User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2008 April

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

Lawjobs.com deletion

Can you clarify how this wiki page qualifies as spam and not careerbuilder, or hotjobs.com, or any other online job search engine website? I used these websites as templates for this submission. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewcurrier (talk • contribs) 21:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• It had a spammy smell and having been deleted once did not help! But have an AfD with my compliments. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

U Direct Deletion

Article is a posting for a legitimate production company, it has been incorrectly marked as "blantant advertising" due to an early stub. Had to repost to due unwarranted deletion. Please do not delete again.--Adamlancegarcia (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

NYC Resistor Deletion

RHaworth deleted a post concerning a US oriented article with no cause. Suggest he stick to his own continent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Openfly (talk • contribs) 19:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

OS grid key Ireland.gif

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:OS_grid_key_Ireland.gif. -- Rettetast (talk) 13:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

How Television Works

You meant content fork, I assume. I think strangling the entire article at birth is a little harsh; it's impossible for others to edit or discuss the content if they can't find it. I've reinstated it, with a merge-multiple tag and a discussion starter on Talk:Technology of television. Can you let others read it and have a say before deleting it again, please? IanHarvey (talk) 14:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

speedy deletion

it wasn't an archive or a test, it was merely a place to get the discussion out of the way of the general forum, because it was becoming far too long. speedy deletion(talk) 08:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about. Try creating links! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Cab spam

I got a problem for "speedy deletion"... In fact, My first level title was wrong and i was not able to change it, so i deleted the page and recreated it... Then i got your message....

Is'it possible to do something please ? -- User:ludovic19

• Yes. What you should do is go away and stop trying to advertise - see WP:SPAM. When your company becomes notable in the English-speaking world, someone will write the article for you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand... This was a description article of the company which has got subsidiaries in all the world, and not an advertising. (I tried to do the same as Intermec, is this article an advertising? Because i tried to do the same thing) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludovic19 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• You did not do the same as Intermec! How many times does the Intermec article have the word "our"! It also has a link to the company's website that works. It does not matter to me how notable the company is, you clearly have a COI so you should keep away. Sorry. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok you are right, i assume the fact that i did not take the time to read completely the wikipedia policy and goals...

Can i rewrite the article without using " advertising " language but only with a neutral language like the Intermec article ? sry again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludovic19 (talk • contribs)

• I repeat, I say: leave it to others. But if you want to try, I will not stop you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok thank you for your help and advices, i can only do better now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludovic19 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

the Joël Bellassen index

I actually moved it to the Wikiversity. You can suggest a better place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soulstrialhaha (talk • contribs) 09:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

For moving my user subpage to the proper title. I didn't realize that typo had happened till after you moved it. Thanks! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Glad you noticed. Now I won't need to leave you a message. I was just about to caution you about the title when someone tagged the article as an attack page. I saw the title, thought it might be attack but actually went to the trouble of reading it. But to be on the safe side, I have move it to User:Wilhelmina Will/CharAss - CharAss stands for character assassinations. I have had User:RHaworth/CharAss for ages so no-one should object to yours. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • WP:ATP covers this quite well... From that page, and I quote, "a "list of enemies" or "list of everything bad that some user ever did" is not constructive or appropriate. " If you feel this is an appropriate page, I will not wheel-war over this, but clearly, regardless of the name, one should not mainatain such lists for any good reason... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• I do not think it is an attack page. The wording is far milder than than the many newbie-biting things that I have written! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Jayron32. I'm sorry I jumped into it, but with a title like that it's ripe for miscommunication and I don't think any editor should be held accountable if they misinterpret the reason for having such a list, myself included.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 04:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well that was a busy few minutes! All told, Wilhelmina, and to be on the safe side, keep your notes about other Wikipedians on your own computer! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, there still appears to be enough of a disagreement on this that I have started an WP:ANI thread on it. Clearly, there needs to be a wider input on the issue, and I am willing to abide by whatever consensus holds on the issue... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Controversial literature

Category:Controversial literature, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Cgingold (talk) 12:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

deletion of paypay article

I need a reasonable explanation why was my article deleted. I've conscientiously prepared and described paypay article as another payment system and in accordance with moneybookers article to avoid advertising. There is absolutely no difference in contents between moneybookers and paypay article since the text is strong similar. If you deleted paypay article you have to also delete moneybookers article that's pure advertising too!!! Please be so kind and explain me the difference. Thank you --AndreYoung (talk) 17:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• You are an SPA. I take the firm view that SPA automatically makes you a spammer. The article was also spam because you had provided no independent references to the notability of the company. Moneybookers does appear to have some notability. But it is no use talking to me. I have made the pig-headed decision that you are a spammer. You now need to go to DRV to find others willing to reverse my decision. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Web jockey, etc.

I recently added a piece to the Web Jockey article expressing the company that trade marked the term Web Jockey. I do not know why it was deleted. Is that not important info? I gathered the info from a recent press pack. I feel the info is highly relevant. Anyhow just wondering. Thanks.

I also added the term 'social utility' that was linking to a unrelated term and it was promptly deleted. Both terms were branched from a bandFIND.com article I wrote based on a highly engaging press pack and an in depth review of their site. Honestly the other articles (bandfind.com, web jockey, and chris purifoy) are only important to me b/c of the extensive amount of time I spent working on them. But the social utility article is close to my heart. I had planned on expanding it as I began to research references. I only began the article due to it's relation to the article I was writing. I am a Web 2.0 analyst and I have heard this term bounce around for some time. I had not ever heard the origin of the term until I came across the press pack. I am one of the analysts that fully agree that it is the future of an entire industry... I could understand marking it as disputed due to my lack of references.. But to delete it entirely feels a little harsh considering the impact it could make. Anyhow, I guess I would just like a fair review of these items. I am confident that a fair review will judge in my favor. Thanks for what you do. I am an advocate of the wiki cause.

Ciao.

p.s. This was my first stab at wikipedia, though I am a LONG time reader. I spent several hours on it and found myself very engaged and excited to become a contributor. The more I wrote and began to learn about the process the more I enjoyed it... I have to admit though. In light of the deletion and "about to delete" status of ALL my articles I do have a tainted impression. It sucks to work for several hours and find it waisted. I hope it's just a bad first impression. :) Have a great weekend! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedidiah757 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In addition. I tried to refrence the bandfind article the best I could. I do not know how to cite press packs and press releases. I will try to find them online. They are not listed on their press page. I received them in a mail out. Btw... I just finished the funniest episode of family guy ever... haha I've been geeking out to family guy on my dvr for hours... sorry to much info. Later! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jedidiah757 (talk • contribs) 08:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• I have a suspicion that you wrote the press pack in the first place! Chris Purifoy is currently deletable as empty. Bandfind.com is deletable as non-notable. You addition to web jockey may be re-instated if you provide a reference to their trade marking of the term - and citing the press-pack will not do! Your usage of social utility reads like a neologism but feel free to create a disambiguation page and write an article about your usage of the term. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

) You are a smart person. I had to look up a few of your words. (disambiguation and neologism). Thank God for Wikipedia! ha!

As far as the deletions...Hey man do what you gotta do. I don't even know how to find that kind of info on the trade mark. My only reference is the press pack. It's no big deal. I just hate wasting my time. I'm a creative artist manager on the side, and a Web 2.0 columnist as my full time job. I was just intrigued by their stuff. You should give it a look. It's pretty impressive. I see them becoming a major player and really changing things both in the music industry and the web 2.0 industry. I have to admit.. Their corporate pages are terrible. Hopefully they will redo those before their grand opening. But, once you get inside the site... Its hot. Anyhow I just got overly excited and figured I'd do them a favor and write a good wiki article. I have to admit I was kinda hoping it would help them grow. At least I learned how wiki works. NO PRESS PACKS! :) I see several articles about wiki technology in my column in the future.

Thanks for your review. I appreciate what you do.

Ciao

P.s I read some of your previous posts. I think you may be over worked. "Yes. What you should do is go away and stop trying to advertise - see WP:SPAM. When your company becomes notable in the English-speaking world, someone will write the article for you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)"  :) Don't let the spammers get you down!!

Christian Guild Holidays

THIS WAS NOT BLATENT ADVERTISING I am independent of the hotel company, and it took me one and a half hours to make that article. I am absolutely SICK of so called 'administrators' deleting perfectly good content. I wish i was sorry for venting my anger on you, but it is perfectly justified. This article was not persuasive, nor was it advertising in anyway. I am asking you now to put the article back on line- this is not funny. If you want wikipedia to grow, you need to advise, not just delete.

Please put the article back, and i will make it less of an advert. If you have any suggestions on how to make it better, please contact me ASAP via my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robincross224 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Merging histories

Thank you for your help with the "histmerge" for Goose Village, Montreal. Is that something I could have done myself? I think I've got the hang of redirecting article and Talk pages, but didn't realize I could or should merge the histories. I didn't find anything on this as WP:REDIRECT, though perhaps I missed it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I gather the info I need is at WP:MOVE? Though I'm still not clear on it.... Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Correct, you should have used a move. It ain't difficult - just click the "move" tab! But no action needed for Goose Village, I have fixed it. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry

I made a mistake after going over a LONG backlog of un-patrolled new pages and I wanted to get back to the backlog. I am quite familiar with WP:MOS, I figured just someone with a little more time would catch my mistake and quickly fix it. I don't think what I did was "horrible," just lazy, and I'm sorry for doing it. Thank you for catching my faux pas.--Nkrosse (talk) 18:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• The word "horrible" referred to the appearance of the finished edits, not the act of doing those edits! A subtle difference. Glad you have not taken it too much amiss. Keep up the patrolling, we need you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Ask A Chola

Can you please tell me why you deleted the "ask a chola" article I wrote? I was working with an admin person to get it up to par with your standards. There were references to back up the entry, including the chola entry in IMDB and in American and Mexican periodicals. I am new to Wikipedia, so I appreciate your patience. If you could please let me know where to find the last version of the article so I can work on it that would be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CholaLife (talk • contribs) 21:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• You can have you text free of charge. The first thing you to do is to make the refs and external links work! Your user name indicates a blatant COI which means that I will probably rate it spam again if you submit it to DRV. And in any case appearance on a public-access cable channel does not sound notable to me. But by all means follow Torchwood's suggestion and create User:CholaLife/cholatest. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Orange County Teachers Federal Credit Union

Hi. Sorry to sound rude, but I was trying to figure out a few things, like how to create an article, and how to move one article to point to another. While I appreciate your help, I wasn't ready to set the OCTFCU article to point to the SchoolsFirst article. The Credit Union hasn't changed the name yet, and won't for a few weeks still. Thanks. ZooCrewMan (talk) 06:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to have offended you by not following Wikipedia Regulation whatever it is. I'm trying to figure out how to create articles, move them, redirect them, whatever you want to call it. The fact remains that I was trying to do something, you came along, and interrupted what I was doing. All I ask is that if I, or some other person (especially newer and unexperienced people) is trying to do something, you not muck it up right in the middle of what we're doing. Thanks. ZooCrewMan (talk) 07:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• I am sorry, if I had noticed that there were very recent edits to the article, I might have acted differently. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • It's ok. I'm sorry to come off sounding rude. It just seems that every time I try to create something or do something major, somebody comes along and deletes it or something. It gets very frustrating after a while. No hard feelings! (?) ZooCrewMan (talk) 07:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Home Stored Product Entomology

Before the article is moved, it must be understood that I have given valid reasons for it to be under the more specific title of "Home Stored Product Entomology". Stored product entomology covers much more than simply 5 insects- it encompasses all stored product pests. It is misleading to place the title under Stored Product Entomology, since users who actually have prior knowledge of the subject will be disappointed to find that the article only covers five major stored product pests found in the home. Thanks. Csb14 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• OK . But why the capital S on stored? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Dr Barbara Moore

I see you have moved this article to Barbara Moore (walker), although Barbara Moore (vegetarian) might be as appropriate. The reason why I named the article Dr Barbara Moore is that that is the name by which she was always referred to (trust me, I am old enough to remember!), that is the name she is called in the references, and that is the name she is called in the WP articles which mention her. Hence I believe that the original name better complies with WP:NC. Mhockey (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• Trust me, I am old enough to remember too. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) says we must drop the "Dr" but if you prefer (veggie), then tou can have it. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually I did read WP:NCNT before naming, and I read it the other way. I did not see any "must" there. I read: "Most general rule overall: use the most common form of the name used in English if none of the rules below cover a specific problem." I did the article because I looked for "Dr Barbara Moore" and could not find an article on her. Also, I was puzzled by your edit to Land's End to John o' Groats. Surely if there is a redirect from Dr Barbara Moore, you don't need a pipe? Just curious, I'm fairly new to all this. Thanks. Mhockey (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• To be honest, given that we needed to disambiguate this one from other Barbara Moores, putting "Dr" in front was really good enough but some real wikipedant might come along and object. Having moved the article to the veggie version, we had double redirects which always need to be fixed. The move message claims there is a bot that fixes double redirects but it is always better to fix them oneself. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I have changed the redirect page to save the bot the trouble. I think WP:NCNT could do with more guidance on stuff other than royalty - I'll put something on its Talk page to suggest it. Mhockey (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Self-replicating machine unprotection

It seems like Mr. Collins has settled down lately, and it's been over two weeks since you semi-protected the page. Do you think it would be wise to unprotect Self-replicating machine now or some time soon? -FrankTobia (talk) 03:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• Settled down? Have you seen this rant just three days ago? Why unprotect? It is only semi-protected, so anybody who matters can still edit it! I have switched to the smaller icon. Given that Mr. Collins has been around here for two years, I would suggest waiting two years with no hint of Mr Collins' presence before unprotecting. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Haha, I stand corrected; I had not seen that rant from three days ago. Thanks for the consideration and reasoning. -FrankTobia (talk) 04:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Uncapping passion

I'm quite new to wikipedia content adding or editing but why do you keep uncaping acronym?

If you provide me a real rule, maybe I'll follow it. But actually I can't find twice the same one.

For example I found that :

If you are going to acronym it, then capitalize it to indicate which letters form the acronym. If not, don't, unless it is a proper noun, which would be capitalized regardless.

E.g. "Your computer starts up from Read-Only Memory (ROM). The ROM contains diagnostics and instructions and for reading a bootstrap program from disk."

But "Your computer starts up from read-only memory, which contains diagnostics and instructions for reading a bootstrap program from disk."

What tell me this is not the good one? -- Bastien.guillaume (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

• Where did you find this conflicting advice? Please provide links. And feel free to update the Manual of Style (MoS). In the case of your example, I am quite clear in my mind. It should be "Your computer starts up from read-only memory (ROM), which contains diagnostics and instructions for reading a bootstrap program from disk." Read-only memory is not a proper name or trade name so we do not capitalise it. The acronym ROM is capitalised by tradition. (Sometimes actually I do capitalise stuff - eg. I think Railway time should have a capital 'T' - same like GMT, CET, etc.) -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Protected page

Not sure really - there clearly should be an article for this topic, but perhaps I'd better salt it, since only this recalcitrant spammer seems to create it. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Duh... the redlink didn't register, obviously one of those days, thanks for fixing Jimfbleak (talk) 15:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Rev. Christians

Thanks for the info. He definitely seemed to be an interesting guy. To appease him I had changed the article to a one sentence stub, but I'm glad you deleted it. Beach drifter (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Just curious...

...but did you notice this. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 19:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

• No I did not. Thanks. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Gibson Tom DeLonge Signature ES-335

Hi. This may or may not be a good article, but you should not make speedy deletion requests for articles that you know don't qualify. If he should have put in the word "guitar", then put in the word "guitar", and help him understand his mistake. Unless there is some history I'm missing here, he seems to be a well-meaning newbie. Your chosen alternative, to try to punish him by creating excess drama and adding to admin backlogs unnecessarily, is inappropriate. William Pietri (talk) 06:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Nowheristan

After re-writing it to meet Wikipedia criteria, I have reposted the article Nowheristan which was speedily re-deleted by an administrator. I have asked for a deletion review of Nowheristan. Since you took part in the deletion discussion of the first version of Nowheristan, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the current deletion review. Ttiinnaabauer (talk) 09:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Transwiki

Hello. Last April, you tagged the Slogans of May 68 article as a candidate to be copied to Wikiquote. In the last 24 hours, an anonymous user decided to be bold and simply create a Wikiquote page with the same content. Since the article never went through the transwiki process, what should be done with it? Should I just blank it and turn it into a redirect? Or, is there some other process? Having never dealt with this issue, I felt I should get some guidance. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Redirect - I have just done it for you. May 1968 in France already has the {{wikiquote}} tag so all angles seem to be covered. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, great! Thank you. I assumed it would be a redirect to the Wikiquote page, but no matter. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Gayelle (lesbian)

I have added new sources to the article and have addressed editors concerns regarding apparent, albeit entirely unintentional advertisement. Would you take a look at it and reconsider and perhaps delist the AfD, even if its to let it grow and wait for even more and better sources, content, and writing. I wrote the article in good faith. There wouldn't be so much talk about it in blogs if the term did not exists.NewAtThis (talk) 00:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• "There wouldn't be so much talk about it in blogs if the term did not exist [on Wikipedia]." What an admission! Do not use Wikipedia to promote your own website and ideas. You saw what happened to it on Wiktionary. Do you really think it has become less of a neologism in 20 hours? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Le pardon de Ploërmel

Just a note to say i've asked about the title on the talk page. Thanks. Best. --Kleinzach (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined

Hiya. Sorry, but I've declined to speedy Angus, Thongs, and Full-Frontal Snogging. It doesn't look great, but doesn't seem to be blatant advertising. You may want to consider WP:AFD. Pedro :  Chat  10:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Given that I deemed it notable in 2006 (but failed to spot a copyvio!), the chances are that it has become more notable since! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging

Hi! I notice you have just moved Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging to Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging (movie) in order to create a disambiguation page. However the WP film naming conventions say that it ought to be at Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging (film) instead - but as that page is a redirect and you've now edited it, the article can't be moved onto it. As you're an administrator, could you please perform this move for me? -- KittyRainbow (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Done. Perhaps I will seek to reverse policy. "Movie" has ceased to be slang and is explicit. "Film" has far too many meanings. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

template:US Air Force navbox

Thank you, I didn't even notice I forgot that namespace! bahamut0013♠♣ 18:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

King Alfred's Tower

Hi, You seem to be an expert on King Alfred's Tower which I'm just editing (as part of reading the new book "Somerset Follies"). Do you know why it is in categories "Buildings and structures in Wiltshire" & "Visitor attractions in Wiltshire" when all my sources say it is in Somerset?— Rod ^talk 19:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Gerard McMahon sub page

Hi!

Ok I will admit to being a bit of a newbie to all this, but nevertheless I am a person who likes to get things right.

As such I was therefore a bit concerned about a message that suddenly started to appear at the top of a page I created Gerard McMahon telling me the page was 30 kbs long. Believing this to be warning me of an error I had made, I thought I should try to resolve this 'error' by doing something to make the page smaller. However, I didn't want to resolve this 'problem' by creating seperate articles, since all the info needs to be kept together on this page. So I read up on large articles and somewhere in amongst these it suggested to resolve large pages by 'transclusion'. After which I created a sub page Gerard McMahon/Song List (Film and TV), selected the entire contents of a large involved section I had created on the original article page - a table - and copied this to my new sub page.

Ok I panicked and therefore now realise I did this a tad prematurely (since I had not actually finished compiling the table - lol), but my intentions were such that when I had finished compiling the table on the main article's page, copy it over to the sub page, delete the table on the main article's page and then 'transclude' this sub page, like a template, i.e. by just entering the code {{:Gerard McMahon/Song List (Film and TV)}}. Thereby resolving this too big 'problem' before anyone came along waving a big stick at me (lol).

However, today I have today noticed a number of things. Firstly, that you have spotted my prematurely created 'orphan' page before I had a chance to finish dealing with this (sorry..I really was very tired by this point and had to go to bed) and that you have also endeavoured to help me correct my errors (thank you). The only problem is that the section I tried to create the sub page for is simply part of the main Gerard McMahon article. It was never my intention to create a seperate article for this, as it appears by the way you have thought to correct my errors you may have thought was my intention. Indeed without asking the author of the orphaned sub page what their intentions were in creating this, I would probably have assumed likewise.

I also had a minor problem in so far as sub pages usually have the main articles page name appearing on the top left hand side of page (in very small writing) and I happened to notice that the sub page I created did not have this (???) but the main problem is the redirect, since like I say, the section I created the sub page for is simply part of the main Gerard McMahon article and needs to remain on that page. As such I'm hoping you will give me some advice and also assist me further in resolving this. In fact if it hadn't been for the "This page is 30 kbs long" message, I would not ever have considered attempting any of this, for I was more than happy with the page as it was. Obviously if this isn't really an error message, then the sub page I created and the page that you created can simply be deleted. However if it is an error message, I would be very interested to learn how others overcome it and why it doesn't appear on extremely large pages such as The Rolling Stones, pages with lots of graphics and which contain a hell of a lot more info than the page I created on Gerard McMahon.

I hope all this makes sense to you. --  _♫ Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪^Talk 16:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC) <<<< (a fellow Brit..lol)

• Whaddya mean "fellow Essex|Brit". I scorn Essex (lol)! Do we have a policy on transcluded sub-pages? They are fairly rare things - but a good idea. Sorry if I caught the article in mid-edit. I don't really mind what you do - you clearly will tidy up after yourself. One suggestion though: a more explicit edit summary might have prevented my meddling and certainly a string of "updated page"s are not as informative as they could be. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Phew! After reading some of the posts on your page (many of which amused me greatly) I really thought you might wave a big stick at me...especially in view of the amount of room my post took up on your page ;-) No seriously cheers. I am grateful to you. And yes, I will endeavour in the future to detail more 'explicitly' (good word that..hee hee) any changes that I make. I agree, "updating page" is a bit of a cop out. I do like to get things right, just sometimes it's hard to locate the right info, or the info appears (certainly to the uninitiated like me) to contradict what is written elsewhere, leaving it as a matter of interpretation.

Today however you may be relieved to know that I have decided that my "Problem of the Day" should not be trying to annoy hard working admins by trying to create sub pages for articles that are not overly large (yes, I have since read that I should not have panicked at the 30 kbs message), but to try to establish exactly what I need to 'reference' (i.e. only contentious issues, not things that can readily be established..??). I certainly understand the need to 'source' and totally agree that it is a responsibility required of us all, that's not the problem. My problem is the complete opposite in fact, for as you can see from the 3xcolumn list of references at the bottom of the Gerard McMahon page (lol), I seem to be sourcing way tooooo much!

Well I guess I can't expect to become a brilliant Wikipedian all in one night, so I guess I'll just keep plugging away for now. Thanks once again  _♫ Яєd_{xx ♪}♫♪_♫♪^Talk 22:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC) <<< a Brit who is known to like a glass or two of lemonade...

Telegaita

Hello RHaworth. Telegaita was created by now banned user User talk:Obardo, a Galician nationalist vandal. Telegaita, in Galician language, means TeleSHIT, or TeleCOCK. I was an attack page. The Ogre (talk) 20:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• So why does the word appear in this article? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Because that is the Spanish version of the Uncyclopedia, a satyricall version of Wikipedia. Notice that even though Gaita main idiomatically mean the avove meanings, it expresses them in a light way. The Ogre (talk) 20:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Explanation accepted. I shall delete. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Space Shuttle Challenger Edit

RHaworth. I did not vandalise the article. I put a link into the Auburn Senior High School's Notable Alumni section. When i clicked the link it showed that their was no article so i copied from where the article was available so the link could be followed. try the link aon auburn senior high school's page and just type in the search box space shuttle challenger. This was not an attempt at vandalism i just could not see what i was doing wrong. Bgrddg253 (User talk:Bgrddg253) 20:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• What you were doing wrong was failing to do this simple and obvious edit! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow... i feel dumb. thank you. Bgrddg253 (User talk:Bgrddg253) 16:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

MATRIC

The problem is there are more than one organization that call themselves MATRIC, as shown on the dab page Matric. As the neighbors, friends, customers and employees of MATRIC (Mid-Atlantic Technology, Research and Innovation Center) refer to the organization as MATRIC, why shouldn't the WP article do the same? BTW, I've change the redirct MATRIC to the point to the dab page. WVhybrid (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Free dating websites

I would like you to further explain why you thought that OkCupid and PlentyofFish were the only two free dating sites worth mentioning. When a wrote the article, I listed four, and when you edited the article, you left two.

Perhaps Wikipedia isn't about knowledge for the masses, I thought it was. What you are doing is similar to the ethics of Microsoft and now Google, you only let the viewers and users of your site see what you want them to see, nothing more.

I am fully willing to retract my statement if you can send me an explanation as to why both lovedango and justsayhi was deleted from the list of sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovedango (talk • contribs) 21:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• An article about Justsayhi was deleted as non-notable. And as for Lovedango, your blatant spamming is simply disgusting. Any more and I shall block you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ivy Bridge

Done dissambiguation. Please check it. Bsrboy (talk) 21:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia requested photographs in ...

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Photo_Matching_Service. I revised the pages at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Please consider adding your name to the top of the page at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in London and to any of the other subpages for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 01:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for informing. The dictionary entry which I AfDed, actually it often takes long time to delete article marked with no context or the articles even get expanded after addition of speedy tags. So I used AfD for it instead of speedy. Anyhow I will be careful about it. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Love Systems, (cont)

Thanks for your comment on my talk page. I have no idea how to prove I am not someone else. Someone posted on The Attraction Forums that there was a new wikipedia page for Savoy and another for Love Systems. As a former customer, I know both well and I came and I saw a pretty crappy page. (Presumably you can look that up). So I brewed a post of coffee, sat down, and took a morning to do it properly. I felt good about myself. I contributed. And then I got told I was working for various companies, I was the same person as several other individuals who write like they are 8 years old, people told me my page was a walled garden and wouldn't respond when I showed them how it wasn't, people told me my account was a single purpose account and didn't respond when I showed them it wasn't, etc. I dunno...I'm trying to lower temperatures here, but it's a bit annoying to get accused of something with no evidence based on someone's hunch and then have you account tagged with that. I'm not accusing you of anything (this is an illustrative example) but how would YOU prove that you're not associated with any competitors to Love Systems? How would YOU prove that other people voting to delete aren't you? If there's a way to prove this stuff and it's not overly burdensome or trusting a stranger who seems to have it in for me with personal infor like social security data, I'm game. Anyway, I'm not the only one who posted about those pages. I didn't start them. I edited and improved them. And then I stuck aroudn to defend my work.

So...moving forward....I saw that the Savoy page was approved and the Love Systems page wasn't. And my best guess would be you're going to come down on the next person who tries to put up a Love Systems page like a ton of bricks. So rather than go through this again, why don't we work collaboratively? This is a genuine and open effort to work with you...if you don't want to, no need to rip me a new one, just ignore I guess.

Here's something that might help.

1) What third party sources would you think would qualify as establishing notability?

• Savoy and Love Systems is the focus on the April 11th episode of Dr Phil show. (http://www.drphil.com/shows)
• National CBS radio interview
• Fox news broadcast
• Keys to the VIP episode (and wikipedia page)
• Chow magazine
• Brink magazine
• Other local radio & TV & print

2) Was the issue that the sources before weren't notable (I realize the Dr Phil show was a new one; I hadn't found that at the time) or that most were referenced from the Love Systems' site? If the latter, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do...sometimes Love Systems links to the original article and sometimes it's just .jpgs or videos that they host from 3rd party outlets...I'm not aware of searchable databases to for example, link to a audio of a national CBS radio broadcast. I'm not being sarcastic here; I am genuinely trying to understand the delete comments based on the fact that many links are on the LS site.

Best regards,

Camera123456 (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I thought you were again with the Savoy page? Now I see it's deleted as well. What's up?

Re, Love Systems - I take it you declined my request to help do this properly in a way that wouldn't offfend you, which is fine...is there someone else you respect you could refer me whose judgment you trust? Camera123456 (talk) 20:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

reply

At last - we get a clue: "someone posted on The Attraction Forums". Now why did you not say that a week ago when I accused you of sock-puppetry? It might have reduced the antagonism towards you. But you might have the decency to give us a link to the relevant thread on the Attraction Forums: Wikipedians might want to go and contribute there!

Once again, I remind you that you said: "I have no affiliation with the company and can prove it". You have changed your mind and now say: "I have no idea how to prove I am not someone else". Fine. There is no need to go on about it.

It is no use denying that you are a single-purpose account - a glance at your contributions screams "SPA". (OK you have made two or three edits to unrelated articles.)

I have gone carefully through Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love Systems. The "voting" is perfectly clear: three established Wikipedians have said "delete", four people (I will withdraw the sock-puppetry suggestion) said "keep" but a glance at their contribution histories told us that they had all signed up purely to endorse Love Systems and Nick Savoy. The AfD decision is a clear mandate for any admin to speedily delete the article if it re-appears.

It is too late to present extra evidence about Love Systems - the AfD discussion was open for six days and nobody touched the article during that period.

I was surprised to see Nick Savoy deleted - Philippe who closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Savoy, Nick is not the same person as the one who closed the AfD for Love Systems. Philippe initially said "no consensus" but fourteen hours later changed his mind and said "delete".

You may care to ask Philippe why he changed his mind but you may have more joy talking to WoodenBuddha who has been contributing for some time. I would be interested to hear why he "voted" to keep Nick Savoy but abstained from commenting on the AfD for Love Systems. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

reply to your reply

Thank you for withdrawing the sock puppetry allegation in your response. Will I be able to expect that this will take practical form as you withraw it from my user page as well?

To the rest of your points:

1) I CAN prove who *I* am (as long as I have protection against identity theft, etc.). Will that change anything? If so, what?

2) I CAN probably dig around and find the TAF post. Will that change anything? if so, what?

3) I CAN ask WoodenBuddha for his reasons, would that change anything? If so, what?

4) As for the page topics, if someone puts up a page and doesn't have all of the evidence immediately at hand, does that mean that when future evidence is discovered that the page can never be introduced? If (hypothetically, since there already is a page on it) I wrote a page on World War II and an admin didn't like it, does that mean World War II could never have an entry in the future?

I have repeatedly expressed my desire to work with you in a non-confrontational and non-abusive way. I will be happy to do all of the above if this is part of a genuine path to us figuring out where to go from here.

Camera123456 (talk) 21:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

RWH on April 11

1) I would be mildly interested to know who you are. I will keep the info. completely confidential. It will not change anything. (Protecting yourself against identity theft is up to you!)

2) "Dig around to find the TAF post". Is the site so vast and badly organised? If you provide a link and if I find user names there matching the "visitors" who voted here, then I will gladly remove the tags from your user page. (But what is stopping you removing the tags? The page is not protected.)

3) Have you looked at special:contributions/WoodenBuddha and his user page? You asked "is there someone else". I would not say that I respect him nor would I necessarily trust his judgment. But do you think he is more likely than me to help you?

4) If a topic is going to be notable enough for Wikipedia, the chances are that evidence of notability will be readily to hand. Having to scratch around to find evidence implies non-notability. If it acquires notability later, that is a different matter - but we would be looking for months delay anyway, not days.

"My desire to work with you". Good heavens! What on earth do you want me to do? Surely it would be better to find someone who might show a shread of sympathy?

I have just seen your pleas to multiple people about me. I would say that if anything, it is you who are stalking me. Please stop. I created user:Bixolon on April 6. Is there anything I have done or said since then that you object to. All I have been doing is responding to you. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Response

You asked what I object to. I object to the fact that you haven't removed the sock puppet allegations from various parts of wikipedia about me even though you said you withdrew the allegations here. What's the problem? Do that and I'll stop coming here.

You want me to "stop" what exactly? Me trying to clear my name? Me trying to get someone to moderate this dispute so you'll leave me alone? Why don't you just stop accusing me without evidence? Why don't you man up and withdraw your allegations where you made them. This is the equivalent of a front-page allegation in a newspaper followed by a withdrawl of the statements in a tiny classified ad.

Camera123456 (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

• I think you actually enjoy being confrontational. After I had said "I will withdraw the sock-puppetry suggestion", it would have taken you a few minutes to go round and remove the {{sockpuppet}} tags. Frankly I am getting tired of your hectoring tone and your canvassing other editors. If you cannot be bothered to "man up" and point me to this alleged posting on The Attraction Forums, then I cannot be bothered to remove the tags. However, if you remove them yourself, I guarantee not to put them back. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• Indeed, you could have started even earlier. The moment the tags appeared you should have followed the be bold policy, removed all the tags and left a note here, with a link to The Attraction Forums (vital) and explaining the reason for the apparent sock-puppetry. I would probably have accepted your explanation. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think looking at the history of our conversation on the deleted pages would give you some perspective on who enjoys being confrontational. You know as well as I do that there is a big difference between 1) an admin noting someone for violating the rules and the accused person deleting the allegation (when it will always be there in the history) and 2) the same admin withdrawing the accusation.

I am also still not sure why I am guilty until proven innocent. And yes, I will continue to talk to other editors about you for as long as you persist in this. You've obviously made a big contribution to wikipedia, but that shouldn't give you the right to abuse your power. And while you endlessly quote different policies at me, how about "assume good intent" for you?

Checkuser...checkuser...checkuser... go for it. I have nothing to hide.Camera123456 (talk) 00:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Seductive visitors

Here are some details of the people who "voted keep" in the AfD for Nick Savoy and the AfD for Love Systems.

First edit	User		Deleted edits
2006	WoodenBuddha	contribs	About 100 but none recent
2008 Feb 7	Truthfullmee	contribs	NS	Also edited as 75.47.140.107
Mar 26	WikiPUA	contribs	NS LS	Created NS and first version of LS
Mar 26	Camera123456	contribs	NS LS
Mar 29	TruthToPower69	contribs	NS LS	Created second version of LS
Apr 3	Bullet silver	contribs	none	Only contrib was AfD for LS
Apr 4	Bixolon	contribs	none	Only contrib was AfD for NS
			LS = Love Systems
			NS = Nick Savoy, originally created as Savoy, Nick

-- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Afd

Hey, I followed the instructions as they were stated. What else am I supposed to do? This is the first time I proposed an article for deletion like this. If you can help me that would be excellent you know... Dbm11085 (talk) 04:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• "I followed the instructions as they were stated". Clearly you did not follow them quite right. I think my sarcasm was justified because you must surely have noticed that your AfD looked different from all the others! I did help you. In case you have not noticed, I fixed it for you. And for future reference the format is:

  {{subst:afd2|pg=title|text=nomination text}} ~~~~

  (The AfD template also mentions a cat but I never bother.) -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Remember to check for double redirects

When moving pages, as you did to Celine Borzecka, please remember to fix any double redirects. These can create slow, unpleasant experiences for the reader, waste server resources, and make the navigational structure of the site confusing. This move and the move for Hedwig Borzecka created many double redirects, but I think I've fixed most of them. Dgf32 (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry but:

• I am sure I checked - the only double redirects that I left were from dead-end redirect pages which are not as important
• the move confirmation page claims that there is a bot that fixes double redirects
• in fact is not the wiki standard that the article should be on Celine Borzęcka? (Sorry, I only noticed that late on in the edits.)
• are you sure you have enough redirects?

-- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Editthis

I'm contacting you as you suggested on your talk. I left a message with someone at Editthis, but I'm not sure if I'll get a fast response, I want to set up a wiki so I'd like a fast response, I'll link to the message and if you can help can you reply on my talk on Editthis (I check it regulary and I'll link) I'd like a fast response, many thanks! Hunterj on Editthis.

Links:

• my message with questions
• my talk on editthis

Again the faster you respond the better, thanks! 20:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

• See User talk:Stormraven. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiJob deletion

Hi Rob - I can't understand why you just deleted the WikiJob profile. This was deleted and I spent over an hour checking wikipedia style guidelines and checking my references and facts - I put it up and you deleted it and barred anyone from putting anything back up! Could you please recheck the work I did - I honestly don't think anything is inacurate and I double checked everything regarding COI - it was all fact. Referenced fact too! Perhaps a visit to the actual site at wikijob . co . uk would put your mind at rest?Redsuperted (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• OK, you have tried hard and provided lots of references but given your COI, I think deletion review is more appropriate than re-instate and AfD. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you reviewing it. Could you just explain the process for "deletion review"? Furthermore, one of your colleagues seems to have blacklisted links to w i k i j o b. Is there anyway this could be reversed - is this page does make it back then I would of thought one external link to the actual site would be sensible!! - thanks again, appreciated, please let me know the process from here, Redsuperted (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Did you notice that when I wrote "deletion review" (DRV) above it was a link? Did you follow it? Here is a more explicit one: steps to list a new deletion review. I am sure that if the DRV closes with "re-instate" the then blacklisting can be removed. But you should mention it in the DRV request. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Fireteam Bravo 2

Hi, you deleted my article Fireteam Bravo 2 PSP Hack Codes because I posted it on the wrong wiki. You then proceeded to say that if I established an e-mail and allowed e-mails from other users you would send a copy to me. I have done so and I was wondering if you would now send it. Please post a response when you do so that i know to check for it. Thanks. --HermXIV (talk) 20:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Done. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)