Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard

Proposed text for Flynn DRN case

@Robert McClenon:

Here is the exact text I would like to propose for inclusion in the article, as requested.

Happy to adjust tone or wording if needed.


Proposed addition:


“In 2015, the Flynn brothers joined Jamie Oliver’s Food Tube network to promote plant-based cooking.”

{{cite news |title=Identical Irish twin brothers get set to join Jamie Oliver |url=https://www.independent.ie/life/food-drink/the-happy-pear-brothers-bring-healthy-eating-to-the-masses/30456847.html |work=Irish Independent |date=23 July 2014}}


“In 2019, they opened a fully plant-based Happy Pear café in Dublin Airport’s Terminal 1, the first of its kind at the airport.”

{{cite news |title=The Happy Pear Opens Dublin Airport’s First Plant-Based Café |url=https://www.dublinairport.com/latest-news/2019/09/09/the-happy-pear-opens-dublin-airport%27s-first-plant-based-caf%C3%A9 |work=Dublin Airport |date=9 September 2019}} Calmsea123456 (talk) 14:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrectly closing Pizza_effect dispute

User:Robert McClenon:

You have closed this dispute because "I haven't informed the other editor" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Pizza_effect

I have, and I wrote as much in the comment. I replied to one of his comment on the talk page, here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pizza_effect#c-Gotofritz-20251204135000-DonBeroni-20251204134200

Now if I file a dispute it redirects to the one you have incorrectly closed. Thanks, Robert

Newly opened 'Pointer (computer programming)' dispute

This caught my eye, as something I remember seeing disputes about many years ago on some forum or other. As an outsider with no wish to engage in this rather silly argument, I'll not comment on the project page, but someone needs to point out to ~2025-40797-91 that labelling a talk page thread 'RfC' doesn't make it one. Wikipedia has a formal RfC process designed to resolve disputes by asking a neutral question, and by seeking input from uninvolved contributors through notifications. The so-called 'RfC' on Talk:Pointer (computer programming) did neither. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:AndyTheGrump - I have closed the dispute, not because of the RFC that is not an RFC, but because the filing editor has not been discussing, and has made personal attacks. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Followup query on Luc Besson DRN submission

Hi Robert McClenon,

Was my DRN notice request denied specifically because of the adjoining sockpuppet noticeboard submission or because an involved user was suspected of foul play barring the fact that there was another relevant noticeboard request?

I'm still new, and I want to know if I asked for assistance in the wrong location/time or if my notice was properly placed but problematic in another way.

Thank you in advance! Phoeromones (talk) 01:37, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Phoeromones - I declined your request only because of the sockpuppet investigation. DRN does not handle any dispute that is also pending in another forum. You did not ask for assistance at the wrong place or the wrong time, because you were not involved in the SPI. It was the wrong combination of time and place because there was also the SPI. If Royge 12 is cleared, you can request DRN again, if the dispute isn't also pending in a third location. You didn't make a mistake. Asking for DRN is a better idea than either sockpuppetry or edit-warring. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:58, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sockpuppet case has been closed, with an IP ban result. The notice should be updated. Despressso (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:DRN