User talk:RHaworth/2014 Nov 18

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

Archives

The Knowledge Centre for Agriculture Deletion

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

Great Lakes Institute of Management

Respected Sir, Greetings from Great Lakes Institute of Management. The Wikipedia page for Great Lakes Institute of Management was deleted sometime back. We understand that some of the information mentioned was promoting the institute's name and we respect your decision. We have prepared the new content for the Wikipedia page. Request you guide us as to how we can we make the Wikipedia page active again. Warm Regards, Rachit2908 (talk) 05:48, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

  • An article that has survived for eight years deserves better than speedy deletion. Restored but kindly leave it to people with no COI to improve the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:45, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Hi, I have edited the article and will continue doing so in the future. Request you to check and to take back the vote for deletion on the discussion page! Thanks, Sushree27 (talk) 15:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I am unconvinced that you have really established notability but it would certainly be OK for you to add a note to the AfD discussion pointing out that you have improved the references. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Creating a new page for an airliner?

Mr. Haworth. Please do point me to somebody else if need be, but I need help on another page I would like to create. I tried the Teahouse, but I am not immediately finding somebody as active as you seem to be. I want to create a page for a private airline company having operated from Switzerland and Belgium between 1959 and 1988. Its size was more or less that of Martinair. How do I approach this? Are there templates to use? What should I include? Any other relevant information you can provide? (I posted it just now without Heading and signature - I apologize while feeling embarrassed) — 6th Common Sense (talk) 21:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Err... yes I do, don't I? My first page wasn't quite a success, was it? I apparently also need to learn the vocabulary here, confusing templates with examples. I am trying to get this right. As mentioned, if you do not find my questions appropriate, then do point me to somebody else. In any case, you did help me now, in your own specific way. You gave me a place to start, which I am grateful for. — 6th Common Sense (talk) 00:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Your first page still has a chance to become a success - do you intend to finish it? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I do. Thanks for bringing it back to my user space. I noticed I can also upload images now. That'll work to back-up the text. Open question I still have. This was a project from the early seventies. No internet then. I only have newspaper scans and copies. How can I add them as source? Do I upload them as images to Commons? — 6th Common Sense (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Use {{cite journal}}. Do not upload the scans - doing so would be a copyright violation - but RHaworth is the expert on why.--Launchballer 17:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Launchballer. — 6th Common Sense (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I created User:6th Common Sense/HAWA Air. How does it look? I included an image, but it is marked for deletion, while I tried to use the example of Air Belgium as far as licensing is concerned. My image is marked for speedy deletion though. Why is that? — 6th Common Sense (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

  • There are NO sources. There is biased (or at least unsupported) language like, " Hawa Air was maneuvered to close down under political pressure in 1988". There is little or no assertion as to the notability of this topic. -- Orange Mike | Talk 00:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I was aware that there were no sources. No need to write that in capital letters. I added one and included another image, which backs up the airliner's existence as well imho. As for the unsupported (not "biased") comment, I'll add the reference {{cite journal}} tonight. Beyond that, is there anything else missing or can it be moved to mainspace? (my first page!) — 6th Common Sense (talk) 11:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Please note the : trick to link to an image rather than embed it.
You did not use the Air Belgium logo closely enough. Logos must be uploaded to Wikipedia, not Commons. They must have a full fair use rationale and, I believe they are only allowed in articles, not drafts.
We are told that references to paper (as per Launchballer's instructions) are as valid as web links but I still prefer links. But in this case reviewers will recognise that web links may be hard to find.
You added a link to commons:Category:Hawa Air - so why have you not created and populated the category?
I fear that one cite journal ref may not be enough. Indeed, I fear that however hard you work on it, the subject is going to be deemed non-notable. Do not try and move to mainspace. I have already told you to use draft: space - move the article to draft:Hawa Air and, when you think it is ready, slap {{subst:submit}} at the top. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not immediately understanding the : remark...

I also do not understand the "closely enough" usage of the Air Belgium logo. I don't use it myself. I referenced it as to use an example of how the "Hawa Air" logo should be licensed similarly...

There indeed will not be a lot of web links. I have dozens of pages of magazine copies and scans though, which I can reference, as far as I understood, by using the "cite journal" functionality. I understood already and will not move the article to mainspace myself. In fact, I will not move any article I think I can contribute to mainspace myself.

As I am new, I find it difficult to compile you saying "why have you not created and populated the category?". Please explain what it means and how I do that.

However, my main question about your reaction is the following. Without refs and without "cite journals" there already is ample evidence on the page, as it is, that this airliner existed - or do you think I photo-shopped the pictures? How it could be deemed non-notable, while there is a complete category for "airliners of Belgium" and "defunct airliners of Belgium" is beyond me. For some reason, IMHO, not including the page I made would need to put into question the above categories as well. Am I missing something here? As said and please bear with me: I am new to this and I was and still am under the impression and belief that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia made for as well as made by the masses, but it increasingly seems "overpatrolled" to me. Do not understand me wrong here. I am strongly convinced that Wikipedia needs patrolling and I do think you do a damn fine job, but I think the point I just made, is valid as well. Please correct me if and explain why I am wrong. 6th Common Sense (talk) 20:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC) I added the reference and corrected some things. When I compare to mainspace pages like BelgiumExel and Birdy Airlines, I think it is more elaborate, at least as notable and equally deserves a place on Wikipedia under categories "Airlines of Belgium" and "Defunct Airlines of Belgium". It is created in my userspace User:6th_Common_Sense/HAWA_Air. Mr. Haworth (or anybody else), are there more comments? Can I move to draft? How? — 6th Common Sense (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Moved it to draft and slapped {{subst:submit}} at the top. I am trying to wrap my head around populating commons:Category:Hawa Air now. — 6th Common Sense (talk) 12:40, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks at least for your last remark - it has saved me two laborious explanations.
: trick. Examine the wiki markup for this page and compare and contrast the way that the image of Verne Troyer is embeded in the page and the Air Belgium logo is merely linked to.
"Closely enough". You claim to have used the Air Belgium logo as an example of how to upload a logo but as I explain above there two important respects in which you did not follow the Air Belgium example.
Your logic is distinctly faulty. The existence of category:airlines of Belgium (do you see the : trick again?) contributes absolutely nothing to demonstrating the notability of Hawa Air. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
  • OK. I see what you mean with the Air Belgium logo. I only did that here on your talk page though. The draft:Hawa Air page uses the : trick correctly, as far as I can judge.
I populated the commons:Category:Hawa Air a bit. I'm going to add two or three more. I hope that is what you meant.
I do trust the joint Wikipedia team's judgement as to notability; to me it seems to compare well to for example BelgiumExel and Birdy Airlines. Yet, since I created the Hawa page, I am obviously biased. ;) 6th Common Sense (talk) 14:47, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Really speedy deletion

When I got on for the first time today (just now), I found a notation that Visiting Nurse Association of Chittenden and Grand Isle which had been an article for several years had been nominated and deleted for failing to state importance in the lead. From my pov, speedy deletion of an article that has been there for several years could have waited a couple of more hours until someone had had time to look at the notice. Student7 (talk) 00:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

  • @Student7: Actually, the page was nominated for speedy deletion at 4:30 AM and it wasn't deleted until 12:52 PM, so the template stayed up for at least a good 8 hours before RHaworth deleted the page. As far as it being on Wikipedia for a long time, that doesn't really mean much- we've had a lot of pages that have remained on Wikipedia for years but still failed notability guidelines overall in ways that could make them qualify for a speedy deletion. Since we don't really have any guarantee that an article's creator will still be active on Wikipedia or that they will really object to the article's deletion, it's just not feasible for us to leave the article up until the original editor (in this case you) comments on the article. The only options here are to ask RHaworth to restore the article and if he declines, to take it up at deletion review. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
At Great Lakes Institute of Management RHaworth expressed the view that an article that has hung around for several years deserves better than speedy deletion. I recommend restoring and sending to AfD.--Launchballer 10:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • More important than the 8 hours before deletion are the five years of the article's existence during which you made no attempt to add evidence. Re Great Lakes: one of the fun things about Wikipedia is that, within the very tight rules there is still leeway for me to act as the mood takes me. In this case I say that the VNA is a purely local charity and is inherently not notable enough for Wikipedia. Ask at deletion review to see what others think. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

This may come as a surprise for some editors. Not all editors spend all day on Wikipedia! I actually do other things. I am on once a day. I think for obvious vandalism or "joke" articles and spam-only, speedy delete is "too kind." I don't think any of the articles mentioned herein fell into that category.

Maybe the erasers could more closely monitor more recent articles? Like 4 weeks old to one or two years or something? If an article is that bad, why not sooner, rather than later? Student7 (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Pirate101

Hello, The Pirate101 page is under Creation Protection, and apparently has been so for nearly two years. I would like to request that this protection be removed to allow for proper creation of the page. The page is also referenced in the Video Game Wiki Project, which includes links to multiple reliable sources that support the page's notability. Thank you! ZaneDH (talk) 03:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

SPI

I've opened up an SPI for the various accounts and IPs coming in at the structured search AfD. You can see it here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:35, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Why bother? the AfD reviewer is not going to be fooled at all. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Cem Soyal

Hi, I noticed that you have deleted Draft:Cem Soysal. The reason is mentioned as: (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.gbameetup.com/members/) Can you please provide draft text and also inform me about why you evaluate using a Web site link as an infringement (this Web site belongs to an institution which person mentioned in draft - Cem Soysal - is a registered member of. Specific URL contains this information too). So that I can find a proper way to use Web sites as references. Best, Aliselcuk (talk) 14:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

  • The proper way to use web sites as references is to use the {{cite web}} template. Copying the text of a website into a Wikipedia article is almost always either a copyright violation or a style violation. I can let you see the deleted text - read this. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks this guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

SelectQuote

Hello Roger, Inquiring why the SelectQuote page I created was deleted. Please provide some insight as to why the article was deleted so I can understand the deletion policies and how to successfully create an article. Thank you, Robyng11 (talk) 15:18, 30 October 2014 (UTC)Robyn (Robyng11@aol.com)

  • Does not the deletion log provide you with sufficient insight? Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Tommy Joe Ratliff

Hi, dear - please Rehabilitation Page of Tommy Joe Ratliff - I've got bugs to fix it. thank a lot for info :) نیکی رامونا (talk) 12:08, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I suspect that your grasp of English is simply not good enough to enable you to create a non-copyvio article on this subject. But if you can, do so and submit it via articles for creation. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Nosebleed section

Hi - would you please not re-delete the redirect to Nosebleed section? As stated, it is a special redirect, used for temporary statistical tracking purposes. Thanks! Dohn joe (talk) 21:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

It's fairly common to use these special redirects to track specific usage patterns. Having that redirect exist only at the Nosebleeds disambiguation page lets us know many people go to the Nosebleed section from the dab. Combined with the special redirect to Nosebleed will give us a good picture of the overall reader usage of the dab page. The redirects are temporary (generally speaking, viewing patterns emerge quickly), are almost invisible to the reader, and WP:Redirects are cheap. So, that's its purpose. Let me know if you have any questions. Maybe I should write something in WP space about them? Dohn joe (talk) 23:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

It works in reverse. After a week, or a month, or however long, you go to stats.grok.se and look at the pageviews for Nosebleeds, Nosebleed (redirect), and Nosebleed section (redirect). Because the two special redirects exist only on the dab page, you can see exactly how the dab page is being used - those who click on to Nosebleed, those who click on to Nosebleed section, and those who go somewhere else. Dohn joe (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, it had been on the nosebleeds page until someone removed it today (probably after it had become a redlink). I re-added it now, so it should work. — Dohn joe (talk) 00:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

  • As well as an edit summary, it would be a good idea to add <-- HTML comments --> to say what these weird redirect pages are doing. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I dispute your "fairly common" claim. Please give a couple of other examples. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Astronomical Society Vega - Ljubljana

Can I get the article, so I can re-do it and try again? Where do I state the reason, why I think the deletion was unjustified? Twas unjust because they, in cooperation with the school group, constructed the first ever radio telescope of any middle school in Slovenia. That's why it is notable. -- Nejc Kincl (talk) 04:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I am happy to let you see your text - read this. But as for reposting it, kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no KOI thinks your club is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with my supposed membership in the astro club or alike to count in any way. But if it matters, then I say it clearly: I am not a member, have never been a member. I've only met those people one month ago. We barely know each other. The club is noteworthy, because it was mentioned on Rtvslo, main national television of Slovenia, which I believe was the only (or close) mention of an astro club in Slovenia. Now my e-mail is set.--Nejc Kincl (talk) 03:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  • My simple-minded KOI test says that your claim that you have no KOI is probably valid. There was absolutely no need for "(Slovenia)" in the title and we don't really need "- Ljubljana". Restored to Draft:Astronomical Society Vega. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Villagers and Heroes

Page deleted. Linked from list of game engines. Why? I am not connected with Villagers and Heroes in any way. I was simply researching game engines. I cannot understand why in this cyber world we can simply delete references to something that exists. Very Google-esque type of censorship! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.64.224.173 (talk) 06:13, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Unsigned; no link to article; wrong format link to another article - count yourself very lucky that I am replying. The article was deleted for the simple reason that the author Jondinham (talk · contribs) replaced content with '(deleted)'. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Badminton-SJ-tapner-inonothing-6.jpg

You deleted this image this morning (UTC) before I could respond to the notice. Why has it been tagged after several years? I took the photo and have every right to upload it copyright free if I so wish. Anybody who had looked at the real name on the uploading account would have seen that the name matched the photographer cited in the speedy deletion notice. Someone is working too quickly! — Nico (talk) 15:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  • So where do I see "the real name on the uploading account"? Perfectly simple solution: change the copyvio source page to say "for resolutions of 1660 × 2500 pixels or less this image is available under {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

United States v. Nathan Rehlander

Hello,

I began the Talk:United States v. Nathan Rehlander page to get the attention of a competent editor, so that the long requested legal article may be written. Since you have displayed such prowess, could you please write or start the article? 74.78.70.130 (talk) 16:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

If the issue really is finding someone with legal knowledge, ask User:Ironholds to help.
If the issue is really that you have an overwhelming horror of creating a Wikipedia account, and thus cannot create new pages in the article space, then proceed to WP:AFC so that you can create a draft article and then have it reviewed. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I'd be happy to write it, but I'm kinda busy. Ironholds (talk) 20:12, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Pardon my ignorance, but from what I was told, you can not write an article if you were directly involved in the subject matter in real life, which I was, so if this is true, I can't. 74.78.70.130 (talk) 18:58, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

That's about right. Actually you are merely strongly discouraged from writing it if you were directly involved. However, it is generally considered acceptable to use WP:AFC to submit a draft, even where you were directly involved, since the draft will be reviewed by a wholly independent editor before it becomes an article.
There is also a possibility that the topic itself (the case) may not need a Wikipedia article if it does not meet the requirements of WP:42. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Talk pages without articles are not allowed. Certainly this page would never be seen by anyone interested in the subject - it was only seen by a user who specialises in this sort of page! First get yourself an account and then raise the matter at appropriate Wikiproject pages - I leave you to find the specific ones but I think we will have projects on US constitution, gun law and mental health which are, I believe the issues here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:Midas King

I've just deleted it again as a copyvio - and noticed you'd restored it previously. To me, it is a clear copyvio, but you may know something I don't... Peridon (talk) 11:24, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Less that an hour ago and I stare blankly at the screen and ask myself "wtf was I doing"! Don't tell anybody else but … I think the explanation is: I have the habit of opening multiple pages from CAT:CSD and then working through them doing the deletes. In this case, we edit conflicted: I called up the page as held in my browser and unhesitatingly decided to delete it but "in a moment of mental abstraction, for which I never can forgive myself" [Oscar] I failed to notice that it had just been deleted and actually restored it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

At least you didn't detag it... Peridon (talk) 13:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Cross-country skiing (sport)

I quote from WP:WHEEL, with emphasis added:

Wheel warring usually results in an immediate Request for Arbitration. Sanctions for wheel warring have varied from reprimands and cautions, to temporary blocks, to desysopping, even for first time incidents.

No request for arbitration will be filed at the present time. Let this be your reprimand and caution: when you delete something, and when it's quickly restored with a rationale of "Not a test; see WP:AN", do not restore it. Nyttend (talk) 19:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Deleted Article

Hello! You recently deleted Draft:Yusuf Olanrewaju (Lanre) Ope for Copyright Vio from my Tag. It has been re-created, and immediately flagged again by the Coren bot. The author who is apparently connected with the subject has now blanked the source so I can't check the bot's report. Can I ask you to compare the deleted version with the current version if you have a moment (or restore it somewhere briefly)? I'll figure out the implications of having the source page deleted vis-a-vis copyright, but I just want to see if the 2 versions are identical. Thanks, CrowCaw 17:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Mujeeb Rahman Chandio etc.

Hi, re Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mujeeb Rahman Chandio/Archive - what do you think of Mujeeb mrc (talk · contribs), Mujeeb Rahman Chandio (talk · contribs), Nadir Hussain Chandio (talk · contribs) and خير محمد چانڊيو (talk · contribs)? The last of these appeared today on the same article, Hafiz Mujeeb Rahman. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Another: Abdul Jabbar chandio (talk · contribs) and article Mujeeb Rahman (Reciter of Naats). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:52, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Catalina Parra

Hi, Thanks so much for fixing the wacky redirects that ultimately led to Catalina Parra. I've been performing reviews as an online ambassador for Education Program:University of Maryland, College Park/WMST 250: Women, Art, and Culture (2014 Q3) - and the notes that I posted in User:Clavaden/sandbox‎ are gone. Do they get erased when an draft moves to article space? Or, did it get lost in one of the redirects?

I'm wondering if I have to hurry and move comments from other course user's sandboxes to their user talk pages before the articles are moved? Thanks! -- CaroleHenson (talk) 02:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  • If I have moved some of your notes to the wrong place, I make no apology - there was such chaos. I suggest you look carefully through your contributions history. I do not see anything likely in your deleted contributions history.
"Do I have to hurry" - ridiculous question - why on earth should you have to hurry? Who is going to do the move anyway? If you have made comments in user talk:Foo/sandbox and user:Foo/sandbox is moved into yzx article space then you should probably allow user talk:Foo/sandbox to be moved automatically to talk:yzx at the same time. Is that what you were asking about? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I meant needing to hurry to move my comments before the other students in the class move their articles from sandboxes to article space.

I don't think you deleted the comments, I think they got lost in all the wacky naming / redirects. From your initial comments, it doesn't sound like they get deleted when a user moves the pages to article space. But based upon your comment about the user checking the "Move associated talk page" - maybe they get deleted then. In this case, there's no history in the sandbox talk page... and I couldn't find it in the history of other pages it was moved to. It's confusing and better to leave alone at this point.

Good idea to look through my contributions for the comments for Clavaden / Parra article! Thanks! -- CaroleHenson (talk)

  • If your comments are more directed to the student rather than about the content, put them in the first place on the student's talk page. Nothing gets deleted when an ordinary user does a move.

Boyd Rutherford

Hello, could you explain to me why a picture taken from the Maryland State Archives website used for Boyd Rutherford was Deleted by Wikipedia, when the Anthony Brown picture taken from the Maryland State Archives/State Government website has not been deleted from the Anthony G. Brown page? Thetruthspeaker14 (talk) 08:25, 7 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetruthspeaker14 (talk • contribs) 08:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Why? Sloppy image description. Try again following the Anthony G. Brown example properly which includes uploading to the Commons, not here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Bangkok Prep

Hi. I've started a discussion regarding the article title at Talk:Bangkok Prep#November 2014. Please take a look. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Shasta-Tehama-Trinty

I don't think Shasta-Tehama-Trinty Joint Community College District was implausible, and it definitely wasn't recently created. Do you have any objections to me undeleting it? Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:55, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Bharat Ranjan

Hello elder brother. I was searching for a person on wikipedia and finally got that. But suddenly i found that you deleted that page. Please let it remain published Bharat Ranjan. tell me what should I do for this ?? Yours faithfully, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickysharmaji (talk • contribs)

  • Kindly a) do not shout and b) have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Beckham draft

I am allowed to use the picture as it is public to use under the copyright law. There is no copyright infringement as I have stated where it came from and I will get Getty Images to send a personal email if you so badly want it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jksamnjason (talk • contribs) 15:08, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Please stop shouting and provide a proper link to the picture about which you are talking. I consider it highly unlikely that Getty Images have released an image for Wikipedia - please tell me what licence terms they are giving.
I have deleted your RfA to save you embarassment - have you actually looked at WP:RfA and at the sort of edit counts that recent successfully appointed admins have? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Sibyl Heijnen

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sibyl Heijnen. You move-protected this, apparently because the author moved it to the wrong namespace. I'd like to accept it and move it to mainspace, but I can't; is this intentional, or would you consider unprotecting it? -– Cathfolant (talk) 02:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You always seem to be the name popping up on my watchlist when I request admin actions, so thanks! CrowCaw 23:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

G13

Thanks for starting to make your way through the G13s... I'm tagging them as quick as I can without a bot :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 23:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Please do not overload us. I suggest there should never be more than 60 outstanding in CAT:CSD at any time. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Benedict Cumberbath's Personal Life section

Hi there! Favor? Would you mind amending the paragraph regarding Cumberbatch's engagement to Sophie Hunter? It's rather ambiguous and I think a good context is necessary. I have checked Hunter's page and the paragraph about her engagement is just right. On 5 November 2014, The Times announced that Hunter and actor Benedict Cumberbatch became engaged.[26] They met on the set of the 2009 film Burlesque Fairytales but didn't start dating until early 2014.[27][28][29] Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.68.224 (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Re-creation of page by blocked editor

Hi, I wanted to let you know that this page has been re-created. Draft:Adib Yaseen October 20, 2014 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Adib Yaseen (G5: Creation by a banned or blocked user (Newzealand123) in violation of ban or block) Thanks! Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:31, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! BTW, if you have a look here [1], most of NZ's recent socks are SPAs. Logical Cowboy (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Maat Morrison

Hi, I've been searching some info to add some media-related subjects to Wikipedia. So far I found Tim White (musician) and Elijah Blake – and also Maat Morrison. I have references needed but so far, everyone whom has created the article has been blocked for multiple accounts. If I somehow create a draft, I get blocked too? Just a concern. Thanks Karlhard (talk to me) 19:59, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey, why not start at WP:AFC ? -- Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
  • You have a sound contribs history. So a block for sock puppetry is simply not on the cards. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:10, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Deleted history

Can you restore the deleted history? Actually both are making thier acting debut with Hero (2014 film) and the film release date is too close. Athiya Shetty – Sooraj Pancholi. — Chander 13:06, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Not actually clear what you want restored. But in any case let us wait until Hero has been released and received critical acclaim. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:20, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Antony King deletion

Hello, I tried to create my first Wikipedia entry for Antony King but it was deleted because of A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. I followed the Article Wizard but it was still deleted. Can you please let me know what I'm doing wrong and how I can go about creating an entry that won't be deleted? Thank you x, Analogtapes72 (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Link-centric preferential attachment

Link-centric preferential attachment. The removal reason was listed as obviously invented by myself except I forgot to include the citation for the paper that coins the term - not coined by me at all.

Extended content
If you looked at the last few edits of the page the citation for the term was included and the citations for all of the results were included. Here's a link to the article coining the term: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.90.042805

and the term is coined on the second page under section C: Incorporating the memory effects into the model. Another paper also examines this same kind of preferential attachment model but never specifies the name of the model, simply refering to it as a reinforcement process. This is where the formula for the probability is taken from. Here's a link to that paper:

http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/140210/srep04001/full/srep04001.html

Both papers use this link-centric preferential attachment model to produce strong and weak ties, terms that go back to at least Mark Granovetter (1973) and possible Anatol Rapoport (1954) Interpersonal ties. Granovetter's work on the collection and analysis of data on the social networks of a workers provides evidence of the presence of strong and weak ties due to link-centric memory in those networks and has been widely cited in sociology and network science. There's also other research investigating the effects of memory on the spreading of diseases, one in particular is the Framingham Heart Study:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa066082

In that paper they looked at the likelihood of a person becoming obese based on whether or not they were socially close to others who were obese, how long they had been friends or social contacts (this is where the effects of memory come in although the model here would have to be more complex than the simple model proposed by the Karsai paper - second one referenced here), and what kinds of social ties they had. The data for this study was collected over 3 decades and it has been cited by over 2000 other articles.

The point of this page is to describe the mathematical model or way to reproduce the effects of social memory and how this ends up affecting contagion spreading models. I would like to include an image from one of the papers cited that shows how much this simple model for memory can change the spread of a rumour/disease. If you look at figure 4 on:

http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/140210/srep04001/full/srep04001.html

you can see the results of the spread of a rumour or disease on a time-varying network without this modification for nodes keeping memory on the left, and on the right the results of including memory. What you're seeing there is that the structure of the network ends up being different because of memory or link-centric preferential attachment and as a result the spread of the disease has drastically changed as well.

This paper also has another figure, 5, which then shows the ratio of how many nodes in the network are aware of the rumour for the networks produced by link-centric preferential attachment to the number aware in networks without memory. There are other parameters in the model but the important thing to take away from the plot is that this ratio is almost always less than 1, indicating that network structures produced by this memory based preferential attachment are harder to spread diseases on. Since real individuals follow this kind of behaviour, albeit more complex, it is an important area of research to write about and deserves it's own page.

My apologies for not including the citations for everything in the correct locations earlier. I was unsure of how to publish a page and did not realize that it should be as correct as possible with all citations in place before publishing. I realize now that my sandbox is the location for editing my page entirely before submitting it for review.

I hope this shows that this is work that has been published and reviewed and is not simply my invention. The mathematical modeling may be relatively new (now that computers can handle the large amounts of memory required for the simulations) but the basis and real-world evidence for the idea dates back quite a while. I read these papers in a class and thought this would be a neat topic to include in wikipedia especially since there seems to be nothing on it as of yet.

-- Dcmistry78 (talk) 20:06, 13 November 2014 (UTC) Dcmistry78

Ayaan Chawla's article deletion

I just got to know that you have deleted Ayaan chawla article, which I had created no issue on that. But just for a concern as a contributor under Wikipedia & you, I want to know as after a complete research on Ayaan chawla I got some verifiable references & presence and even first time I got know about him through IIT Kharagpur as he is invited in Global Entrepreneurship Summit 2015 (January). Even he is being covered by CNBC Young Turks show. "Shereen Bhan - Managing Editor of the [[CNBC]] TV18". {{cite web}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help) So is there any way that we can resolve this matter or debate by other contributors related to his articles? — Ndtv.news (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Two AfD discussions and two DRVs - what do you think your chances are? Try a new twist - read this advice and see if you can con a well established editor to create the article for you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

RHaworth, First of all shut the Ayaan chawla article, you should have some courtesy to write anything to anyone, but you should see to whom you are talking to and it just that I got know about him through IIT Kharagpur as he is invited in Global Entrepreneurship Summit 2015 (January) and saw many updates about him on my Facebook by friends and tried it to write by getting article histories. Leave it! I have enough work to do except writing articles on Wikipedia but I did as contributor, but let me tell you you are very rude as a senior. Still I request you to not use these type of words (Con) for anyone. Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 18:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

  • In British English, "con someone to" can sometimes have a slightly more light-hearted meaning than you might be imagining here; it is not an accusation of fraud as such. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Demiurge1000, Thanks for your message but RHaworth is rude with his statements and what he is trying to say is very clear, as a senior & experienced writer / contributor / administrator, after all the courtesy I shown in my first message. Kindly let me know how to close this matter or debate? Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 20:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

  • RHaworth has a rather brusque manner, for which I apologise. (Others are worse.) I and others have intermittently tried to talk him out of it. But snow monsters, like leopards, do not change their spots, and RHaworth is actually very very busy dealing with huge numbers of problematic article creations, and other issues, all over this wiki. So often he lacks the time for a more delicate tone. Anyway, if you stop discussing this issue, it will fall off his talk page within a week or three. If on the other hand you find multiple significant non-Facebook and non-social-media mentions of this Chawla person, you could try your hand at WP:AFC. But you are more probably correct it might be best to leave it. Thank you for your contributions. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Demiurge1000, Thanks for your gentle reply & information you have provided. Once I get those kind of Verifiable References I'll contact you. Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 22:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Demiurge1000, Is it possible for us to create an article on a subject (as a stub article) and afterwards other contributors can add more Verifiable References to it? Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Demiurge1000, Thanks for the reply, If we leave this Chawla article. On contributor level I have seen many articles from months & years which are mentioned as kind of STUB in multiple categories - Entrepreneurs, Organisations, etc. I don't know much about it. If you can guide me on it, that will be a great help. Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Theo Green.jpg deletion

Hí RHaworth, Thank you for deleting this image File:Theo Green.jpg and a previous attempt. I can see that I went about it the wrong way - I am going to try again with a different approach, modelled on the way others have successfully added similarly sourced images (eg. Christopher Nolan) - please contact me via talk page íf the approach i take is different or incorrect and I can try to correct it without the need for speedy deletion, hopefully. Thanks again Rumplestiltskin2009 (talk) 20:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

  • I note that the two uploads you did could not have been cropped out of the image here because they are at higher resolution. But we do need to know how you got hold of an high res. version of an image created by "Alberto E. Rodriguez/Getty Images North America". Yes, do follow the procedure used for File:Christopher Nolan, London, 2013.jpg. We will need an email to OTRS identifiably from Alberto Rodriguez. You may need to reveal your identity to the OTRS system but the information will go no further than OTRS and it is perfectly OK for you to use a pseudonym on Wikimedia sites. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful reply. Would the link to Green's image be a similar thing to Nolan's in that his image is linked to a small watermarked file, which the version here cannot be from? Here is a link to that image [2] Thanks again for your time Rumplestiltskin2009 (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Uploaded a photo I took to Commons - nb looks similar but not the same - while I go through OTRS for the preferred pic. -- Rumplestiltskin2009 (talk) 02:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

  • So pull your finger out and submit to OTRS. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:47, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Pull my finger out? I'm waiting for two things, the email address of the photographer which is needed for the OTRS, and which I have to wait to obtain from getty, and your reply to the question above from (21:52, 14 November 2014) regarding linking to a watermarked image as the source. Rumplestiltskin2009 (talk) 19:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Would you mind re-deleting an article?

Hi, I closed this AfD because I saw the article had been deleted by you, but the script remade the article as a blank page. Would you mind redeleting it? Thanks/sorry, Deadbeef 23:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Carried out by another admin. Never mind! Deadbeef 00:06, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

My Speedily Deleted Page

Yeah thanks a lot! Did you really read it? I definitely indicated why this band SWIMM is important to satisfy criteria A7, G11. Or do you think putting out two EPs, recording at an internationally renowned studio and touring with famous bands and bands with lesser fame who have a wikipedia page isn't enough? Also, Surfing Magazine isn't real to you I take it? — gn2587 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gm2587 (talk • contribs)

Latest stable software release

Thread transferred to User talk:Dvorapa

Fazlur Khan move

Please respond to my comments at Talk:Fazlur Khan#Title. Thanks SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:26, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

SargentSignals

Is spamming his talk page. Please remove talk page access from him. - NG39 (Used to be NickGibson3900)Talk 21:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, another sysop did it - NG39 (Used to be NickGibson3900)Talk 21:30, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290

Thanks for deleting the Antonov 70 photo I uploaded, I wasn't sure how to do it.

My first article Air Cargo Carriers Flight SNC-1290 was deleted. Is there any way I can access it? May I store it in my sandbox area or anywhere else to use for a reference? Samf4u 21:24, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Deleted article re-created

Hi, this is to notify you that an article recently deleted by you, The Secrets to App Success on Google Play, has been recreated on the basis of the reason given in the edit summary. The article has now been improved with multiple refs. One more Further reading link (from DZone.com) could not be added as it triggered a spam filter. - SD0001 (talk) 05:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

In which case the original revisions need to be restored to allow for proper attribution.--Launchballer 11:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Deleted article gaeleri

Draft:Gaeleri. Hi, I noticed that you deleted my article on gaeleri due to copyright issues with this. The base of my article for Wikipedia was my own text which (eralier than my submitted article in wikipedia) was used in a press release sent out by the band gaeleri and ended up in the above bulletin. I have written each and every word of both the press release and the full deleted article. f it is rejected by you and wikipedia, I don't have a problem with that. However, I spent a great deal of time writing and editing that article and I'm afraid I didn't keep any copy of my own and kindly ask you to retrieve the full article and send it to me at … It would be much apreciated, since I could send it to the band and they could use it themselves. Many thanks in advance. Andymcfast — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andymcfast (talk • contribs)

  • If you wrote it, why do you need me to send you the text? OK, you may have spent time adding wiki markup but to what point because I ask you and the band to kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks they are notable and writes about them here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Unstylish

Hello Sir, I would like to know what I need to modify in order to keep the interstyle ceramics page on Wikipedia. I think its a new trend Nigerians need to know about, as all their tiling and home are made out of cheap tiles, the dirt coming from europe, the old collections etc... Thank you. Sincerely, Webloft — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webloft (talk • contribs)

  • Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Spidersweb

hello there we would like you to please lift the deletion as we have changed the article to not advertised from spidersweb.

  • Originally in wrong place, no link to article, unsigned, etc. I don't need to reply. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello RHaworth. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Amol Arora

Hi. Could you have a look at the latest version for me? Maybe my judgement is clouded by the amount of interaction I've had with the creator. Deb (talk) 11:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/2014_Nov_18&oldid=1211538201"