User talk:RHaworth/2012 Mar 10

Archives

Archives Edit list Up to: 2005 March 2005 June 2005 August 2005 Oct 2005 Nov 2006 Jan 2006 March 2006 May 2006 July 2006 Sept 2006 Nov 2007 Jan 2007 Feb 2007 April 2007 May 2007 July 2007 Oct 2007 Dec 2008 Jan 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 Sept 2008 Oct 2009 Jan 2009 Feb 2009 March 2009 April 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 Oct 2009 Nov 2009 Dec 2010 March 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 Sept 2010 Oct 2010 Dec 2011 Jan 06 2011 Jan 14 2011 Jan 27 2011 Feb 09 2011 Feb 23 2011 Mar 06 2011 Mar 18 2011 Mar 30 2011 Apr 07 2011 May 02 2011 May 22 2011 Jun 08 2011 Jun 26 2011 Jul 26 2011 Aug 18 2011 Sep 06 2011 Sep 28 2011 Oct 17 2011 Nov 04 2011 Nov 19 2012 Jan 29 2012 Feb 26 2012 Mar 10 2012 Mar 31 2012 Apr 14 2012 May 07 2012 Jun 01 2012 Jun 23 2012 Jul 06 2012 Aug 31 2012 Oct 06 2012 Oct 30 JWJ 2012 Dec 05 2012 Dec 27 2013 Jan 22 2013 Feb 05 2013 Mar 06 2013 Mar 26 2013 Apr 15 2013 May 09 2013 Jun 07 2013 Jun 27 2013 Jul 22 2013 Aug 06 2013 Aug 20 2013 Sep 03 2013 Sep 19 2013 Oct 11 2013 Oct 23 2013 Nov 09 2013 Nov 22 2013 Dec 18 2014 Jan 11 2014 Jan 25 2014 Feb 18 2014 Mar 08 2014 Mar 29 2014 Apr 11 2014 Apr 23 2014 May 08 2014 May 22 2014 May 30 2014 Jun 07 2014 Jun 18 2014 Jul 17 2014 Aug 09 2014 Aug 27 2014 Sep 04 2014 Sep 16 2014 Sep 28 2014 Oct 11 2014 Oct 28 2014 Nov 18 2014 Dec 18 2015 Jan 10 2015 Jan 26 2015 Feb 11 2015 Feb 24 2015 Mar 11 2015 Mar 30 2015 Apr 20 2015 May 12 2015 Jun 12 2015 Jul 07 2015 Jul 25 2015 Aug 11 2015 Sep 03 2015 Sep 23 2015 Oct 25 2015 Nov 28 2015 Dec 21 2016 Jan 13 2016 Feb 10 2016 Mar 03 2016 Mar 30 2016 Apr 18 2016 May 16 2016 Jun 02 2016 Jul 09 2016 Aug 11 framework 2016 Sep 02 2016 Oct 05 2016 Nov 02 2016 Nov 27 2016 Dec 18 2017 Jan 10 2017 Jan 31 2017 Feb 23 2017 Mar 15 2017 Apr 20 2017 May 18 2017 Jun 21 2017 Jul 05 2017 Jul 25 2017 Aug 15 2017 Sep 07 2017 Sep 30 2017 Nov 14 2017 Dec 21 2018 Jan 12 2018 Jan 30 2018 Feb 25 2018 Mar 11 2018 Mar 28 2018 Apr 16 2018 May 03 2018 May 22 2018 Jun 14 2018 Jun 28 2018 Jul 19 2018 Aug 03 2018 Aug 20 2018 Sep 07 2018 Oct 01 2018 Oct 24 2018 Nov 16 2018 Dec 02 2018 Dec 26 2019 Jan 27 2019 Feb 18 2019 Mar 06 2019 Mar 17 2019 Mar 30 2019 Apr 14 2019 Apr 27 2019 May 16 2019 Jun 10 2019 Jul 07 2019 Jul 26 2019 Aug 16 2019 Sep 07 2019 Sep 17 2019 Oct 07 2019 Nov 04 2019 Nov 23 2019 Dec 09 2019 Dec 21 2021 Jan 21 2023 Apr 08

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

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

12 month block

I noticed that you would block me for a year and comment on my talk page about this because i get nervis when bad comments come up. Walter55000 13:23, 20 feburary 2012 (posted by 72.161.12.108 (talk))

• A twelve month block is very much on the cards. But we would prefer it if you were to stop editing voluntarily until you actually have useful contributions to make. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:02, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Anyway could you help me take out vandalism 21:44, 21 february 2012 (posted by 72.161.12.108 (talk))

• I don't talk to IP addresses and especially not to a block-evading IP address. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • FYI. As 72.161.12.108 (talk), Walter55000 is still messing around on his talk page. Could it be revoked? --Bmusician 12:52, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

what are you thinking about on the 12 month block — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

• I don't talk to IP addresses and especially not to one who claims to have forgotten their user name even though it appears twice above and four times on their talk page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

well i started to rembering now can you satrt talking to me?Also give me an update on the 12 month block? 00:07 26 february 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 00:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, when you actually log in and sign your message with ~~~~. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

well i cant log in because dad changed my password. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Then either ask your dad to change your password back, or create a new account. Editing is not fun without an account! --Bmusician 04:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

i will create a new account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 12:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

i made walter55024.--Walter55024 (talk) 14:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

will someone reply?--Walter55024 (talk) 16:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for telling us your new name. Indications so far are not at all promising: you have created two AfC submissions which do not even attempt to assert the notability of their subjects. Your addition to Toy Story 3 will continue to be reverted until you provide good, independent supporting evidence. Personally I will give you a week to prove that you have turned around but do not be surprised if another admin blocks you sooner. As to taking out vandalism, what advice do you want? Just watch new pages and recent changes and you will see plenty to keep you busy. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

anyway the afc was to get messages and help also can you put a link for a vandalism page?--Walter55024 (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Did you actually see my links to new pages and recent changes above? The whole point about fighting vandalism is that we need more people to find it. If I see vandalism, I fix it on the spot. I don't pass it on to someone else to fix. An higher proportion of vandalism comes from IP addresses. Here are some examples (all now fixed): unsourced additions: this and this; pure vandalism: this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

well the only fighting vandalism that i know is the 3rr rule.--Walter55024 (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• I don't really count 3rr violations as vandalism - they are content disputes and there is usually reasonable good faith on both sides. Another suggestion for fighting real vandalism is that you should build up a watch list of articles that interest you, eg. Phineas and Ferb. Indeed, if you look at the edit history of that article you will see some good examples of vandalism. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:09, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

can we continue this discuccn on my talk page?--Walter55024 (talk) 18:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• By all means but I do not undertake to respond as quickly. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

well just check my talk page a lot plus this thing is filling up your talk page so lets close this thing on your talk page and open it so i will just say that this is closed.--Walter55024 (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

this is closed here but is open on --Walter55024 (talk) (UTC) talk page. thanks.--Walter55024 (talk) 18:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

will you reply on my talk page--Walter55024 (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

walter55024

(talk page stalker) An apparently very young and inexperienced editor who does not know anything about referencing or how to use talk pages, but does understand the 3rr shortcut!? They also also, somewhat correctly, imitate an emdash by using two hyphens. I'm thinking disruptive WP:SOCK, but it could just be my cynical side coming out. Pol430 talk to me 22:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• To Pol430: self-admitted very young - search User:Walter55024 for Oklahoma. Has also mastered the use of undo - which I hesitate to use! Walter55024 is a replacement account for Walter55000 but beyond that I see no sock puppetry - just a kid who needs to wait a few years until he actually has something useful to contribute. Please continue to stalk him. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

WHAT IN THE WORLD!--Walter55024 (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• @Pol430: The familiarity with the 3RR shortcut probably comes from a 3RR warning he received. So I doubt there's anything mysterious about it.

@Walter: Don't worry. You had a little bit of a rough start here on Wikipedia, but it will get better. I'm counting on you to work with Worm and learn lots of cool stuff. Cloveapple (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

good work but reply above. Walter55024 (talk) 21:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hello, would you please delete Chrissy9876/Free Culture (book)/sandbox? I was moving an article to a user's sandbox and clicked "submit" before adding "User:". Thanks, SwisterTwister talk 21:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Marek Kamiñski an implausible redirect?

You recently deleted Marek Kamiñski citing "R3: Recently created, implausible redirect". I gave a reason for it's creation in my edit - the name's cut-n-pasted direct from http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-5000/first-person-to-walk-to-both-poles-solo-and-unsupported/ and when I searched I got no article. How do you figure it's implausible? Did I redirect at the wrong target? Josh Parris 22:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Correct me if I am wrong but ñ is Spanish. Marek Kaminski is Polish and spells his name with an n-acute. The Guiness World Records are simply displaying their appalling ignorance by spelling his name with n-tilde. We have a redirect at Marek Kaminski without diacriticals. A search using the version with n-tilde finds the guy all right for me - how come it did not find him for you? We do not need any other redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea what languages accented letters come from; I'm operating from ignorance. Redirects are helpful for many reasons, including they can be tagged as misspellings and any present or future internal links changed to the correct spelling. The search box is not the only way that articles are accessed, and I hope you can see that I've demonstrated the redirect is not implausible, merely wrong. Would you object to me recreating it, tagged as a misspelling? Josh Parris 22:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Rossami (talk · contribs) also seems to be waging a campaign to keep implausible redirects. If you really want to recreate it, do so - redirects are not worth wasting talk page space over. Make sure you add a link on the talk page to the GWR web page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:58, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Free Culture sandbox version

User:DavidMCEddy's edits to the Free Culture (book) article may very well make that sandbox page pointless (in that better edits have already been made to the article), and the sandbox page likely should have instead been created in userspace instead, but I don't think the Talk:Free Culture (book)/sandbox page should have been speedy deleted. The page was created by a professor for his students who were supposed to be improving the article. Will you please undelete the page and move it into the professor's userspace, say to something like User:Theredproject/Free Culture (book)? Thanks. :) Banaticus (talk) 01:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• The only things I deleted were redirects. Furthermore, realising that the people involved might be incapable of reading the deletion/move log which was clearly displayed, I left a message at User talk:Chrissy9876 notifying them of the move. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Apparently move notices don't automatically redirect when the page is moved a second time, so the only thing listed on the page that Talk:Free Culture (book)/sandbox redirects to are redlinks and I didn't notice that the page was redirecting, or that the new page had again been moved (which was why the "new page" was listed as a redlink). :) Banaticus (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

A final barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	good work cloveapples is in my disccoun now but thanks. Walter55024 (talk) 01:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

"Pointless" follow-up

Thread transferred to user talk:Aubrey Cloud

Three-drum boilers

Why have you repeatedly renamed this article to the singular form, without discussion, and even when it was reverted per BRD you then proceeded to rename it once again and admin-protect this? You have made no attempt to discuss this change, before or after, nor has anyone else called for it.

The name here is plural. It is a clear example of WP:PLURAL #2, "Articles on groups or classes of specific things." Although there are several classes such as the "Admiralty three-drum boiler", there is no such simple device as an unqualified "three-drum boiler" and so this new name is a WP:NEO.

Please revert the name to the correct pluralised form. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

• Page unlocked. I shall not do any further moves (unless I see a clear consensus). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

respond

my comment is on the page that you replyed on before and you can get there by going to my talk page and then clicking the link at the bottom of vandalism part 2.--Walter55024 (talk) 00:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Please do not waffle. Give me an explicit link to the page and section in question, for example like this: User talk:Bmusician#help me!. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

go to:User Talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Walter55024

cchallag

I have done all the things and removed Nokia references. I have following the advices given by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yngvadottir. I dont think this is fair. Please suggest what needs to be done to make it neutral. everyone has a right to know about this Technology. Why not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FaceTime is removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.120.41 (talk)

• I do not talk to IP addresses. Especially not one who cannot be bothered to learn wikilinks or tell me what the <expletive deleted> they are talking about. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Cchallag, your message is very confusing. At first I thought "cchallag" was the name of an article, then I figured out it is your name. I can't figure out what article you are talking about though. If you want help, just log in before posting and then be sure to say what article you are talking about. Cloveapple (talk) 11:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

(Point of information) He/she is talking about PureView Pro. I was advising on our notability and referencing policies but had to go to bed. He/she had contested the PROD on the talkpage and may have added 3rd-party refs before it was deleted. There is a request at WP:Requests for undeletion. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Well sorry for using IP, but message is same. There are lot of cool technologies out there and people deserve to know about it. These technologies are the results of the passion to make difference and bring innovation to common users, which is similar to Wikipedia. I would like to spread the word and we made very neutral together with Yngvadottir. There are also external links which are from neutral sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 05:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Please read this advice. Yngvadottir says she has not the knowledge but someone else might be willing to help. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice RHaworth. I have done quite a many modifications after the article was published. I am not able to see that anymore. Could you please send me the text which was there before it got deleted or let me know how I can access it? I will try again and Cloveapple said that he would help me in making the article good. Thanks in advance. cchallag (talk)

• I always think that one of the hallmarks of a spammer is that they resent having to learn wiki standards whereas true wiki editors relish learning the standards so that they may be seen as established editors as soon as possible. Before you think of doing any more substantive edits, please take some time to actually learn a few of these standards. There are several crass errors in the first edit of this section. Let's see how many you can spot. I make no apology for rubbing your nose in it because you have repeated all of these errors elsewhere. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Well I respect you for correcting me and I never expect anyone to apologize to me as it annoys me even more. May be I should have approached the admins to get this published. First things is that I have be in discussion with Yngvadottir to get it corrected and I was about make it even more informative and neutral, but suddenly it was deleted when discussing and I would have appreciated if you would have discussed with Yngvadottir at least. Another reason for getting IP was that, I have put remember password and for some reason it didnt work fo Wikipedia and I assumed it was working. Also I should have referenced the talk subjects as "PureView Pro". I am not expecting any favor also here. All that I am interested and wanted is to spread the knowledge of technologies and I have been using Wikipedia for learning about technologies. Just wanted to do my part so that people know about these cool things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchallag (talk • contribs) 20:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• OK, you have, somewhat clumsily admitted two of the errors. The others were, failure to sign with ~~~~ - which you are still doing! - and the use of naked URIs instead of wikilinks, ie. the first should have been written as User talk:Yngvadottir. If I see you repeat any of these errors, I shall rap your knuckles again. Check the edit history of User:Cchallag/sandbox where you will find your last edit and for Pete's sake, start by re-writing it as an article instead of an advert. Another bit of wiki knowledge: there is nothing special about admins for getting things published, indeed since we have access to the delete button, you are far better off looking for an editor interested in your subject. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Spamming?

Hi Roger. Do you know what this is all about? I see he's hit you up too. He keeps putting invitations on my talk page and I keep deleting them, and he keeps putting them back. A bot? I never heard of this editor: User talk:Walter55024. The message he keeps leaving on my talk page is:

Would you like to join my disscion at:User Talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Walter55024?--Walter55024 (talk) 22:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 00:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• Bit of an exaggeration to sat "keeps putting them back". How many times? Search User:Walter55024 for Oklahoma and note the kid's age! Harmless. Ignore it or follow with wry amusement his contribs history. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Roger. Thanks for your kindest work and reply. I unintentionally overstated (exaggerated) the "put backs" since I was thinking it was a 'bot. I didn't get that far with researching it as I was otherwise offline occupied in person, my fault. I hope no one was taken aback by my protestations. I just wanted to see if someone knew what was going on. Many thanks. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 02:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

By the way, Roger, I frequently wonder how one can be fairly and reasonably certain another is who another says he is -- on this medium. Recall Magritte's painting of "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" reminds one of skepticism as does the Turing test. One is forced to presume the new editor is as he says he is. Cheers. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• I agree, AGF demands we treat him at face value. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

i do not know what you mean when you say search user:walter55024 for oklahoma.what does it mean?--Walter55024 (talk) 12:18, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• I wished to point to Wikiklrsc to the place where you have disclosed your age. How would you suggest I do it? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

well if you are asking for my age i do not want to say that because it could give some of my indity away.--Walter55024 (talk) 12:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I want to add

	Please
	Sir I running my own company and I want to give its profile into wiki, I wrote its profile into wiki, but you have deleted, can you tell me how can i write this, please Samee2cool (talk) 07:14, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
	So far you have written spammy articles about three different things. I think you are being paid to promote things and I am minded to block you permanently. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

To answer your question, Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing. Your edits show that you are only here for advertising purposes. Please note that this is a blockable offense. --Bmusician 09:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for responding to the message from Tvaddict15 on my talkpage. Happy contributing, SwisterTwister talk 20:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Maximum (film)

I question your deletion of article Maximum(film) here. The reason being provided is implausible but

• I don't see what is implausible in creating a page for upcoming big Bollywood movie( going to release in 2 months) when there exists pages for Bollywood movies coming even next year.
• I guarantee the content is totally neutral and informative in nature.

I am new to editing so please light me with what is implausible in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpmeena (talk • contribs) 07:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

If you follow the link to the article: Maximum(film) you will see the move log entry as well as the delete log entry. That should answer your question but I will also point out the subtle difference between "implausible redirect" and "implausible article". But why are you asking me? Have you actually looked at your own contributions history? Just go and fix the links - all of which you created? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for confusion about who deleted article. Thanks for clearing doubt too. Jpmeena (talk) 18:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't get you: why this article an "implausible redirect"? And about fixing the links, if you could help me with my question then I think the article will be in place very soon i.e. no need of fixing them.Jpmeena (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I admit that you have to look closely at this edit but if you do so, you will see that I have added a space immediately before (film). You may think it obsessive but we prefer things that way. Now go and do the same edit to these pages. Just to spell it out very slowly: Maximum(film) was an implausible redirect - we do not call it an article. Maximum (film) is a perfectly acceptable article about which I have no complaints. Do you understand now? Did you look at your own contributions history when I recommended you to do so above? Please answer. By an interesting co-incidence, I also had the same problem yesterday with some racehorses in Hong Kong - see this message. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, got it. Fixed links too. Thanks! Jpmeena (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Developmentaid

I question your deletion of the page Developmentaid The reason provided A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content). but I beg to disagree

• There is a page in Wikipedia about a company Devex that is exactly like DevelopmentAid. The difference being that they provided two links regarding the launch of their new web site.
• DevelopmentAid is a young company and it is difficult to have proofs of its importance, but it has a lot of visitors and users
• I am not affiliated with this company, just wanted to create a page about a company that offers good services. I was neutral.

Can you tell me if the reason for deletion was the absence of links in newspapers or media about DevelopmentAid? C9h9m9 (talk) 09:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• The short answer is: yes. Re Devex, I remind you that other stuff exists is never an argument. The Developmentaid article was void of links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. It was also slightly spammy in tone and lacking in incoming links. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Iowa Alliance for Reformation

I removed the prod tag you placed on Iowa Alliance for Reformation because it has been discussed and kept at AfD in the past. I only did this to comply with policy and have no prejudice against nominating it at AfD. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:42, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Port Citizen

Please Remove Speedy Deletion I added a source showing the band is relevant. Hi I just wrote the Port citizen (band) page, how does A7 apply? I added an article reference that showed they are known in PEI and relevant to the music scene in 2001. Why does the page keep getting deleted? I dont have many references yet but I'm working on it. Just give me some time and I will get more info posted. — JmBass — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmbass (talk • contribs) 17:08, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• You might have better luck if you were to draft your article in User:Jmbass/sandbox until it actually contains links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Having their name mentioned in a night life article is nowhere near sufficient. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Astronomical calendars on Gotland

I agree that this is an implausible redirect. The article on grooves does not mention calendars, and their use as pointers to astronomical entities needs a reference. Why does every ancient artifact have to have a deep meaning? Honing stones (in this case, grooves) are practical and reasonable. David Spector (user/talk) 17:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• Have you been following the endless ramblings of Stavgard (talk · contribs) and his wild accusations that every editor who reverts him is Martin Rundkvist? Do you want to propose astronomical calendars on Gotland for deletion or shall I? But let us get rid of it now. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: Shh

I apologize for any errors, I was taking my cues from how the National Park Service seems to have them listed.Packerfansam (talk) 20:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

• I feel that Wikipedia is now influential enough to be able to set editorial standards rather than following others. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:25, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

cut-copy-pasting?

cut-copy-pasting my posts to my own talk page? Not using your own name? What are you doing? My I not talk to the deleting admin for a well-contested deletion? -DePiep (talk) 01:51, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

You created a user:.../sandbox with es: "at user request"? You don't know what you are talking about. And you did not ask. Then you state: "does exactly the same as in mainspace page"? Nonsense. Not true. You don't know what you are saying. -DePiep (talk) 02:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

• So tell me what the difference is. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Again: no. I contested the speedy correctly on two places (you deleted a third one here). That should be enough to start one asking questions before deleting. OTOH, if you or your fellow "us" (who congratulated me with my first edit today) did not assume good faith, there is something you should motivate even now. (your deletion & moving of coments, without signing, also hints to that problematic direction). The one issue, now growing in importance, remains: did you check the situation yourself before deleting, or were you blindly trusting your "us" partner? What did you do with my "deletion contested" remark? What about AGF? -DePiep (talk) 02:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

And please, stop f*cking with my sandbox subpages. Even without claiming "it does the same". Unbelievable. -DePiep (talk) 02:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Kindergarten.com

Hi Roger. I understand you're busy, but if you would take 2 minutes to view the 60 minutes link at the kindergarten.com article you deleted, you'll see why we are so passionately asking you to resurrect the article and help by instructing the edits to make it meet guidelines. There are millions of people who are using these products and the creator does not provide much info on them. Wikipedia is often one of the only outlets for the masses of users to reference. Our intentions are pure and your assistance would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FTS MD (talk • contribs)

• I saw your reference to "walled garden editors". Please name names. I would say that Zad68 (talk · contribs) who first tagged kindergarten.com for deletion, Cntras (talk · contribs) who tagged the next version and myself are all the exact opposite of walled garden editors. If you mean us, pray, what walled garden are we editing in? You claim to have been editing for nearly 8 years. How many more years will it take before you learn to sign talk pages properly, clothe naked URIs or provide multiple reliable sources - or even, when writing about a website, provide a link to that site. Please also read {{uw-coi}}. If you had created an account eight years ago, we would now be better able to judge your COI and tell how closely walled your garden is. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Page removal

I would like to know why you removed the CATS Applicant Tracking System page when it contained non biased, factual info about a company and their product? Why do pages such as basecamp (software) and ZipRecruiter get to stay up when they have the same layout and form that the CATS page did? Respectfully, Codebiker (talk) 15:40, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

• Other stuff exists is never an argument. Your article was devoid of links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. You have a blatant COI. I recommend you to wait until someone with no COI thinks the product is notable and writes it up. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

New page triage engagement strategy

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleting userpage

I recently changed my username. Please will you delete my previous user and talk pages. Thanks in advance.

• user
• talk

Solomon7968 (talk) 10:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

• Done. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Rasheed Sulaimon

I greatly respect your dedication as a Wiki admin. I ask that my article you recently deleted Rasheed Sulaimon be restored as I was unfamiliar with the process of contacting the admin who deleted the article in April 2011 rather than recreate an article with the same title. Please see my response to the April 2011 deletion and why I recreated a page. I would also welcome the opportunity to work with you to better help me understand the Wiki processes as I have similar pages in the works for other Notable athletes. — Collegehoopsfan (talk) 23:29, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

• Flattery will get you nowhere. You cannot even be bothered to provide a link to your "response to the April 2011 deletion". You can try deletion review but don't get too hopeful since the last AfD was only a few weeks ago. If you really have similar pages for other notable (small n!) athletes, start submitting them via AfC. Until you do that I will continue to believe that you are Rasheed Sulaimon, a close friend of his or his manager. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Walter55034

Walter55024 is evading his block again, he is editing from a new account: Walter55034 (talk) (block) J9 91 13:07, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for telling me. Keep watching. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Wow, that was fast! I should have come here first. I had reported Walter's block evasion on ANI and you had blocked him before I'd even put the ANI notice on his talk page. Cloveapple (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Rossignol Technology

I prepared a base for an article for Wikipedia about Rossignol Technology. I try to do it with an objective manner as I am doing in the French version. I asked others to forward additional materials and references. I was planning to incorporate our findings in the base article when we discovered that the article has been removed ! Can we recover the original posting for a new start in a sand box ? — Maseracing (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• Please learn how to do interwiki links. I have added the last state of the deleted article to User:Maseracing/Rossignol Technology. I wonder if the words "aucune source ni notoriété" mean anything to you, or in English: how about links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources? Do not attempt to launch an English article until Fabriced28 says that he is happy with the French version. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

An opinion, if you might...

I'd like you to take a look at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Take This Lollipop and tell me if you think it's ready for mainspace. To be Frank, once I began the thing practically wrote itself. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, go for it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Will go live shortly. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Craziest Show Ever

Since you deleted it, please also delete List of The Craziest Show Ever episodes. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:17, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

• Gimme time! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:18, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Freeloading

Hi, I would like to get my article back which I produced only in order to use for a project work in school, I was never suppossed to have saved the actual page, displaying it for all users which have resulted in 3 deletions, I would very much need it for a presentation I have tomorrow, I will only have it in my sandbox and by next week it wont even be on the sandbox, but I desperately need it before 12 am GMT+1 tomorrow (tuesday) I´m not a pro on wikipoedia thats why I have by mistake saved it and displayed the article. Also I don´t really understand where to ask you for this so please do not be angry with me if I have written in the wrong place. Please send me the article to this e-mail; <redacted> Sincerely Simon Ljungberg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zybed (talk • contribs) 22:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

• This is the right place to contact me. I shall overlook a number of irregularities in your request including publishing an e-mail address - which is a very bad idea. I have e-mailed you your text via the "e-mail this user" on your user page. Wikipedia is not a free host. Do not attempt to repost it here, even in a user page. If I see it, I shall delete it instantly. If, for some reason, it must be in wiki markup, then be my guest: post it on this wiki where the admins will allow you to keep it up for as long as you like. (Do not use "12 am" it is somewhat ambiguous: proper terms are "12 noon", "12 midnight", 12:00, 00:00 or, one which perhaps only I use, 24:00.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

College123456789

can you tell me specifically what i have to do to modify my page that you deleted. I look forward to making the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by College123456789 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• Before you think about submitting any article, you need to think about basic things like: create a section heading for a new message, put it in the right place, sign with ~~~~, etc. I suggest you work through a few of the articles listed in the sub-categories of Category:Schools in Connecticut and tell me six differences between those articles and your submission. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
• Hoaxes get speedily deleted. I am amazed that you even thought it might be worth rescue. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

wikisamg

Recently I have created an arcticle GTB DLP. Some later, his article was deleted, however I have unswered on "Speedy delletion" with followig comment: "This article just describe GTB DLP solution. In future it will be completed". Why the article was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisamg (talk • contribs) 11:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

• Blatant advertising. Poorly written article - what the <expletive deleted> is "enterprise extrusion". No evidence of notability. Kindly wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:INTDABLINK

Please do your homework.
The creation of an "xxx (disambiguation)" page as a redirect to "xxx"", where "xxx" is a dab page, is an established convention. (Example)
Extract from Wikipedia:INTDABLINK#Links_to_disambiguation_pages

How to link to a disambiguation page

To link to a disambiguation page (rather than to a page whose topic is a specific meaning), link to the title that includes the text "(disambiguation)", even if that is a redirect—for example, link to the redirect America (disambiguation) rather than the target page at "America". (If the redirect does not yet exist, create it and tag it with {{R to disambiguation page}}.) This helps distinguish accidental links to the disambiguation page from intentional ones. (For use in navboxes, see the {{D'}} template.) There is nothing wrong with linking to a redirect instead of linking directly to the disambiguation page; redirects are cheap and are basically transparent to the reader.

Please revert the situation to what it should be.
With thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 22:17, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Ditto. Pdfpdf (talk) 23:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

So what action do you want me to take? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct. My requests have been overtaken by events. But as you have asked, I'll reply.

If you're in the mood, you may wish to apologise for your behaviour.

I find it ironic (and highly amusing) that you were "shocked" by my "ignorance", yet you barrelled off like a bull-at-a-gate making all sorts of assumptions, ignoring useful/relevant information, and imposing your own POV - completely ignoring the MOS and WP guidelines. I'd be absolutely astounded to hear that you weren't aware of WP:AGF, so, given that you're an admin, perhaps you should practise it? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

wikisamg

I had understand my mistake and rewritten my article. Please, consider it again and allow to public it, if everything is ok. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisamg (talk • contribs) 13:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

• Your main mistake was to write here at all. You clearly have not learned from that one. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Silvatica

Please don't use false edit summaries in deletion. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

• So what deletion reason should I have given? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

You are the admin, not me. All I know that these were not test edits. They were normal, plausible redirects, even within the policy, which I've just reviewed. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 02:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• OK, perhaps R3 implausible typo or R2 cross-namespace redirect would have been better reasons. Given that we have relevant articles here, {{wi}} seemed such a curious way of treating this title and sylvaticus and silvaticus. But simply deleting was, I admit not the best treatment. I hope you agree the present arrangement. (I am not sure whether there is precedent but there is certainly scope for a separate list of species called foo sylvaticus.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, it seems this was part my fault. My first intention was indeed to redirect to an exiting article (which I did at the second attempt). But the article "silvatic" seemed dubious at that time and I noticed this cute trick "wi"... And then I forgot what I did. Anyway, I am still unsure whether "silvatic" is a valid wikipedia article, since it is about an adjective and has close to nothing to say. Also I don't see what's wrong with "wi". Many people are so used to wikipedia; they would search for everything in it. So a reminder about the existence of wiktionary would be quite in place. By the way, it not exactly a "cross-namespace" redirect; it is a cross-wiki redirect. Anyway, I re-read carefully the instructions about the intended usage of "wi", and now I see that your deletion was basically correct. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 17:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Trophy Wife (US band)

Hi there, I wanted to ask why you deleted the Trophy Wife (US band) page that was built. It contained a number of news articles and credible sources documenting the band's existence. What changes would you recommend I make? Do you still have the text and can you provide it to me? I am happy to make changes, just wish it had not been deleted. <e-mail address removed> or my talk page. Katyotto (talk) 17:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

• You don't deserve it but I see that it has been userfied for you. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your band is notable and writes about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Redirect Deleting

Please delete the following redirects:

• Ramakrishna Mission Vidyapith
• Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya
• Ramakrishna Mission Residential College
• Ramakrishna Mission Narendrapur
• Sri Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya
• Ramakrishna Mission Vidyapith, Deoghar, Jharkhand

Reason: There are number of Ramakrishna Mission institutions. So these redirects can led to confusion. Like Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya can refer to both Coimbatore or Narendrapur instituton. I have moved them to their respective pages. So please delete this redirects. Solomon7968 (talk) 12:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• "Leads to confusion" is an excellent reason for not deleting a title. Probably best to change these redirects to point to list of Ramakrishna Mission institutions or create more specific disambiguation page/s, eg. for Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok I have created disambig pages for the first two and I agree with your view with the first four. But I can't agree with your view with the last two. Reason:There is nothing called Sri Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya. And the last title is completely unnecessary as no one will want a redirect title with unnecessary place names to make it look extra important.Solomon7968 (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• You should have done an edit to Deoghar before nominating the last for deletion. Why does Ramakrishna Mission Residential College, Narendrapur have to be on that title rather than on Ramakrishna Mission Residential College. Is there more than one such college for which future articles may be expected? Are you aware of {{db-redirtypo}} which might have been useful? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
• Thanks You agree with me. Some other titles for deletion:

Sri RamaKrishna Mission Vidyalaya

RamaKrishna Mission Vidyalaya

Ramakrishna Mission Vidyapith, Deoghar, Jharkhand - 814112

Sudhakar dvivedi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solomon7968 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Go

Hello RHaworth, I'm contacting you with regard to your deletion of the article Go Overseas Organization. The article was very well referenced. I assume you felt it was not "notable". Would you mind expanding on your reasoning for this? Thanks very much Mgordon1 (talk) 18:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• Why did you dump your question in a completely different discussion thread? "Well referenced"?!! In the phrase "links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" does the word independent suggest anything to you? I suggest that you wait until someone with no COI thinks your organisation is notable and writes about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Implausible redirect

Hi RHaworth. I see that you recently deleted Women deliver as an implausible redirect. It's my understanding that different capitalisation actually is a plausible redirect (in fact, Category:Redirects from other capitalisations has >350,000 entries). So could you please explain why you believe it to be implausible? Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 23:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• Women deliver serves no useful purpose. It is not needed to find using search. Only an ignorant person would use it as the target of a link, unlike a phrase like hand to mouth where both capitalisations are likely. But if it offends you, put it back - redirects are not worth arguing over. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Dear Mr Haworth,

As I suggested to you earlier, you really need to do your homework! As I stated earlier, what YOU think is not the point, particularly when WP policy stating the exact opposite of what YOU think exists. Also, you seem to have developed a nice line in insulting people who don't share your POV. I suggest that it might be a good idea if you stopped such behaviour as soon as possible. I suggest that the attitude and approach that I have seen you displaying recently is completely inappropriate for an administrator.

It is simply your opinion that "Women deliver serves no useful purpose". The fact of the matter is that at least one other person thinks it does serve a useful purpose, and unlike you, that person has had the good manners to explain why. It is not needed to find using search - Irrelevant. As I suggested to you earlier, you really need to do your homework. But if it offends you, put it back - redirects are not worth arguing over. - I find that remark to be, at best, hypocritical. It may have escaped your attention that you are the one making all the fuss and creating all the problems. But it hasn't escaped the attention of others ...

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

• OK, I've re-created it. Sorry if this has caused any hassle, I just thought it would be pretty poor form to re-create it without talking to you first. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 12:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Tylerhyde etc

Thanks for blocking this vandal and User:Carasoles. You may have noticed that User:Marthigh is the same user.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Punjab Education in 19 and 20th_Century

Please Punjab Education in 19 and 20th Century which was deleted by you for reason A3: Article has no meaningful, substantive content.As a matter of fact the day you deleted the article it was actually bereft of any cited content . However I had been working on this article prior to your deletion and provided content from about 5-6 citations from reliable sources , which had been recently deleted from the article . So the meaningful content had been just deleted from the article . Although complete attribution through citations were provided for the deleted content by me, the content could have been put in parenthesis or paraphrased . I propose to effect this once the article has been un-deleted .Thanks
Intothefire (talk) 10:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

• Please learn to use wikilinks. The history is that Sitush (talk · contribs) removed large chunks as copyright violation and then decided that there was nothing worth keeping. I have restored the last state to user:Intothefire/sandbox. I suggest you get the approval of Sitush before you move it to Punjab education in 19 and 20th centuries (note the changes). If you wish to see any of your own edits, plese read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)