edited by admins). I've seen them around at AfD and DRV showing a high familiarity with the deletion process, and would therefore trust them with (un)deletion buttons too. Left guide (talk) 05:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
27. I support. toby ^(t)(rw) 05:28, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
28. Fiddlesticks yeah charlotte ^👸♥ 05:29, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
29. Happy to support based off of general impressions of Dclemens and of specific interactions at DYK. In solidarity, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 05:35, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
30. Support Why not. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
31. Stephen 06:06, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
32. Support Hard-working editor with a good grasp on the policies, and willing to take feedback. Should wield the mop well. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
33. Support, precious --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:15, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
34. Support. Great candidate. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 07:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
35. Support Tazerdadog (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
36. Support, does great work at DYK. Good content skills too! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 08:14, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
37. Support, excellent candidate ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 08:15, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
38. Strongly support. Dclemens1971 has demonstrated the experience, judgement, integrity, and temperament needed for adminship, with an impressive record of constructive work across Wikipedia. I have no hesitation in supporting the nomination. Footballnerd2007 • talk ⚽ 08:59, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
39. Support they've done incredible and very valuable work at DYK. I don't know what the backlog would be without them. 1brianm7 (talk) 09:22, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
40. Support. No bad experiences with this user. Lynch44 10:09, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
41. Never ... Over my limp big toe ... What is wikipedia coming to? No barrels left to scrape? Really? </rendered inversely proportional> Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 10:39, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

    @Goldsztajn I'm a bit confused by this. Are you opposing the nomination? If thats the case, then you should've replied in the correct section. Monathephantom (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

    @Monathephantom Just an attempt at levity for the sake of RfA theatre (inversely proportional was the hint). DC71 is a fine specimen; one of the best I've ever seen AfD, IMHO. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 13:01, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

42. Support – Their DRV against my close was well-written! FaviFake (talk) 10:41, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
43. Support, enthusiastically :). GoldRomean (talk) 10:47, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
44. Support This is an easy and carefree support !vote. I would have !voted earlier if I'd known about the RFA. scope_creep^Talk 11:03, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
45. Support: Thank you for volunteering! YuniToumei (talk) 11:04, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
46. Support Great candidate, best wishes Josey Wales ^Parley 11:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
47. Support. I'm always delighted when I see Dclemens1971 at an AfD I'm closing, knowing I'd get a thorough, unbiased assessment of the subject from someone highly familiar with our policies and guidelines. Owen× ☎ 11:20, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
48. Support DYK is a cesspit and badly needs good people who are willing to do the work and keep their cool when things get stressful. DC seems to be that person. RoySmith (talk) 11:39, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
49. Support Someone said the F word (Fiddlesticks). Polygnotus (talk) 11:54, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
50. Support, always has something well worth reading when they participate in a discussion. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:56, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
51. Support as nom. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
52. Ternera (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
53. Support. Excellent content contributions. — Newslinger talk 12:32, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
54. Support I do believe he is good for the wiki. Beyoncé and Rihanna's navy 🐝🪖 12:47, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
55. Support Rolluik (talk) 12:49, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
56. Enthusiastically support! Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 13:21, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
57. Support. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 13:27, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
58. Support No concerns around him being an admin. The person who loves reading (talk) 13:40, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
59. —Ingenuity (talk) 14:03, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
60. Excited to see this :) HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 14:05, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
61. Good addition. Support. Jordano⁵³ 14:21, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
62. Support without a doubt in my mind. LightlySeared (talk) 15:28, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
63. Support. Offered a nom after seeing their great work at autopatrolled requests, but alas 4 noms would be a bit OTT. Full confidence. In solidarity, —Femke (talk) 🐦 15:38, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
64. Support - Good stats on xtools, logs are all solid, quite a bit of excellent content work, and honest. ASUKITE 15:47, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
65. Support Inspiring work in the backlogs :) /over.throws/^✎ 15:55, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
66. I saw when this page was created (by Asilvering?), I was damn sleepy so I was hoping it doesn't start when I was sleeping, now the next thing I remember is that I am number 66 (If I don't save this edit quickly now I might miss this spot too). How is that fair? I need consolation please >.< I can't be watching a page since forever and still be late to the party, never! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:09, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
67. Support _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:17, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
68. Support. Seems very clear. MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
69. Support For sure. Mfield (Oi!) 18:07, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
70. Support. Good balance of content creation and behind the scenes efforts especially at DYK. Early COI missteps are par for the course and not problematic now. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:18, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
71. Support will be a net-positive to the project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:30, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
72. Support just wondering why there was only 1 optional question. In solidarity, Dafootballguy (Want to talk?) 18:34, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
73. I keep forgetting you're not a long-term admin. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 18:37, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
74. Support, no concerns. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
75. Support - no concerns, part of me thinks you already had the mop?! GiantSnowman 18:42, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
76. Support CoconutOctopus talk 19:26, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
77. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:31, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
78. Support Every comment I've read from them across a variety of forums has been level-headed and rational. Exactly the sort of user that'll make a great admin. The Kip ^(contribs) 19:35, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
79. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:38, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
80. Support, absolutely. I have seen Dclemens around, and they have always struck me as a very reasonable and rational person. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 20:42, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
81. Support Excellent candidate with solid nominators.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:58, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
82. Yes. Thank you for standing. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 21:02, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
83. Support especially happy to see someone active on AfD and DYK Ryan shell (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
84. Support. Some of the best answers to questions I've seen in RfAs. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:13, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
85. Support Dangit I'm late to the insta-support party! fanfanboy (block_talk) 21:57, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
86. Support Dclemens has the right temperament, approach, and experience. Schazjmd (talk) 22:55, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
87. Support: Overjoyed to see this. I've run in the same editing areas as Dclemens for years and have always found them utterly patient, considerate, content-focused, and capable. Their work in the modern Anglican subject area is unparalleled. Wikipedia will gain an outstanding admin. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:47, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
88. Support This candidate will make a positive contribution to the project as an admin. Let'srun (talk) 23:52, 20 August 2026 (UTC)
89. Pileon support haven't done this in a while. Andre🚐 00:39, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
90. Support – per the user. I usually detest all kinds of hierarchical authority but accepting it as pragmatical it's a good user who can positively contribute to a good environment for new users, those interested in page creation as well as in DYK CoryGlee 00:43, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
91. Support. Dclemens1971 is an editor I hugely respect for his work at AfD, where we have crossed paths on many occasions, and for his great work at DYK. This is long overdue. Toadspike [Talk] 02:11, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
92. Support - you make 18 GAs I support your nom. It's that simple.Czarking0 (talk) 02:40, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
93. Support ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:52, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
94. Support – no reason not to. Graham87 (talk) 03:53, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
95. Support - Enthusiastically. --Enos733 (talk) 05:46, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
96. Suppory based on my experience of them as an NPP colleague. Mccapra (talk) 05:54, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
97. Support - Will be a superb admin. Schwede66 07:06, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
98. Support thoughtful, careful and thorough everywhere I've crossed paths with them. Rusalkii (talk) 07:32, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
99. Support would be a very worthy addition. We have not always agreed on some points, but they were handled in a very collegiate and supportive manner.ChrysGalley (talk) 08:29, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
100. Support We need more admins. JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 08:37, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
101. Max (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
102. Support Clear net positive. -Kj cheetham (talk) 08:45, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
103. Thought he was, for many years. -SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:03, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

     At User:Dclemens1971#Disclosure, is a disclosure of having edified undisclosed for their employer. I consider this late disclosure to be completely satisfactory and thank him for the disclosure. An inexperienced Wikipedian acquiescing to an employers request is an honest mistake. Further atonement is not required. Wikipedia should always welcome such disclosures, and without retribution of any kind. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

104. Suppport always conscientious from what I've seen Paul W (talk) 09:22, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
105. Support an excellent editor at DYK and elsewhere! JuniperChill (talk) 10:13, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
106. Support They do good work. Opm581 ^{(talk | he/him)} 10:30, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
107. Support Mox Eden (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
108. Support all the best. _signed, Aafi (guesthouse) 11:15, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
109. Support, thank you for all your work! Tvpuppy (talk) 14:31, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
110. Support many thanks for your incredible work at DYK and elsewhere Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 14:38, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
111. Support. I've seen the candidate's work around at DYK and they are very diligent. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:07, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
112. Support Thanks for volunteering and for keeping the lights on at DYK. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
113. Support ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:40, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
114. Support Good answer to my question, good interactions with them on my part, and with this many other good, trustworthy editors vouching for them it's clear that this process is really just a necessary formality. Daniel Case (talk) 20:32, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
115. Support. Best wishes. Volten001 ^☎ 20:37, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
116. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 21:39, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
117. Support Fathoms Below (talk) 23:30, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
118. Support. ShadowBallX (talk) 00:32, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
119. Support TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 00:54, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
120. Support - Dclemens is very thorough in DYK & maintains a high standard for sourcing and article quality. He would make a good admin — Chao Garden 🌱 ~ say hello 01:31, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
121. The standard 'I thought they were already an admin!' Great work at DYK, consistently. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:26, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
122. Support I am happy to see them run. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 05:22, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
123. Smart, articulate, appears to have maturity and good judgement, good content creator, highly active - what's not to like? :) Gatoclass (talk) 07:56, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
124. – robertsky (talk) 09:08, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
125. Not at all surprised to see this ~ Lindsay^Hello 09:15, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
126. Support Yup! Has a need, has a clue, is not a **** and normal checks all positive. KylieTastic (talk) 09:57, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
127. Support Seems like an all-around competent and dedicated editor with a number of highly impressive articles under their belt, making me confident in their editing abilities when it gets down to brass tacks. But, with the caveat that many of their earlier articles seem to be worryingly thinly sourced, and I'd encourage them to ensure that they all previously created pages conform to the notability guideline. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:08, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
128. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:40, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
129. Support-seems like a competant admin and we need more due to the large backlogs.Equivalent-Text2598 (talk) 10:57, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
130. Support, no issues. Aszx5000 (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
131. Support - I see no issues here. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
132. Support. Fully qualified candidate. Newyorkbrad (talk) 13:34, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
133. Support - definitely an excellent candidate who can be trusted with the admin tools. ~SG5536B 14:10, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
134. Support. Looks okay to me. Deb (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
135. Support, no concerns. Girth Summit _(blether) 15:30, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
136. Support, I see no red flags or concerns here, Easy support. –Davey2010^Talk 16:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
137. I thought he is an admin. Accesscrawl (talk) 16:40, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
138. Support, I've come across Dclemens1971's efforts a number of times while I edit around Washington state and its clear they're good people. Their work done at Commons should be a massive bonus to the justification of the nomination. Direct, but helpful. Knows the ins and outs, and doesn't mind working with new or older editors to make sure the guidelines are followed. Doesn't take any guff but doesn't give any either. Proud to have them around in my editing neighborhood.OlympiaBuebird (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
139. Support – I see them around DYK, and they have a very impressive resume plus testimonies from other admins. Perfect for me! Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 17:43, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
140. Support, excellent candidate. Zsinj^Talk 18:28, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
141. Support – Well-qualified. EdJohnston (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
142. Support – add me to the group who thought Dclemens1971 was already an admin. Will be great with the tools. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:12, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
143. Support Trustworthy candidate, trustworthy noms. Good answers to questions. Happy to pile on. In solidarity, Miniapolis 22:48, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
144. Support Thank you for volunteering your time with English-language Wikipedia and all the mayhem thereof! jengod (talk) 23:01, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
145. Support Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:08, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
146. Support. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:26, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
147. Support - one of our best editors. Bearian (talk) 02:20, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
148. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:30, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
149. Support - By all accounts a qualified candidate. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 02:41, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
150. Support Agent Viraj (talk · contribs) 07:42, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
151. Support - satisfied with experience. Blythwood (talk) 09:59, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
152. Support CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 13:46, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
153. ResonantDis_tortion 15:30, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
154. Approve nomination per statements from nominators. --Minoa (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
155. Support: their work at DYK indicates that they have a clue. TarnishedPath^talk 15:44, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
156. Support without hesitation. Familiar with their work and no issues. Welcome addition to the admin corps. Star Mississippi 17:40, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
157. Support In solidarity, Destinyokhiria _{(talk / cont)} 17:57, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
158. Support, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
159. Support Has a clue. No red or yellow flags... -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:45, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
160. Support - genuinely thought this user already had the mop! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 20:19, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
161. Support Cicada1010 (talk) 20:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
162. Support. Will be a great addition. —TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 21:12, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
163. Support, what do you mean "they haven't already been one for years". BD2412 T 21:24, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
164. Support—Kurtis ^(talk) 21:35, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
165. Support Excellent answers to the questions given. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:11, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
166. Support - I don't normally pay attention to RFAs, but this one caught my attention. I'm familiar with their work at DYK and NRHP, and have no doubt they'll be a good admin. APK hi :-) (talk) 23:24, 23 August 2026 (UTC)
167. Support sure, in solidarity. Jianhui67 ^T★C 03:21, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
168. Support No concerns Giulio 09:24, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
169. Support - Dclemens1971 has been very active with DYK recently, preparing sets and making sure it is free from errors. They've also been a productive content creator, and no red flags that I can see, so no issues at all with granting them the mop. Good luck, and welcome to the admin corps!  — Amakuru (talk) 09:33, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
170. Obvious support. I was especially impressed by this complete and helpful comment, which laid out a situation in a way that made my own job easy. Bishonen | tålk 13:18, 24 August 2026 (UTC).
171. Support Strong answers and track record from the candidate (and particularly impressed by the lessons learnt and thoughtfulness shown in answering question 3), with a solid case from the nominators too. Greenleader(2) (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
172. Support More than qualified ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 13:46, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
173. Support per Hey man im josh ―"GraveDragon-X" _(hihi) 15:30, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
174. Support Very qualified candidate with good content work and solid work at New Page Patrols. Also trusted noms so I think they will make an excellent admin. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 16:33, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
175. Support. We may not always be on the same side of arguments, but Dclemens has been very professional when we've interacted. In solidarity, Gommeh ^{(talk 🎮 sign)} 17:23, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
176. HurricaneZeta^C 17:58, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
177. Support TheBritinator (talk) 18:16, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
178. Dclemens has caught things I've let slip through that, although not wiki-breaking, were still extremely important to catch. We're better off with Dclemens getting a mop, especially to fix things like DYK updates breaking or handling last-minute changes when something's already in cascading protection. He's also incredibly diligent at WP:PERM/AP, and I highly value anyone that can give constructive feedback to prospective editors on how to improve their article writing even when delivering a comment that basically kills any chance of getting the permission requested. Full confidence. The oppose only gives me more confidence, in fact. Sennecaster (Chat) 18:20, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
179. Support: surprised this editor wasn't already an admin. Travellers & Tinkers (talk) 18:38, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
180. Support A great editor. My interaction has mainly been through DYK, and I trust their judgment. A lot of editors underestimate the difficulty in preparing a DYK prep area. Pleased to support. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:58, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
181. Support I've seen DC around AFD: a dedicated, experienced editor with excellent communications skills. I expect they will be great as an Admin. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 20:31, 24 August 2026 (UTC)
182. Support. Great candidate. Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:05, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
183. Support, have found Dclemens1971's work at DYK to be careful and measured. CMD (talk) 00:53, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
184. Support – finally! Great at DYK and elsewhere :) Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 01:15, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
185. Support – A profoundly charitable editor I am glad to see mop in hand. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
186. Support. You mostly seem to be a solid candidate. The history of COI editing made me pause for a while. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and conclude that you've come around and won't ever do it again. Renerpho (talk) 09:30, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
187. Support. Funnily enough, I checked DClemens user page a just few weeks ago to check if they were an admin. I've been impressed by where we've crossed paths. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
188. 'Support MOAR!!! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
189. Support - Looks like a great candidate. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:41, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
190. Support Familiar with his work at AfD, and also DYK, where I was impressed by the way he got a hook unstuck. When thinking of a word to describe his work here, I thought diligent—and then saw that Epicgenius and Sennecaster used the same word above. StonyBrook _babble 20:51, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
191. Support - kind of a pile on at this point but I am super impressed with the redemption arc. I think this editor will make a good admin. ++Lar: t/c 22:40, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
192. Support - Always does great work at DYK, good answers to questions. Thanks for volunteering. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 22:56, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
193. Support. Trusted and trustworthy. Binksternet (talk) 01:37, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
194. Support - Excellent candidate. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 03:32, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
195. Samir 03:35, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
196. Support Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
197. Support - Low-drama user who learns from mistakes. Happy to support this trusted wikipedian. BusterD (talk) 09:38, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
198. Support – Ammarpad (talk) 09:59, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
199. Support - Not sure I've interacted with them but see them around quite a bit, they have my trust and I'm sure they will do great with the bit. – LuniZunie_(talk) 11:28, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
200. Support --Mateus2019 (talk) 11:56, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
201. Support per nom ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 13:29, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
202. Support didnt realize they weren't already an admin. ^MetalBreaks_AndBends (One for all) 14:04, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
203. Support - InfernoHues (talk) 14:35, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
204. Dclemens is the kind of person who can look at a backlog and decide "well ok, I guess this needs help, I'll learn how to do it" Yes. 100% yes. Support per this and noms. 7amiþ reform · solidarity · 💬 · 📊 16:14, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
205. Support - I am satisfied with the candidate's acknowledgment that they made a mistake about not declaring COI, and we all make occasional mistakes, and I am satisfied with the candidate's participation at DRV. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:02, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
206. --📎 JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 23:24, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
207. You earned it ! Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:08, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose - For that instance where Dclemens1971 reverted a citation needed tag that was clearly warranted, and when I raised it on the talk page because the info was unsourced, they claimed the info was "clearly cited", when in reality they had actually added the source after the fact rather than owning the mistake (see discussion). Not a good sign for someone looking for more tools. Morogris (✉ • ✎) 18:08, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

   Discussion moved to talk page Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:11, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I'm familiar with Dclemens, a few of the BTS areas we both participate in overlap. They will probably be a net positive as an administrator, I've got no problems there. Unfortunately, knowingly editing with a COI for years before deciding to declare it formally is a pretty major blow, especially for someone who is now running for the mop. COIs need to be declared upfront, so that articles remains unbiased. Even editors that believe they can write completely unbiased with a COI eventually realise they cannot. There was a good essay that gives an example of that from either @HouseBlaster or @The Bushranger. I welcome anybody to link it in a reply if they know what I'm referring to. Regardless, it would not be right morally for me to support due to this, but I'm also not going to oppose. So consider this a friendly good luck with an asterisk to stick by the guidelines in future. All the best! 11WB 💬 06:33, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

   Don't try to look it up. User_talk:11WB#Essay. Polygnotus (talk) 07:43, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

   Although the last trivial edit (just to change the Chairman's name) was in 2022 the only substantive changes made were in 2015. It looks like 98% of their edits are post any COI editing issues. KylieTastic (talk) 10:00, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

   On a closer inspection, it appears to have actually been UPE, which is slightly worse. Many edits were done between 2015 and 2022, with edits such as this one being quite substantial in size (this article is part of their disclosure). To go seven years without declaring a paid COI is not good. They've committed to the project since then, which is why I'm not opposing. 11WB 💬 10:17, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

   I do not believe I wrote such an essay, but I agree that COI editors cannot write neutrally, no matter how hard they try.

   While I'm here, can I ask you reword your comment which implies that all 192 supporters are doing something immoral? I believe you are trying to say I am not, personally, comfortable supporting, which is reasonable. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:23, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

   I didn't say that at all, with respect @HouseBlaster. My comment made no mention of what other editors are doing, I spoke only for myself. "It would not be right morally for me to support". I would appreciate not having my words taken and spun to imply something I'm not. (Please direct any further replies to my talk page, rather than here, as these discussions generally get moved once they reach a certain length.) 11WB 💬 03:14, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

   I'm more than satisfied with this comment making your intention explicit, and I apologize for my incorrect assumption. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:47, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

2. Neutral simply due to my own unfamiliarity with the user - no reason to oppose, none to support in my own experience. Good luck regardless (though with numerical superiority, who needs luck? ;))! DimensionalFusion (talk) 20:41, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

General comments

• Since everyone is so positive maybe we can use this section to file our complaints inspire Dclemens1971 to be even greater in the future. I'll start: Dclemens1971 has yet to (offer to) deep clean my dishwasher. Polygnotus (talk) 03:54, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
  • This is inspired. From now on I'm opposing all candidates who have not personally mopped my kitchen a chore I have definitely not been putting off for mumble months. Rusalkii (talk) 07:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    I want a pony. RoySmith (talk) 11:26, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    As there are ~800 admins to 15 bureaucrats, if you ask for demand a pony from every RfA and a large stable from every RfB, you should be good. (in solidarity), JacobTheRox^{(talk|contributions)} 12:18, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    This better not be retroactive...---v/r - TP 20:05, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    Looks like some editors are going to horse around until someone ponies up. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    All opposed, say neigh. RoySmith (talk) 20:52, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    I want a *golden* pony and it has to be bigger than Roy's. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:39, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

    what am i looking at 👀 ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:08, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

    I came here for an argument. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:11, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

    @ToBeFree Sorry I am using this section for giving constructive feedback to Dclemens1971. Click here to have an argument. Polygnotus (talk) 01:26, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

    You want 12A next door... Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:59, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

    I want Dclemens to give me a Tibetan Mastiff, which, by the way, is an infinitely better suggestion than Roy's and L3X1's (I mean, who doesn't love a Tibetan Mastiff? Aren't they just so cute?!?!)^[Humour] Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 17:43, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

    @Icepinner Just one? Everyone knows Tibetan Mastiffs work best in pairs. Dream big. Dclemens1971 should give you at least 17. Polygnotus (talk) 11:29, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

    I think the real vote buying strategy here is a two year supply of food for the Tibetan mastiff rather than the pooch itself. ^Thanks,L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:36, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  • Back to the subject in hand, this thread started with a proposal to deep clean a dishwasher. I would suggest caution here, some years before my late mother got dementia, we found a letter from C.S Lewis among the many papers filed in her dishwasher (she'd been one of his students in the mid 40s). Given that dishwashers are boxes that seem perfectly designed for the filing of miscellaneous papers, and they are often located in the same room as the domestic paperwork hub, lets not be too hasty. ϢereSpielChequers 16:19, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

---

All of you folks saying "I thought they already were an admin!" should be installing Daniel Quinlan's user highlighting script so you can find those people you thought were already admins and get them to become admins! The config section tells you how to customize the tool to show user groups in your common.css; setting extendedconfirmed=EC, sysop=A will help you find good potential admins. happy scouting :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:02, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

I thought @Theleekycauldron was already an admin, downloaded the user script, and it turns out that theleekycauldron is, in fact, an admin. EaglesFan37 (talk) 13:03, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

When do we see that (A) under those wings of yours? (using User:Mdaniels5757/markAdmins) – robertsky (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Daniel's user highlighting script mentioned, wahoo! I unfortunately know that Dclemens is, as of writing this, not an admin. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 17:43, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

@Robertsky, be nice. It's cruel and unusual to press-gang someone who hasn't even been here for a year yet! In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

markAdmins for life charlotte ^👸♥ 15:09, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

There's also User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/UserHighlighterSimple (my preferred). TarnishedPath^talk 15:55, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.