User talk:RHaworth/2012 Aug 31

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is an Online Ambassador on the English Wikipedia
Page extended-protected
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archives

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

[Title width guide. Delete above here if no further edits – already in archive. If further edits, move below here.]

Wikimania 2012

My apologies to Drmies (talk · contribs) and anyone else who was at Wikimania and did not meet me. This being my first time in the US and my wife having planned a tight schedule that gave us only three days here, I wanted to see something of DC. And indeed we did, most interesting being the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal and Union Station. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:01, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Collège d'enseignement en immobilier

You recently deleted an article named Collège d'enseignement en immobilier which was created after seeing several red links about that institutions in other articles on Wikipedia. Even if the education facility does not seem to be worth enough to be included in Wikipedia, the incomplete article still permitted users to gather some information by clicking on the blue link when reading another article. --BScMScMD (talk) 17:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Utterly no attempt made to provide evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Except the fact that other contributors linked the institution in several articles. Moreover, a few days ago on Wikipedia I came over a list of schools in the province of Quebec which mentionned the education facility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BScMScMD (talk • contribs) 02:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at Template:Qc Uni in the "private colleges" section. The Collège d'enseignement en immobilier is present, which should prove its notability on Wikipedia. In other words, if the institution is part of the list, it is without any doubt worth creating an article on the subject. If I'm wrong, then what's the use of having such a template with the names and links of so many institutions if half of them are not notable? --BScMScMD (talk) 02:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Then what's the use of having such a template with the names and links of so many education facilities if half of them are not notable, which means that contributors will never have the opportunity to create an article with the institution as the main subject? --BScMScMD (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Could you at least set the deleted article as one of my subpages. Other users have already done this for other "non-notable" articles which may gain notbility in the future?--BScMScMD (talk) 21:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

  • You asked "what use". The answer is: none whatsoever. So I have deleted all the red links from template:Qc Uni. The template is what we call a navbox, intended to link existing articles on a given topic. Deleting the redlinks does not in any way predjudice the creation of articles about those institutions in the future. I have restored your text to User:BScMScMD/sandbox. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:26, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --BScMScMD (talk) 22:22, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

By the way, UnQuébécois does not seem to believe that the deletion of "redlinks does not... prejudice the creation of articles about those institutions in the future," as seen here (RHaworth, 18 July 2012). The modifications you performed were deleted... --BScMScMD (talk) 00:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

  • It apparently exists as a recognized educational institution (http://www.afe.gouv.qc.ca/en/pretsEtudesTempsPartiel/etablissements.asp), although it issues an "attestation of college studies" (AEC, in French) rather than a "diploma of college studies" (DEC) and seems to be more in the vein of adult continuing education. Most Google hits seem to be from online business directories. It might take a certain amount of time and effort to establish a case for notability. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Sock?

Sure seems to pass the duck test to me.[1][2] Edward321 (talk) 21:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

R Ganesh

Kindly redirect Dr.R.Ganesh (which is how he is called in Kannada magazines) to the stub Shatavadhani Ganesh. I dont have permission to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishvas vasuki (talk • contribs) 01:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Over your threshold

Hi there, I wonder how fast this was deleted? Because I did not get a copy of it with my ten minute checks of deleted articles. But somehow this article was missed. Can you please provide me a copy of the text of over your threshold? I am going to host it here, http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Over_your_threshold so if you want you can post it there. Thanks, mike James Michael DuPont (talk) 02:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

  • You need to learn how to create wikilinks. 17 minutes elapsed between the speedy tag being applied and my deleting the article. Posted to wikia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

RaceYours

Why did you delete the RaceYours entry? I believe I entered the content I wanted to go on the page in the talk section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjanstulen (talk • contribs) 17:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I know you may find it a strange idea, but article content goes on the article page, not the talk page. I must warn you that even if you do the job properly, the article stands a good change of being deleted as blatant advertising. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Neocate

Dear Mr Haworth, Many thanks for your response. As you stated, I am working with Nutricia to help them with their use of digital channels, although I am not an employee of the company directly.

I have had a look over the pages you suggested, and other pages in Wikipedia too, and I'm trying to understand how the COI issue applies across them. It seems that thee are lots of Wikipedia entries written by people who have a working-level knowledge of the products they describe, and almost certainly have some interaction with their owners, as is the case with myself. In this case of a health and allergy product, Nutricia feel they have a responsibility to make the information that worried Mum's are looking for available to them, and with the knowledge they have of the condition and possible treatments they are one of an extremely small number of people in a position to do so accurately. The article has been with objectivity in mind , with no attempt to 'sell' the product or convince people of any particular benefits, but rather to help people to understand what it is and what it's for.

Given that although we are affiliated with the product all we want to do is provide balanced, fair information to help these Mum's, could you please clarity by advising us how to go about putting that information onto Wikipedia? Many thanks, EmmaEJarvis (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia is not a place for advocating "for mums". If you wish to do so you may wish to start your own blog. For Wikipedia articles, the base requirement is that the subject of the article has recieved significant coverage by third party reliable sources. (note that the fact that some other articles exist that have been developed inappropriately is not a valid reason to allow other articles to do so.) -- The Red Pen of Doom 17:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Stubs

Just so you know I have about 12,000 articles I'm going to be creating over the next week or two, some will be xxx is a, others decent or public domain material. Most of the British villages I aim to create will be sub stubs and unsourced as I think they stand more of a chance of being expanded. The majority will probably be Turkish villages though which will have a population figure and source. You know that I mostly create decent new stubs but occasionally I feel wikipedia would benefit in the long term to have a wide scope of articles simply identified and started. Notable subjects will always be notable subjects and we must try to work towards as broad a scope as possible.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Foulbridge and Fornside...♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Kelbarrow, Keekle, thousands more to come soon..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC) I've proved with Foulbridge and Fornside that they are worthwhile article subjects, and our purpose on wikipedia is to route out notable topics. It shouldn't matter how short the articles are to start with. Its more productive for wikipedia to start working towards them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Kentrigg. Better?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I think it is just a spooky coincidence, I cannot recall publishing the fact anywhere on the web, but it just happens that I was brought up in an house on Kentrigg. I know that it has a population of rather more than 29 sheep but it cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered an hamlet in its own right. It does not even justify a redirect. Please note that my given name is Roger. I am mystified: since you know my attitude to your sub-stubs, why are you so keen to draw them to my attention? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not a spooky coincidence at all. Let's just say I'm far more intelligent than I think you realize which goes beyond the 5th sense, I have inner powers which attract me to certain things.... I know your name is Roger, the name Ronald amused me though. Yes, I can well imagine there being a lot of sheep, the low sheep population equated low notability! Hehe I'm just playing with you. I happen to like you actually, it amuses me as I know you are under the impression that if an article is started very short then its not expandable.. On a serious note, I gather its a very small farming community in the northern edge of Kendal? I'd say you are correct as google books picks up nothing on it and for most Cumbrian settlements it has scraps which can be used to compile something decent. But its proved that it isn't a good idea to sub stub them blindly without checking each one.. The vast majority are notable, but quite a few aren't. There was a reason why I left some of the earlier ones red linked as I couldn't even verify them as place names.. Regards. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

There you go, Kentrigg is back. Yet I still managed to compile something decent for it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Also known as 5236 characters. :) Thine Antique Pen 12:10, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it might be possible actually to get it to reach GA level. Do you still think its not notable Rodge? I think you could probably find something on most features which appear on OS maps. It would be great to have that sort of coverage. Anyway, I think Kendal could do with a few articles, I think I'll create a Template:Kendal. Kendal Church especially should have an article. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Neighborhoods are a problem. I take the position that if I ever lived there, it's ipso facto notable. Some say just the opposite. BTW,d does the place have defined boundaries? DGG ( talk ) 19:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
A lot listed in List of places in Cumbria are neighborhoods of some of the towns. I would say that if you can find sources to provide encyclopedic information about a place then they are not a problem. Of course knowing precise boundaries is difficult but I'd imagine on council records they'd have maps defining districts if not geographically, electorally. I'm of the opinion that if you can provide B class or higher standard articles on smal locales in the UK its specialist knowledge which contributes to a greater knowledge base and more valuable site. But as I say, they have to provide information and be sourcable. Anyway I'll quit playing with you know Roger, but I am confident you could write something worthwhile about most locales, even neighborhoods of towns. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Dilek2 – again

Looks like more block evasion with only hours left for the block to expire. [3][4][5][6][7] Edward321 Edward321 (talk) 16:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Noted. Keep watching, may well pop up on another IP address. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

And again

Please see this duck 217.248.140.111 (talk · contribs) Thanks!. -- The Red Pen of Doom 19:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Movim

Hi RHaworth, I cannot understand your reasons for deleting Movim. You argued: "Article about a website, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". Movim is not one of that. So please revert the deletion. Thank you.K-hol (talk) 09:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Very sorry, I should have changed the deletion reason to spam. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Why spam? And could we have at least our article back, we do not have any backup, and we worked a lot on it, although it appears to be spam for some people.K-hol (talk) 15:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

For your information, Movim is very similar to Diaspora* and in fact the author of the Movim article used the same structure as that of other articles about social networks. Why don't you delete those other articles as spam then? What is the rationale here and what criteria made Movim's article spam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.244.166.50 (talk) 15:12, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

  • An obvious difference is that the two Diaspora articles have extensive references to independent articles in English. Yours had none. Text e-mailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:38, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Well I am so sorry that Movim is a French project and has so far mostly been communicated in France. However this doesn't mean it is irrelevant to English wikipedia. The whole project is written in English and is getting non-French contributors. Just consider the fact that we could easily forge those references and you'll see your reasoning holds no ground. Moreover, the fact that you considered our project's article as spam only shows that you didn't do even a superficial check, which would have shown that the article wasn't bogus. I though Wikipedia aimed to be a collection of human knowledge, but I guess I forgot that arbitrary censorship was also part of human nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.244.166.50 (talk) 16:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

RM bot

Hello, re: Talk:Current title for page 3, it appears to me that you protected this page so that user:RM bot could not recreate it on July 13. RM bot has not posted at all on Wikipedia since 17:30, 18 July 2012, and it is sorely missed at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions. Could you please unprotect this page, so it can be determined whether the block of this page—granted it is obviously a bug in the program—is stopping RM bot from doing all of its work? I would like to see if by chance the bot is still running, or whether it has crashed alltogether. Thanks – Wbm1058 (talk) 00:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Found the culprit! See Template talk:Move-multi. Doesn't seem that this hung up or crashed the bot, as it's happened several times before and the bot kept running.—Wbm1058 (talk) 14:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Noted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Killer porpoise

Hi Roger You deleted my page about the killer porpoise due to "blatant hoax". This page is not a hoax. The Killer Porpoise may not be a real creature, but it is true that sailing instructors use this legend to keep their students from putting their hands in around the dock. If wikipedia pages like The Loch Ness Monster are not hoax pages, this page should be aloud to stay up. Do not delete this page merely because you do not believe in the killer porpoise, it is a legitimate story/legend used as a teaching tool. I have been sailing on the boston harbour for my whole life and have grown up to be an instructor now, and have seen both sides of this legend. Students love hearing about the killer porpoise, and instructors love telling them about it. It is a fun legend that instructors and students have been passing down for years. Understand the difference between blatant hoax and fictional legend. Somehow you should be able to understand that this is a page that can stay up on this database. I have stated my reasons and they are valid examples of why this page should not be deleted. Thank you. --Mleg94-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mleg94 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Somehow you should be able to understand: a) the proper place to put talk page comments and how to sign them and b) that a legend must still quote reliable sources. For all we knew from reading the article, it could perfectly well be something that you had just made up. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Certified Automation Professional

Roger, I am a little confused as to why you deleted the article Certified Automation Professional. You had cited it sounded like a job posting – which is not what it was. Wikipedia has numerous articles about other industry certifications (which are not deleted), why did you feel the need to delete this one? Also, another did raise a concern about possible copy/paste copyright issues – as a result the text of the article had been rewritten. Yet you still deleted it. I ask that you please undelete the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.184.246 (talk • contribs)

  • Count yourself lucky that I am bothering to reply to an IP address. The re-written version was still too much of a job listing but the main problem was the absence of links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. But since the ISA article currently exists and deals with the certificate in adequate detail, I have restored as a redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

CSD of one of my user sub pages

Thanks for getting rid of that for me! --Nouniquenames (talk) 19:13, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Chargemaster

Dear Roger Hello – I am trying ascertain why the Chargemaster page was last deleted? (R2: Cross-namespace redirect from mainspace.) The content has been changed to provide basic facts and many of its peers are on Twitter. How do we go about explaining the importantance of the topic? Thank you, Lezard1977 (talk) 09:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for spotting that on Tom Bates, it was extremely careless of me. Best, Mephtalk 17:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC).

Klein Windhoek

Dear RHaworth, some time ago you deleted Klein windhoek,namimbia, created by User:Kyknlos, as duplication. The situation is that Klein Windhoek is a suburb of Windhoek. Would you please be so kind to have a look at the deleted article again---and if it contains a suitable reference, and is not indeed just a duplication of Windhoek, undelete it somewhere to my user space or to main space? Thanks a lot in advance, --Pgallert (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of August CE daily “slugs”: Thanks!

Hi, thanks for cleaning up the premature current events pages—and I trust you’ll help deal with any fallout, should it occur.

----Schweiwikist (talk) 10:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Smart911 page

Hello, You deleted my Smart 911 page and I contested the speedy deletion but didn't get any answers. The G11 Unambiguous advertising or promotion states that "An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion." I used only objective and unbiased information, describing only what this service is about and I linked it to references from independent, non-commercial sources, like USA TODAY for example.

Can you please tell me what made you consider it "unambiguous advertising"? — Ev — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilee Ebb (talk • contribs) 13:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I must admit I hesitated briefly over the deletion of this one because of the references but given your obvious COI, I decided to delete. It would be far better if you were to wait until someone with no COI writes about it. But let us see how the AfC submission fares. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

About deleted article Alvaro Bishaj

Hi yet again. See: User:Shirt58/Alvaro Bishaj. I'll go thru the processes with my usual screaming dramatics, RFC/Us, WP:CIVIL blocks, and multiple sock-puppetry allegations. And that's a promise! --Shirt58 (talk) 15:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion&pe=1&#Alvaro_Bishaj--Shirt58 (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
I restored it. The one you deleted just said he was an Albanian footballer, fair enough, but it now has refs showing him playing the the proper level. JohnCD (talk) 10:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi, Your deletion of Linguist List left 700 red links.[8] Please restore. Thnx. — kwami (talk) 01:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Restored this one too, per request at REFUND. The article has been around since 2005, and "major online resource for the academic field of linguistics... thousands of subscribers all over the world... " is surely enough assertion of importance to pass A7. I'll tell the tagger to try AfD if he likes, but the references look good enough to me. (I admit that every one that I tried to check timed out, but I don't think the article is a hoax!) JohnCD (talk) 11:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Heard Building

Hello RHaworth, I am interested in writing the Heard Building article, a page you have previously deleted. Its a historic building in Phoenix, Arizona built in 1923 and was briefly the tallest building in Arizona. Am I free to recreate this page with similar content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cantstandya (talk • contribs) 09:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Excellent! User:Jmappleton1/Heard Building has been waiting quietly for you to come along. As you can see in the history, I rescued it from a rather silly speedy deletion nomination. Obviously you will, as a minimum, need to add decent references before you move back to the (article) namespace. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Shatavadhani Ganesh

You had previously created the redirect Dr. R. Ganesh based on another variation of the redirect see User talk:RHaworth#R Ganesh. Is the current article candidate for speedy or does it need to go through PROD/AfD? -- The Red Pen of Doom 11:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Troikapocalypse deletion

Dear Mr. Haworth, Today you have deleted my page Troikapocalypse. Both wikipedia and indiegogo pages are "mine" (mine and from the other two authors) and there is no copyright infringement since all text and images are ours. We need the wikipage for when the indiegogo page finished in 25 days and to promote our new book. I even provided the indiegogo page in the references to note that this page was also our. Would you mind reviewing my page again please? Many thanks and kind regards, Inês Costa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minescosta (talk • contribs) 08:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I could also have deleted it as advertising. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the book is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:52, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

My sandbox deletion

Why was my sandbox deleted? The reason was "just playing about" and I do not know what that means. Kg pwn (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

  • You had added the {{hangon}} tag which puts a page into CAT:CSD. Finding it there, I had a choice between removing the hangon tag or simply deleting the page. Since there appeared to be no useful content, I chose the latter course. I have now restored your edits. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

"Spam page" protection

Appreciated – wasn't sure how savvy the deleting admin would be :) --Herby talk thyme 10:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Cambus, Clackmannanshire

Hi. I was considering creating a stub article for Cambus, Clackmannanshire, and was surprised to see that one had previously been deleted by you citing "vandalism". There certainly is a notable place of that name. Has there never been a sensible article? Thanks. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 15:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Hawsworth probably made another of his notability judgement calls. He wouldn't know notability if it jumped up and tugged his hairy backside and said "C'mon Rodge, let's go for a walk in the Cumbrian hills and smell the air of home". I'm kidding actually, forgive my sarcasm ahem. He was probably right, it might have contained something nasty. Personally I'd have restarted. I've started it anyway, feel free to expand it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I have e-mailed a copy of the page. I will let you judge whether it was vandalism. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Of course I do not associate myself with Dr. Blofeld's remarks above. Thank you for the emailed page which clearly was vandalism, or had been vandalised. Just so that I understand it properly, are you saying that the page was created like that, with no history? SamuelTheGhost (talk) 23:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Complete history of the deleted edits now e-mailed. No trace of any sensible version. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I've received that and I see that all input was from the same vandal editor, so I'm sure you're right. Thanks. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 09:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
You always seem to be on and doing what you do best! You get a tireless barnstar because you never really seem to sleep and you do a good job! Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Medo9

This user, Medo9 (talk · contribs), seems to continue his/her usual behavior of making unnecessary edits to existing articles/templates (most of which were reversed), as well as creating new, absolutely useless, templates. Also, as you have personally noted on his/her talk page, it's a sockpuppet account of Medo4 (talk · contribs), which can be clearly seen in this example: [9](both accounts tried to nominate the same template for speedy deletion). Since this user was warned several times but has never responded to anything and never provided any reasons for his/her unnecessary edits (as well as reasons for creating a sock account), I was wondering why wasn't he/she blocked yet...98.113.207.253 (talk) 21:47, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Ilkley Golf Club

Hello, I seem to have fallen foul of the editing rules when I created the Ilkley Golf Club page. Could it be re-instated so that I can work on it again, or can I start the page again under the special:mypage link and have someone look over it before publishing ? Yours, Mike Jarvis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yorkshiresoul (talk • contribs) 14:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Whaddya mean re-insted? It consisted of "founded 1890" – there is nothing worth re-instating. I am very dubious about whether a local golf club, even of that age, will be deemed notable but you can certainly create a draft at [[User:Yorkshiresoul/anything]] (if that is what you mean by the rather cryptic phrase "special:mypage link") or you can try submitting via AfC. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

No worries, the page has been expanded by Dr. Blofeld, he certainly works quickly. Yorkshiresoul (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

All "dubiousness" would be erased simply by spending a couple of minutes researching. Wikipedia would be so much better off for it if editors make judgements based on sources rather than their own biases.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Sock?

You identified BeckyCleary (talk · contribs) as a sock of WilsonField2 (talk · contribs). However, WilsonField2 was blocked as a spam username, with instructions to choose a new name that did not represent the company, which is clearly what happened. So why place a notice on the new user's page? Clearly, they have done as they were told. I understand that the user created the same spammy article under the new user name, and could be admonished for that, but I'm not sure what purpose is served by admonishing a user for following the directions they were given in the first place. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Where was the admonition? It was a simple statement of fact. I would call it creating an audit trail. I felt that it was not easy for non-admins to see that this account had "previous". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Systems Science – IIT Rajasthan

Message was duplicated here and I have replied there. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Taxi War Dance

Who decides whether my bro's band, Taxi War Dance is worth putting on the encyclopedia? Not you, he sold thoooouuuusands of copies! I want the page put back. ThaArchitekt (talk) 02:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I would be fascinated to know what purpose the addition of a redirect at the top of this edit was supposed to serve. The band may have played in Peoria but is it notable, even in Peoria let alone the rest of the world? Kindly wait until someone with no COI thinks the band is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Last bunch of copyvios

The last straw was when I found File:Rosariotrolleybus.jpg. You did not even need to copy it because it on the Commons. Also you copied a lower resolution version instead of the original.

To save Martin H. wasting more time on Google images searches, I propose to delete all your remaining uploads apart from File:Fotomia.jpg (a pic of yourself). I thought about being kind and keeping the ones below on the grounds that {{PD-old}} probably applies but since you have not given proper source information, they need to go as well. I will give you a few days in case you can supply proper details for any of them but then I will simply delete. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:32, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Agreed.

--Fercho85 (talk) 22:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Whoa!

Please stop deleting file talk pages for files on commons, as those are not orphaned talk pages. Commonly, they contain discussions and WikiProject tags concerning the files. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Spiritofdubai.jpg.

You were a bit quick off the mark with your speedy of File:Spiritofdubai.jpg. Wyrdlight (talk · contribs) and the photographer Antony McCallum who took the image is one of the same person. He often contributes some of his images to Wikimedia Commons. This dates back to his early uploads before he got the hang of WP's layout. Yet this should have been obvious to you if you had read the copyright info in the Camera's Exif box at the bottom. But before I could pointy this out you had deleted it. Please put it back and I'll add a info box at the top (which didn't exist back in 2006 to guide him) .--Aspro (talk) 18:20, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks Aspro – just to confirm Aspro is correct. I'm Antony McCallum alias Wyrdlight the copyright owner of this image. More lately I've attempted to deal with growing and quite proper concerns about copyright violation (- no one should have their work stolen or plagiarised) by including a statement on my website at: http://www.wyrdlight.com/clients.htm Hope this is the reassurance needed to reinstate the image. Once done I can follow Aspro's info box guide. WyrdLight (talk) 19:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Why cannot you people learn to create links? Whaddy a mean "copyright info in the Camera's Exif box"? I cannot see any. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:51, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Patricia Caicedo, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK [•] 20:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Deletion of categories

I noticed that both Category:Private high schools in Cape May County, New Jersey and Category:Public high schools in Cape May County, New Jersey were deleted by you. These categories are part of a rather well-defined structure for all 21 counties in the state and the more than 600 high schools in the state are being distributed to these 21 pairs of categories that had already been created. I was not notified as the creator of these categories nor does it appear that you performed even the most basic check to see if these categories would be populated. I don't know why you wasted your time (and mine) with these deletions, but can you please undo this rather blatant mistake and recreate the categories so that they can be populated. Alansohn (talk) 22:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Both categories had been around for a month unpopulated so deletion was fully justifiable. But I have restored them. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:40, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks so much for taking care of this. It's easy for me to assume that others would realize, but this county has only six high schools and I had not started populating the subcategories. Just to be on the safe side, I have added an entry to each of the two recreated categories. Alansohn (talk) 01:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RHaworth/2012_Jul_15#Deleted_Neocate_page". Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 16:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

deep configuration assessment

I recently tagged an article as a possible copyright violation, and today I noticed that you prodded the article way back in 2010, so I thought I'd just give you a "heads-up," as a courtesy. Thank you. 71.178.51.90 (talk) 04:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Sorryokyes

I see where you blocked User:Sorryokyes, but no notice was given on his talk page. In addition, the user's first article is being discussed at Afd, yet he has no ability to respond or improve the article. Senator2029 • talk 18:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Deletion summaries

In the summary for O.J. Murdock's deletion, the (auto-generated?) summary notes that the deletion was the result of "a deletion discussion". Personally, I think it would be beneficial to provide a link to the specific XfD page (in this case, here). Nothing urgent and certainly no biggie, just my 2 cents as someone who occasionally checks the XfDs of deleted pages to gauge the arguments that led to the respective page's deletion. Best, 87.78.22.89 (talk) 22:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Normally a link to the AfD discussion is redundant because a reader can use WhatLinksHere. Eg. Wilson Field Ltd and Special:WhatLinksHere/Wilson Field Ltd. In the specific case you mention, my deletion reason was wrong; it should have been 'page dependent on a deleted page' because all there was at that title was a redirect to O. J. Murdock which has adequate deletion reasons. In other cases where WhatLinksHere does not work, I shall try and remember to add a link. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Tbh, it never even occured to me that WLH can be used to track e.g. an AfD page, I'll keep that in mind. --87.79.40.32 (talk) 18:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Payment as a Service

Hi RHaworth, Regarding the article payments as a service, In April 2012 you proposed the article for deletion. Since then I added references and deleted all text that I consider promotional. I would appreciate if you can recheck the article and consider remove the current 'proposal for deletion'. Thanks, (Juanparve (talk) 08:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC))

  • Please learn to create wikilinks. You are living in a time warp. When was my prod tag removed? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The tag was not removed, Im requesting you (that you added) to revise the article and consider to removed it, On the other hand, I don't understand what is wrong with my link, I would appreciate you inform me and let me know where to learn how to create wikilinks. Thanks, (Juanparve (talk) 13:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC))

  • Re links: please see the change I made to your message during this edit. Also read this help page. As to deletion: this gets positively surreal – please state explicitly where there is any 'proposal for deletion' in the current state of the payments as a service article – whether added by me or added by anyone else. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Delta Psi Delta

Hi, I was looking for the Delta Psi Delta (Canada) page and saw that is has been deleted and was wondering why? It is still a sorority within Canada with 3 separate chapters in London, Ottawa and Toronto. Is there anyway to undelete the page, as it is one of the key ways new university students are able to get a quick summary of our sorority. If not, would I be able to receive a copy of this page? Thanks -- Janiquea (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Text e-mailed. Wikipedia is not a freshers guide. New university students should look elsewhere for information. I see no evidence that the sorority is notable outside the three universities in question. You can raise the matter at deletion review but do not get too hopeful. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Medo9 again

Hello, sorry to bother you again, but it seems like this user, Medo9 (talk · contribs), who was previously temporarily blocked by you seems to be doing his/her "old thing" again – for example, right after his/her block expired, the user has attempted (yet again) to do a redundant, unexplained and more confusing edits to article about Gamal Abdel Nasser, which was the second time that user attempted to do same exact unexplained edit to same exact article on same exact day (previous edit was reverted by different person, last edit was manually reverted by me). Not only that, this user seem to (intentionally?) make several edits in a row to same article, making the "undo" function impossible to use, which is rather suspicious. I honestly don't know what to do now – talking to this person seems absolutely pointless (as witnessed by that person's talk page), and it seems temporary blocks are also pointless...98.113.207.253 (talk) 21:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

CubicShogi, Cubic Chess, mad author

Dear editor, I owe you an apology for mistakes in our short written communication. Sory, sory sory and again. I only mentioned by two chess variants – mad and stupid editor (at that time former scientist and author of articles on the brain and games editor in the Czech Republic. In recent days I have made small improvements in the article CubicShogi createned with my chess friend Ralph, editor of Wikipedia as yours. If you do not paint your mustache and beard on the dark, as I many years ago, could you block the ability to edit the Wa – see, you will feel much better.

Best regards. You psychiatry friend, Vladimir Pribylinec MD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prilin (talk • contribs) 07:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Please format your messages legibly. It is just possible that you are requesting me to block a Wikipedia editor. If that is the case, please state the name of that editor and the reasons you think a block is appropriate. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Uploading PDFs

Hi -- I'm working with a professor in the Education Program who is trying to upload some PDFs as tools for her students to use to assist them in editing wikipedia. I haven't seen them so I can't comment on the content, but I understand these are intended to be help files. I see you've deleted at least one of them, File:PJHC Wiki Account, User Page, and Sandbox.pdf. Can you tell me what the criteria are for a file intended for a use such as this to not be deleted? We do have a good many files of this nature already on Wikipedia, so I was surprised to find that it was a candidate for deletion. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk – contribs – library) 21:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Name names (ie. Wikipedia user names – we do not demand real names) – don't just say "a professor". Please point me to any "files of this nature already on Wikipedia". PDFs are totally contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia in that they cannot be edited collectively. The content of the PDFs is probably appropriate for the Wikipedia: namespace where it should be entered as wiki markup in normal wiki pages. Indeed JoyceChou (talk · contribs) appears to done quite a bit in this direction already. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

The professor's user name is DStrassmann; her real name is public knowledge (e.g. she is listed here) -- Diana Strassmann at Rice University. (Sorry about not naming her before; I was at work and in a bit of a hurry.) I agree that PDFs are not ideal, but my understanding of F10 is that the judgement for or against speedy deletion should be based on the content. Since you say the content seems appropriate, I would appreciate it if you would undelete this file. There are more files that Diana was planning to upload; she's emailed them to me and they are all .doc files. All relate to course content. I will ask why they're .doc rather than wiki text, but I suspect it's because they are going to be hosted in multiple places, including the Rice University website. I will ask about that, and will get them converted to other formats if that's an appropriate outcome, but in the meantime let me know what you think about undeleting the PDF and allowing the .doc files to go up. Classes are about to start and it would be nice to get this resolved quickly. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk – contribs – library) 22:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

  • By uploading stuff here in any format other than wiki markup, the professor is setting a terrible example to students. .doc format is almost as bad as PDF. But if other sites are available to host the files, why on earth do they need to be here at all? Links to them on external sites can be created in wiki pages here. If you really want them here, I suggest deletion review. So "get this resolved quickly" by uploading to a site that is not plagued by annoying admins! In any case, re the specific PDF you mentioned, surely this stuff is already covered more than once in various Wikipedia help pages – do we need it yet again – in whatever format? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
    I've suggested to Diana via email that she use wiki text, and I'll let you know the response. She is indeed planning to host this information at two locations, but the external location (Rice) is quite likely behind a userid/password wall, which makes it unusable as an external file link. For now let's wait and see if she can work in wiki text. Regarding whether the information is really needed: I think it's acceptable for a course run under the Education Program to have its own handouts, and not have to rely on the existing help pages. There are certainly plenty of resources out there but I think professors should be able to create material that is tailored for their classes if they wish to. Mike Christie (talk – contribs – library) 23:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

my double mistake

RHaworth, thanks for deleting RockMagnetist/Drafts/Corrupting Dr. Nice. It seems I made a double error – in creating the page when I meant to create a user page, then in not immediately flagging it for deletion after I moved it. I'm glad you caught it quickly. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/2012_Aug_31&oldid=1221628966"