User talk:RHaworth/2014 Jun 18

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

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.]

Comparison of Exchange ActiveSync clients

Hello, I respectfully request for you to un-delete comparison of Exchange ActiveSync clients or somehow feed the information previously stored here back to the TechNet wiki page that you listed as the page whose copyright the Wikipedia page was violating. The main problem is that the TechNet wiki page has less information than the Wikipedia page. It seems that the Wikipedia page had become the trusted source for this information rather than the TechNet wiki page. I am specifically looking for information about Android 4.0 and greater, which was on the Wikipedia page and is missing on the TechNet page.

I respect copyright violations, but this article had become the most up to date source for this information. Taking down this content on Wikipedia has reduced the quantity and quality of available information on the internet. What can be done now? I am not a TechNet wiki contributor, but I want to help get the information that was in this article back on the internet. If the information in the Wikipedia article could be made available to me or to someone else, I could try to pass the information on to the person who had maintained the TechNet wiki article.

Please reconsider the deletion of this article or somehow help getting the information back on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pulsetn (talk • contribs) 13:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• Text emailed. I leave you to feed it back. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:43, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Music and film festivals

Hi RHaworth. Deletion of articles about music and film festivals. As this involves several of your deletions, I would welcome your perspective at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Speedy deletion of articles about music and film festivals. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Tag team music

Hey, we were wondering why our page was deleted. We produced music for an artist who is already listed on wikipedia. We had the link for the video crediting us on the page too... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.185.127.123 (talk) 22:52, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your posts yourself, sign in, learn to post at the bottom of this page and kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you're notable.--Launchballer 23:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Task Force on Human Trafficking

Hello, You deleted the page Task Force on Human Trafficking in Israel. I'd be happy to update it so it becomes a legitimate article (i.e indicate the importance), but can only do that if you will restore the page. How is that possible? Thanks very much, Alon M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.100.206 (talk) 08:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your posts yourself, sign in, learn wikilinks and read this.--Launchballer 09:16, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• I shall be more charitable and assume that you do not have an account here. Creating a new article most certainly does not require me to restore the old. It was a copyvio from here. A new article must be written in your own words. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Involuntary celibacy

Extended content

Hi. It looks like you deleted involuntary celibacy as a G4. It was history undeleted at DRV on the 4th (same day you deleted it). There may have been some discussion elsewhere, but if not, could you undelete it please? Thanks, Hobit (talk) 04:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC) I saw this comment: "due to the nature of this entire debacle, things have gotten quite confusing". I am certainly confused. Please provide links to the log entry for the alleged history undeletion and the associated DRV discussion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Ah, it wasn't history undeleted, the closer just wanted the history to stand. WP:DRV is that way. Hobit (talk) 13:28, 5 June 2014 (UTC) For goodness sake! I know where DRV is; what I wanted was a link to the specific DRV discussion that you are talking about. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:32, 5 June 2014 (UTC) I'd assumed you could use "Cntl-F". In any case, it's [1]. Hobit (talk) 18:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC) I am the one that tagged it G4. There is no consensus whatsoever for the term "involuntary celibacy" to exist in any form, be it article or redirect, in this project. Certainly not to point to a BLP article that contains no discussion of the term whatsoever; it was decided that while Donnelly may scrape a bare minimum of notability, it isn't for the "incel" stuff. If there is some history under involuntary celibacy that needs to be preserved somewhere, it should be in some form or method other than restoring it as a redirect. Tarc (talk) 20:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC) "No consensus whatsoever" means we delete the article and all of its history. If you are saying that there are edits within that history which have become part of other live articles, then their might be a case for restoring but I would need details. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Hi, I noticed that you deleted Involuntary celibacy. In what way does it fall under G4? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:18, 6 June 2014 (UTC) The redirect was pointing to Celibacy per the decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Involuntary celibacy (2nd nomination), but Mythic Writerlord retargeted it to Denise Donnelly. There is no deletion discussion which supports deletion of Involuntary celibacy. Note: This is a very weird case. Its content was at Denise Donnelly upon closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denise Donnelly. However, the only reason it got there is because it was unilaterally moved there by a block-evading sock Candleabracadabra (where it totally did not belong), so I don't think the result in the Denise Donnelly AfD is applicable to the revision history of Involuntary celibacy. (Otherwise, we'd be allowing a sock to disrupt thousands of revisions.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:13, 6 June 2014 (UTC) Per the findings at the Donnelly AfD, however, "the overall concept has been determined (informally) by the community to not have a place on this site" and "to include anything other than a few lines on her work on "incel" in the article would be a direct violation of the very clear consensus" (her being Denise Donnelly). I made an analogy a ways back; "incel" is an orphan that no one wants and no one can decide whose doorstep to dump it on. The celibacy folks rejected it as a fringe topic, and the consensus at the DOnnelly AfD rejected it, as what little she has written about it is a minuscule aspect of her career. We shouldn't redirect the reader to a topic where they cannot find any information about said topic. Tarc (talk) 12:11, 6 June 2014 (UTC) Personally, I don't care about the topic at all. However, the point is that those 1,000+ revisions never got a fair day in court. If the sock had not moved the page, the result would likely be different now (note that a direct nomination of Involuntary celibacy just a few months ago ended in merge, rather than delete, suggesting that people are OK with the content staying). The fact that the content of a page that has existed for years was suddenly moved to a completely different name, rewritten to describe the totally different subject, and nominated for deletion raises questions as to the applicability of the AfD to those revisions. I would suggest relisting Involuntary celibacy at AfD to get a clear opinion from people. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC) "There is no deletion discussion which supports deletion". OK, no AfD discussion but, I clearly see here in the DRV discussion the words "deletion endorsed" - and note who wrote them. The article had a decent AfD discussion before the Denise Donnelly mess. Why will none of you tell me explicitly why you think the history should be preserved? Are you trying to say: because parts may be used in the celibacy article? The best I can offer is: restore the edits, put a redirect to celibacy on top of them and then protect the title. Will that satisfy you? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC) I'm honestly not sure if there is or is not history to be preserved for the sake of GFDL and all that. There are 5 edits under Denise Donnelly as the article currently stands. If VQuakr created that stub entirely from scratch, not by reusing or recycling anything from the "Denise Donnelly" article as it stood when Candle renamed involuntary celibacy and edited it further into a biography, then is there anything that does need to be preserved? I have n o real interst in the subject matter either, other than having a dim view on non-notable pseudoscience being promoted via a WIkipedia article, which is all the original article was. My interest atm is seeing involuntary celibacy remain a redlink. It is a rather thorny question of what to do when an XfD results in a merge to a target article that doesn't want the material. Tarc (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC) @Tarc: thanks for the ping. You are correct that the stub I started was independently written based on third party sources, so I do not see any reason why a histmerge would be desirable. I am a little concerned about your statement, "My interest atm is seeing involuntary celibacy remain a redlink", though. As a plausible search term, it should redirect somewhere. Based on the consensus at WP:Articles for deletion/Involuntary celibacy (2nd nomination), it appears that there is consensus for IC to be a redirect to celibacy whether or not the latter page covers the former topic. Think of it this way - it affords our readers a chance to review the mainstream interpretation of the topic after searching for IC. I would have no objection to the redirect being protected to prevent future re-animation of the article. @RHaworth: since you recently G4'd involuntary celibacy, would you be willing to restore a protected redirect per the outcome of this AfD? VQuakr (talk) 18:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC) I do not see the point in redirecting it to celibacy when 'involuntary celibacy' is not mentioned even once in the article celibacy anymore. It seems very strange to me. There is only one article in wikipedia's main space that mentions involuntary celibacy, and that article is Denise Donnelly. Naturally it should redirect there, if only for this reason. To redirect it to a page that does not mention it and has, as of now, nothing to do with the term would be senseless. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 19:30, 6 June 2014 (UTC) But all that is at the Donnelly is a single name-drop of the term, and the AfD closing statement was pretty clear that if Donnelly's article was recreated, the incel business shouldn't be in it to any great extent at all. Why direct someone to an article that gives no info on the term? And as far as a redirect to celibacy is concerned, that's not possible at the moment either as editors at that article's talk page decided it was inappropriate, per Talk:Celibacy#Requests for comment. The term is in limbo at the moment, hence the "unwanted orphan" comment earlier. Tarc (talk) 20:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC) Sorry about that, it was a typo. I meant "decision endorsed" (fixed). A protected redirect seems to be a good idea (and can be nominated for RfD if desired). Mythic Writerlord: The point is that by default, content should stay on Wikipedia unless its removal is ordered by a deletion discussion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC) Well, no, content is removed from or added to articles each and every day via normal editing processes. An AfD result of "merge to Article X" can determine that there was a consensus to do so, but it is not a binding mandate that can rule out discussion at Talk"Article X", if they decide that the merged content is not germane to the article's topic. Tarc (talk) 01:40, 7 June 2014 (UTC) I might have caused some misunderstanding with the statement "content should stay on Wikipedia." I'm not saying that content needs to remain in a particular article; I'm saying that content should not be deleted (as in, using the delete button) without discussion. Can you identify any discussion that actually supports deletion of those revisions? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:04, 7 June 2014 (UTC) As I wrote at the bottom of WP:Deletion review/Log/2014 May 28, there was text merged to Celibacy that had its original history under Denise Donnelly. King of Hearts restored the deleted history and moved the relevant revisions back to Involuntary celibacy. Tarc tagged it with a G4, and RHaworth fulfilled the request. The situation is the same as before, so I will repeat myself: "This violates WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Reusing deleted material (guideline) as explained by WP:Merge and delete (essay)." There are workarounds to having a redirect at Involuntary celibacy and even to restoring its history, but the current state is unacceptable. Flatscan (talk) 04:15, 9 June 2014 (UTC) I just asked this at the RfD; if there's no material from the old involuntary celibacy article in the current celibacy article, then what's the issue? Does it matter that the merged material may exist as an old revision of celibacy? Tarc (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I am fed up with this discussion which seems to be going round in circles. Please continue at the latest RfD discussion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Contestion of deletion

You've deleted the page The VINC System which was my first contribution to the Wikipedia. I would like to discuss with you about why you deleted the page and the redirect Vinc System.

Extended content

First of all, you deleted the page under the A11 criteria, which it was not speedy-deleted tagged as. This means I had no preparation to defend my article from the deletion criteria. Second of all, I would just like to inform you that "The VINC System" article was not: "An article which plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally". Instead, it was an article about a political system which was created by Vincent Hansson, giving credit where it's due is important and that's what I've done. It also hosted a lot more information and I continuously to the last minute before deletion added new content to make the article more filled out. I even requested in the article talk page, that the article would be tagged as: "Not finished, needs more information". Taking a quick look at the talk page will give you that evidence, also while I was editing the wiki talk page which was deleted which made me re-create the wiki talk page with new information. The sources I've used and credited are the most reliable sources for the information in the article, which means they are official sources of information hosted. I would also like to contest the deletion of this claim: "Article content does not determine notability" "Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article. If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia, no amount of improvements to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable. Conversely, if the source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability." - Which means that the claim A11 wouldn't really make sense of a reason of deletion. Saying that the idea is made up is also wrong, because: We have support for our system on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the VINC System is a real alternative political system. Perhaps I might agree that the VINC Organization is not notable enough to have its own Wikipedia page, because the organization has not had any real progress of having it implemented in Sweden where the VINC Organization is hosted. The system is also not something that you would think was made up over one weekend, but is instead the long term work of creating and rethinking all the possible political failures of a political system. What I would like from you is that you: Re-create the article and tag it with your cause of deletion(if you find that neccessary) -> leave the case for another administrator to decide the final outcome of notability. or Re-create the article in my userbox give me your thoughts as why this article was not notable, and advice on as to how to prove them for the next submit. or take a look at the article again; knowing this information I've written here and visit our website (www.vincsystem.com) for more information, then find that you've done something wrong and re-instate the article with a tag of "not finished, needs more" but let it pass speedy deletion. Choose one please and get back to me as soon as possible, thank you.

Khaleesi. Khaleesi.Targaryen (talk) 12:25, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• You have the makings of a good politician - you talk a lot of hot air. We have a firm rule here against original research and similar new ideas. So kindly have the decency to wait (and I fear it may be a long wait) until someone with no COI thinks your system is notable and writes about it here. You could try deletion review where they will tell you the same thing - but more gently. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:43, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I understand, issue resolved. I'll let time pass and instead create other articles related to my niche; politics.Khaleesi.Targaryen (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• Gosh! Two people - this one and Xavierguillem both withdrawing gracefully. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

File:ChandrababuNaiduPix.jpg

Could you please restore File:ChandrababuNaiduPix.jpg, which you had speedily deleted? I believe the uploader owns the copyright because, firstly, the image is a very large one and IIRC the exif details were intact on the image. Further the uploader, naralokesh, is possibly Nara Lokesh, the son of the politician in the photograph. (He also uploaded this image of Naidu seven years ago.)—indopug (talk) 10:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• The image is a cropped and scaled down version of Sri-NCBN-Garu-Photos-8.jpg. It is linked from this page which has no copyright info, therefore we must assume it is all rights reserved. If the copyright holder releases it, they must establish that as explained here. The image should then be uploaded to the Commons. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Frank J. Pinto

Interesting response to my page creation. By the sites terms and conditions it is "strongly discouraged" but not disallowed to create a autobiography. I do believe, by Wikipedia's definition I am in-fact noteable... "Notability on Wikipedia is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. For Wikipedia:Notability (people), the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice" – that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded" within Wikipedia as a written account of that person's life. "Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary". I would like the page un-deleted please. Thanks in advance, Frankpintosr (talk) 18:59, 8 June 2014 (UTC)Frank

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:06, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Jo9350

Where is my page. I did a page on the Pen is Mightier than the sword — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo9350 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your posts by adding ~~~~ at the end of your posts, add a section header for each new section (but not for comments related to the section) and please learn wikilinks. To answer your question, seemingly right here, which it shouldn't be - if you are planning to create an article about it, it should be at User:Jo9350/sandbox. That said, if you want to write an article about the quote "the pen is mightier than the sword", it will be speedily deleted under criteria A10. -- Launchballer 16:52, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Your user page is all you have written on the pen/sword subject. Please note that we already have an article at the pen is mightier than the sword. Anything you have to say on the subject should be added there. A deleted version of your user page cheekily asks "can you create an article about my homework?" This shows that you had not bothered to do the simplest search because we already have more than one article on the Han dynasty. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I must admit to being rather tempted to just reply "Right here!" and leave it at that. - -Launchballer 21:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Bhuj (Vidhan Sabha constituency)

Please do not delete any page without proper application of mind. Whatever information was provided in that page is public data and no one owns copyright on it. It is result of election and therefore, no one hold copy right of it. Please restore it. CAKrutesh (Talk) 16:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Please sign your posts by adding ~~~~ at the end of it and put your messages at the bottom of the page. Three different editors, OccultZone, RHaworth and CorenSearchBot, all agree that was inappropriate for Wikipedia. As the page stated "Copyright: All Rights Reserved" the content cannot be copied.--Launchballer 17:17, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I've signed comment for the editor. Article can be recreated, no one has stopped anyone from doing that, but it should have enough of original content, not just copy paste. OccultZone (Talk) 17:21, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Dude, that site has copied data from government record. See this link. http://eci.nic.in/delim/Final_Publications/Gujarat/gujarat.pdf. This is official website of Cheif Election Commissioner of India. If someone claims copy right of that page, it is totally illegal. No one can have copy right of factual data. Go and check yourself. And please restore this page. CAKrutesh (talk) 18:25, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Perhaps I am being petty but, first fix all those cases where there is no space in front of "(Vidhan" then come back to me. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Kalol (Vidhan Sabha constituency)

Dude. See this link. http://eci.nic.in/delim/Final_Publications/Gujarat/gujarat.pdf. This is official website of Cheif Election Commissioner of India. If someone claims copy right of that page, it is totally illegal. This data has been taken from government record which is available in public domain. No one can have copy right of factual data. Go and check yourself. And please restore this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAKrutesh (talk • contribs) 18:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Why delete my article?

hay bro..i would to know why u delete my article about THE ALIFa and i believe i have no violate anything and the article is about myself and all the sources are genuine..kindly assist(Meoranderson (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)).

The article was deleted as it did not indicate why The Alif (shouted title) was important or significant. Read this and kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. -- Launchballer 17:17, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Music festival article deletion

Hi! I see you recently deleted Obscene Extreme, citing: "A7: Article about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". Would you mind taking a look at Brutal Assault and determine whether it also qualifies under A7? I've had both articles on my watchlist for some time, but I haven't seen any real notability established for either. Thanks! MrMoustacheMM (talk) 17:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Dealt with. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

User talk:I dream of horses

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:I dream of horses. Thanks. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 23:15, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Deleting userspace

Would you mind deleting this list of user spaces? -- KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Leave them with me. I will work through soon. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For investigating PRODED articles. Keep it up. OccultZone (Talk) 02:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Exchange ActiveSync

Discussion transferred to talk:comparison of Exchange ActiveSync clients. Please continue it there if you feel the need. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Robert Sellar (Australian merchant)

Another transfer - coincidence or the mood I am in? This discussion transferred to talk:Robert Sellar (Australian merchant) where some action that GHG2008 (talk · contribs) needs to do soonest is specified. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Dearest Wikipedia Maven

You recently found it necessary to remove a page that I had created (The Secrets of Floor Traders) to provide a brief background on some educational materials I came across online. If you will consider providing me what specifically about the article you recommend that I update in order for it to be acceptable for re-posting, I'll be much obliged. I endeavored to write neutrally and objectively about the subject, which is precisely why I didn't cite many resources... most of them seemed to be unilaterally in favor of the materials and its author. You, sir, are a true master of your craft. Much Respect & Appreciation, Trevindo (talk) 22:56, 10 June 2014 (UTC)Trevindo

• Flattery will get you nowhere. The article: lacked context - was it about a book, a video, a course or what; was too stubby and, most importantly, contained no independent evidence of notability. But kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the subject is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

LM Guide

Dear, I would like to post LM Guide with same contents,again. It is localized contents of Japanese Wikipedia. Would you please give me your advice? Regards, Tamaki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamaki hirose (talk • contribs) 00:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your product is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps a bit bitey?

Regarding this edit to User talk:Grangeinterns: Yes, the username was blatantly in violation of policy, and yes, the user had come onboard specifically to edit about his/her own company, but consider the fact that this was probably an assignment handed to them by their superiors -- a common task for a summer intern. Discouraging them from creating a personal account because of their obvious COI discounts the fact that they well be quite knowledgeable in the insurance or general business field and have a lot to offer the project, as long as they keep the COI in mind and avoid editing about topics to which they are closely related. We have enough trouble with new editor retention; we should encourage all the new editors we can. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:24, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you for softening my message. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Sarada Prasad Upadhyay

Hello, I was starting a wiki biography about a prominent Nepali Educationalist who was known as a "Founding father of Education in Nepal." He opened several schools at a time when the Rana regime did not allow education to public. I noticed that you deleted the content, and I don't know how to go about it because I'm afraid that it will be subject to automatic deletion because it has been deleted once. I assumed that when you said email address was optional, it truly is optional, and all that is required is a login. Kindly suggest. Thank you Regards, Rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.130.129 (talk)

• Where on earth have I said email is optional? In fact the standard advice is stronger: do not put email addresses into publick Wikipedia pages. As to your query, please read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

MileWEB

Why did our posting get deleted for copyright infringement? MileWEB.com Marketing department — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mileweb2014 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• "Marketing department" - say no more! Please read this and then kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Account

Yes, Re create my account SDL International (talk · contribs). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamaki hirose (talk • contribs) 01:17, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• Accounts are never deleted so re-creation is meaningless. Your present account is not (yet) blocked why cannot you use that? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Buldana Urban

Respected sir..please let me know the reason that rejected our article previously uploaded. — Vsdongre (talk) 10:36, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your society is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio in sandbox

Thank you for deleting Implementation of FIX Protocol in Investment Banking. which I had tagged as a copy-vio.
I note that the article was constructed at User:Pandeyan/sandbox and then copy-pasted, rather than moved, so the original copy-vio still exists in that sandbox - AFAIK copy-vios are not allowed, even in sand-boxes, so can you delete that too please? - Or is the proper procedure to tag the sand-box? - Arjayay (talk) 12:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• The preferred procedure would be to apply exactly the same {{db-copyvio}} tag to the user page as the one in mainspace. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Luis G. Fernandez

Hello, I sent the following response to contest the deletion of this article: The subject of this article (which is still in development) has significant prominence in the field of Trauma Surgery, specifically the treatment of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome. He is a nationally/internationally recognized expert in this area. The subject of this article is a prominent prior military officer who played a major role in the disaster response of the State of Texas and the United States to the effects of Hurricane Katrina (the worst natural disaster to affect the United States on record ) as well as hurricanes Rita,Ike and others . The subject of this article has served in a major leadership role in the The Military Order of Foreign Wars of the United States (MOFW) ,one of the oldest veterans' and hereditary associations in the nation with a membership that includes officers and their hereditary descendants from all of the Armed Services. Membership is composed of active duty, reserve and retired officers of the United States Armed Services, including the Coast Guard, who have served during one of the wars in which this country has engaged and/or is engaged. The subject of this article has been recognized by the Vatican State (Knight hood in the equestrian Order of the Holly Sepulcher), as well as the Royal House of Georgia ( Knight Commander,Order of the Eagle) for his humanitarian efforts throughout his career. The subject is a member of an underrepresented minority and a prominent hispanic who rose from poverty to his current status. I will continue to expand the article as time permits over the next 2-3 weeks to fully reflect the achievements of the subject. This is my first posting of a self contained article and I admit that I am very new to this format. I would appreciate constructive feedback as to how to improve the article so that it may someday be acceptable for publishing. Thank you for your kind consideration. VBR.. Traumanator — Preceding unsigned comment added by Traumanator (talk • contribs) 19:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• You don't shout your name on this page. Why do you do it in Wikipedia? Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Natty Paint, speedy deletion guidelines

Greetings! I'm not requesting an undelete, but rather want to make sure I understand the speedy deletion process, so am hoping you can help. I was working with a group of students writing the Natty Paint article, which was quickly tagged for speedy deletion. Once the article was tagged, I encouraged students to use the "Contest this speedy deletion" button per documentation and post on the Talk page. My goal was to encourage these new student editors to work within Wikipedia guidelines, and articulate why the article met WP:Notability. (In this case, Natty Paint is actually a suggested topic by the WikiWomen To-do List here, so at least one other Wikipedia group thinks it does meet notability.) However, the article was almost immediately deleted by you, without acknowledgement/response to their Talk page comments. Should we have done something differently? What is a good way of working within the speedy deletion guidelines when we think a page has notability? Please let me know if I should ask this question elsewhere -- I am still new to Wikipedia myself. Thanks very much! AmandaRR123 (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• I am contrary - most of the people who demand undeletion get my standard "kindly have the decency" mantra - you say you are not requesting - so you get it! It is always a bad idea to start an article in mainspace - always use a user sub-page. The speedy tag says "do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself" so you could have got away with one of the other two removing the tag! I am not fully happy that the references establish notability so restored to User:AmandaRR123/Natty Paint. It is perfectly OK for the editors to continue working on it there. Be sure to use a move operation (not copy&paste) when you think it is ready. (Confession - I never looked at the talk page! If I had done, I might have userfied rather than deleted.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:16, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you -- I think they or some other group will be glad to have the chance to work more on it. I also appreciate the tip on the move operation, since I would not have thought to do that! AmandaRR123 (talk) 16:48, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Mellofellow

Hi there, I am seeking to understand why my user page User:Mellofellow was deleted. I have read that it is not meant to be a collection of bookmarks etc., however I was creating a book and in order to save it, it seems I had to create it: "You can save your book on the "Book" page, which can be reached by clicking the "Show book" link in the menu on the left hand side or in the toolbar. In the "Save and share your book" section you have to choose whether you want to save your book in your User pages..." Did I misunderstand? May I retrieve it temporarily so that I can at least recreate it? Thanks kindly for doing the hard work of QC. Mellofellow (talk) 13:47, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

• E Wing (talk · contribs), who applied the speedy tag, and I are agreed that it looked like notes to yourself and, as such, have no place in Wikipedia. Draft material for articles goes in user subpages, eg. user:Mellofellow/sandbox. Text emailed but please keep it off Wikipedia unless you can genuinely claim that it is going to be used in an article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:59, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Dhimsiri

Uhm - what? I had already turned down that A1 request as transparently invalid. What're you doing? WilyD 15:39, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

• Have a moan also at Gparyani (talk · contribs) for putting the db tag back. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

• • Uh, okay, thanks. WilyD 08:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Kingsley

Hey, thanks for unblocking. Though, I still don't know what I did wrong. Could you tell me how to properly make a page for Kingsley so I don't upset you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paragonpod (talk • contribs) 16:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

• Did wrong? This edit was pure vandalism - but to be fair you corrected yourself on the next attempt. First, tell me honestly: are you King Russell or, if not, what is your connection to him? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Sanam Gabriel

Hello RHaworth, could you please take a look at WP:Sanam Gabriel (model & humanitarian) and take the necessary action. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 09:32, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Non-English articles

Hi: You deleted പീരങ്കി as tagged - for being not in English. It may well be deletable - I can't read Malayalam and I haven't yet searched whether the article exists on the Malayalam Wikipedia - but simply being in a foreign language is explicitly not a speedy deletion criterion; the tagger erred. (I'm now going to drop them a note not to tag for speedy for that reason alone again, and then search - once in a blue moon these articles can be useful after translation, which is why we have WP:Pages needing translation into English, where it had also been reported). Yngvadottir (talk) 12:17, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Yup, this one was speediable - A2 of ml:പീരങ്കി, A10 of Cannon. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Singaphousing

Re Treelodge@Punggol and The Pinnacle@Duxton: I understand that these two articles cannot be speedied since they are quite old and revised several times. Is it okay if I AfD them? — Jayakumar RG (talk) 15:54, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• This is Wikipedia. You don't need to ask me. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Gakhars

Good day, I would like to know why this Circle Bakote Gakhars remove or delete from Wikipedia. please informe me regarding this issue. I take a long to create this information. Please tell me right way to create these information in wikipedia. you copration will be highly apprichated. i am wating for your feedback. thanks. Asimkiyani0666 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asimkiyani0666 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• Possibly it has had a rough ride but total absence of references was a good enough reason for deleting it. I can email you the text but read this. What is your relationship to Kushal (talk · contribs) or how did you encounter User:Kushal one/Gakhars? There may be scope for expanding Gakhars or even re-creating Circle Bakote Gakhars but all edits will fail if facts are not fully referenced and any names of sub-clans or individuals must be blue links. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• The most frustrating thing about this job is when I give out advice and it is totally ignored. Your recreation of Circle Bakote Gakhars with the same errors shows that you have not heeded anything I have said. I have moved it to User:Asimkiyani0666/sandbox. When it is ready, do not move it back to article space - get someone else to do it - I suggest submit via the draft: system. Kahloon is not a particularly good article but it does give an indication of the sort of stuff we are looking for. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Endrow etc

I've noticed and appreciate your cleanup work, e.g. taking care of {{db-author}} requests. I'm concerned, though, about the haste and the absence of any notification as regards the deletion of {{Endrow}}, {{\\}} and accompanying pages. Perhaps you were unaware that it had only been created within the previous day or so? It appeared to be unused because an editor had taken it upon him/herself to remove the few instances that I'd introduced. If it is redundant, then it seems there are many other convenience/code-appearance templates that qualify. I am perturbed by the sense of "railroading" these events have prompted. My understanding is that Wikpedia is meant to be a collaborative, communicative and friendly project. Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• I was fully aware that they were recent. What earthly purpose did either template serve? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

[2]. — Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

• Having a variant template with a newline code is a difference not worth having. But raise it at WP:DRV if you insist. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your opinion. (I imagine the difference is in our experience of editing/updating wiki-style table code.) Given the rest of the thread to which I linked, I'm not sure if deletion review would be the most appropriate place – at least, probably not at first (and if I insisted). Meanwhile, it looks like you also handle some/many/most/etc of the questionable-sounding new articles, so more appreciation from this general direction. Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Man ,

Hi man , I am [shouting deleted], thanks for your understanding , but can i ask you why did you delete [shouting deleted] page or article, i spent two hours collecting information, and i did not mean to promote the company, its really popular in the [shouting deleted]? And Thanks :))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihad.zeitouni (talk • contribs) 18:10, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Talk about a massive reduction in quality of messages!--Launchballer 19:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedians in Brazil

Why are you doing this[3]????? Why are you editwarring? What has it got to do with you whether I live in Brazil or am just visiting??? Michael N Cooper (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• Replied on Michael's page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Buldana Urban Cooperative Credit Society

Moved to other party.

Deletion of Vichara Technologies page

Hi Roger, You deleted Vichara Technologies webpage. It contained information previously not on Wikipedia, i.e. the company's founders sold their earlier company to Unisys (which is one of the big American IT companies with great no of links to it). This is a vital information previously unknown. Is there any specific text that needs to be removed from the company description, so you can restore the page? Aradhnamaingi (talk) 12:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC) Thanks, Aradhna

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Inappropriate username

Hi Roger - I see you're online, and I'm not sure the appropriate process about an inappropriate username. New account ObamaIsATerrorist (talk · contribs) seems textbook wrong to me. Is this something you can take care of or is there a procedure to go through? At the moment one meaningless edit is all that's been done, but I think the name is not ok. Thanks Tvoz/talk 23:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

• I don't feel sufficiently incensed to block the account myself. So report it at WP:ANB or WP:ANI. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. Cheers Tvoz/talk 23:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah - I see Johnuniq beat me to it at WP:UAA - will see what happens. Tvoz/talk 23:54, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Raul Veiga

Hi, My name in Luiza, I work at Radial. I think there is a misanderstanding. Your criteria as who should and should not be included in an encyclopedia is not clear. Raul Veiga has contributed actively now for 7 years in the musical theatre scene in Rio de Janeiro, among other things as recording an official Oscar winning song, and should be included in the encyclopedia as a means for people who search about him. Everything that was said in the article was purely based on reference material (newspapers, IMDb, webpages, interviews) cited on the page. I think this is the link if the deleted page: Raul veiga. The page wasn't ready when I clicked saved, the references tags weren't ready and the list of all his work too. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radialproducoes (talk • contribs)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks he notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion Status: Amazon Malaria Initiative

Hi there RHaworth, I have received a notification that the page User:Amazon malaria initiative has been deleted for violation of G-11: Unambiguous advertising. I would like to vouch for the article by noting that this piece has no purpose of adverting or self-promoting, and moreover, it fill and important knowledge gap. The AMI article is unbiased and is supported by third party’s sources that are purely fact biased. The reason for attempting to publish this article on Wikipedia was not for a web-hosting space (AMI has an organization website) but rather to provide information about this particular subject Malaria in the Americas that otherwise may be unknown. My hope for having a Wikipedia article is to have others contribute their knowledge to the AMI article page, including organization such as USAID and PAHO , as well as people and organizations from countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Extended content

Improvements What might have contributed to the idea that the article had violated G-11 may have been the article move to the user page space. When I moved the article my intention was to make the article a draft so that I could finishing editing and citing the document properly before making it live again, as well as receive edits and improvement. I realize now that the user page was the wrong location to do so and the use page space is reserved for information and advice user to user. I now know that once an article live everyone can contribute to it. In the future I will have to make sure every edit I make is double checked for correct citation and formatting to avoid any mishaps. I have been researching the wiki markup and would love and appreciate any feedback for properly editing this page. I am new to the Wikipedia family I know there is a lot still to learn about rules and wiki mark ups. For that reason I am currently creating presentation on powerpoint about Wikipedia rule for creating your first article to better my knowledge as well as others. I do believe this article is encyclopedia material that is for the benefits of others. Please give me any feedback regarding way in which i might adjust the article i to Wikipedia format that I have not already noted. Credible Source In guideline it mentions that having multiple reliable sources are very important for having a credible page. Below are more sources that i plan to add to my page to verify its credibility ,Provided the deletion status is lifted from my page, as well as move the article back to the article space where it belongs. If Your are not able to to lift the status I would appreciate if you could provide me with text. CDC USP DNDi New LetterCHS Similar wiki sites Here are a few wikipedia article that at similar to Amazon Malaria Initiative [USAID] [PAHO] [Roll Back Malaria] Thank you so much for taking the time to read my input, look forward to hearing form you!

Sincerely, -- michelle devlin 17:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdevlin54 (talk • contribs)

• Possibly a worthy project. Try following this advice. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Anchorage Fire Department

Please undelete this article. CSD A1 was not correct. The article had enough context to identify the page's subject. Antrocent (♫♬) 00:12, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

• Don't be silly. I could have deleted it as test page. You ought to know by now to develop articles in user space. I have moved it to User:Antrocent/sandbox don't even think about moving it to mainspace until it is a proper article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:19, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

What? No..... don't you be silly, now. Deleting it as a test page would have been as wrong as deleting it for having no context was. Perhaps, you could have deleted it as CSD A7, but that would have still have been kind of poor form because it had just been created and the article's creator was currently trying to ad content (his last article Vancouver Fire and Rescue Services turned out decent eventually) and because the fire department of a city of 500,000 is probably notable. I did not create the article and do not really want in it my userspace, I just was trying to clean it up while on new page patrol. Antrocent (♫♬) 00:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

• Apologies, now at User:Ronicish/sandbox. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Sheila Simpkins deletion

You don't think someone who so dramatically changed their life around like that and was profiled in the Times is an important enough entry?--Aichik (talk) 03:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Deleted Article

Dear Sir

Greetings !!!

I 've create a page " Acharya Santosh Santoshi" three times...all times I got that this page is deleted. Kindly this is my humble request that please do'nt delete this page. kindly allow me to create this page. and be continue on this page. I did'nt copy any content on this page. there is not any fake information on this page. this is not of any duplicate/fake page of any duplicate/fake person. Kindly revert me back..

I am waiting for your valued response. kindly reply me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manjeshkau (talk • contribs) 11:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)