User talk:RHaworth/2014 Feb 18
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archives
Slovenly is a word I find myself using quite a bit at the moment. Slovenly is what I think of anybody who leaves a message here about an article and fails to provide a wikilink to the article. How do you expect me to read the article if you don't link to it? Even if the article has been deleted, you should still link to it.
I reserve the right to ignore any message which does not provide links where appropriate, has no heading, is in the wrong place on this page, has not been signed with ~~~~, is anonymous, etc.
And if that sounds like a grumpy old man, it's because I am ...
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.]
deleted bitcoin embassy page
Well, the bitcoin embassy page was posted and deleted promptly, reason posted was that this page is promotion, i would like to resent this quick determination. bitcoin emBassy non-profit institute and a decentralised entity. it is a community centre, this place is aspiring to be a new function in the cityscape it is a new term, for a new social function capable of duplicating itself and it already exists in Montreal, Tel Aviv and soon in Miami and Greece. i realise that in it's current version the page still does not hold all of this data, but i inter to edit it further and create a valuable source of knowledge — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superyona (talk • contribs) 15:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Superyona: Hi, I've been working on the Wikipedia articles about Bitcoin and the companies and organizations that have sprung up around the technology. The Bitcoin emBassy sounds like a pretty cool place. I agree with RHaworth though that it's not yet sufficiently notable (as described here) to warrant its own article. Here's the basic requirement "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." I see a few mentions of the Bitcoin emBassy in secondary sources but in those news articles the primary subject is the ATM that was installed there, not the emBassy itself. Please remember to sign your comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Also please feel free to write on my talk page if you have any questions about notability or suggestions about Wikipedia's coverage of Bitcoin. Cheers, Chris Arnesen 15:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Connie Corleone
I'm sorry... I'm not sure I'm doing this right... I wanted to discuss the Connie Corleone AfC page issue some more. One problem I have is that you insisted that I rewrite the article to include the novel as well as the movies. I have two problems with this. First, I understand that Connie is not as significant a character in the novel, so there isn't much to be said. I don't see why that matters at all -- there is plenty to be said about her in terms of the movies. Second, I haven't read the novel myself. But last I checked, there's more than one person on Wikipedia, and other people, who have read the novel, might add those parts, once the page exists.
I understand that the Novel isn't the main issue, and have discovered that an older version of the Connie Corleone page, which I must imagine is better than mine, was deleted for failure to meet WP:GNG. I'm looking into notability guidelines... and really annoyed that they're too convoluted to support such an obvious case as Connie Corleone... but I'm looking into that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanHakimi (talk • contribs) 21:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- I like that "I have discovered" - who do you think pointed you that way? I have emailed you the final state of the old article. It had lasted several years and clocked up 280 edits. That is why I recommend you to treat this via the deletion review route rather than pretend it is a new subject as is implied by using AfC. But I have no strong feelings. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:07, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
First off, thanks. And second, I didn't mean to downplay your help, but I first found the deleted article through another talk page, and I guess I forgot you mentioned it. Yeah, it does seem that Deletion Review would be the right way to handle it... I guess I need to make a case now, but WP:GNG doesn't seem to do it for me, and there doesn't seem to be anything specific to notability for fictional characters... Do you know how hard-and-fast the application of these guidelines is? I feel like she is significant enough a character to warrant an exception, if such exceptions are ever granted... Daniel J. Hakimi (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- There is absolutely no justification for treating this article as an exception. Having said that, I have to point out: a) notability judgements are very flexible and b) the AfD discussion was by no means unanimous so it might need only a little persuasion to reverse the decision. Another, bolder, approach would be to replace the current redirect at Connie Corleone with your text. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:20, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Rôle-playing
Hi, you speedied chronology of tactical role-playing video games under A3 over a year ago; I was wondering how bad it was compared to the other "Chronology of x genre video games" pages to be deleted like that. If you have time, could you take a look? Thanks, Ansh666 07:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- I am amazed that it has stayed deleted for more than a year. As you can now see, the article was split into a number of sub pages for reasons of size. But this "index" page must exist, a) because there are twenty pages which validly point here rather than to the sub pages and b) and most importantly to give credit to the original authors whose work is now in the sub-pages. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:20, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted Article
Hi there, you deleted Bay Lough Cheese. Can you please put it back? It was listed as an AfD (does that not mean it should be listed for 7 days?) and nobody was given a chance to comment or address any potential issues. Thank you. -- HighKing++ 12:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
From memory, this producer meets WP:N since it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources such as a newspaper, and a book on Irish cheese. -- HighKing++ 13:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. -- HighKing++ 13:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Bay Lough Cheese has never existed.--Launchballer 13:31, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- Launchballer, even without admin rights a glance at the guy's contribs history would have told you what he was talking about. Sometimes I get fed up with my endless moaning about messages without links, etc. and work out what they are on about without comment. I would have moved Bay Lough cheese to the correct title but it is the subject of an AfD and again, I could not be bothered to do the tidying up that would be needed after a move. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Steven Melendez (dancer)
Hi! I saw that you deleted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Steven Melendez (dancer) on account of it being "blank and duplicate of the fractionally longer Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Steven Melendez" I am hoping you can send me a copy of what exactly was deleted, I was working very late and realize that if you've written that the article was "blank" and short then perhaps I did not save my edits correctly... It was a couple of paragraphs long, or at least it should have been... If it was my error I will do the work again, if however I saved the work correctly and the article was deleted anyway then I will reassess how the article can be written. Feel free to email me a copy. Thank you!!! Heartarts (talk) 14:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heartarts (talk • contribs) 14:38, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me!
Are you aware of its history? I created the article to a teacher because he had problems creating one. He is the content writer, not me. I will tell him. Please do not use words like disgrace. There is a way to advice!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew Eugene (talk • contribs) 15:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Goswami
Honorable Sir , I am a fan of Poet Sandip Goswami. I am not a relative of Mr. Goswami. Poet Sandip Goswami lives at a small towm Nabadwip which was ancient capital of undivided Bengal. So he is out of lime light. I created a page about Sandip Goswami in facebook. [1] and distributing his great Bengali poems , articles , Inflaming ( philosophy ). Some great magazines in Facebook are shearing poems of Poet Sandip Goswami. About 5,00,000 Bengali people in the world are reading his creation through Facebook with love and respect. I am trying to do my best. Unfortunately Wikipedia does not understand to the value of Sandip Goswami . Poet Sandip Goswami is a silent person and dislikes every advertisement and believes on every great creation in the world. He got Dipendra memorial award by Dipendra Natya academy at Nabadwip . Please try to understand him with love and respect. Earnestly hope that you will give a chance to the supporters of Poet Sandip Goswami. We want true judgement from Wikipedia. Yours faithfully. Sagnik Goswami, Krishnagar, Nadia, West Bengal, India.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagnik Goswami (talk • contribs)
- His name is Sandip Goswami - there is no need to keep adding "poet" and certainly not with a capital letter. I am simple minded: when I see a page where the subject of the article and its author have the same surname and, more importantly, where the author has no previous contributions history then I automatically assume COI. So come clean and be honest about any relationship between you and Sandip. If there is genuinely no COI, then: write a proper article instead of the mess that you submitted, give his name proper capitalisation in the title, use wikilinks instead of <refs> but provide proper refs to independent reliable sources, quote only a very limited amount of his work. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted Page - AfC/Plumbee
Hi there, I had actually made a number of changes after JSFarman made some suggestions. I then resubmitted the page for creation. I believe there is substantial information on this company now and would like to have them included. What would be my best approach to get this page approved? Submit for creation again or simply post it at /Plumbee? Thanks, Grepus (talk) 12:51, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- JSFarperson complimented you on the quality of work from a newbie. However you still need to learn some of the basic wiki tools. Please look at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Plumbee and read carefully what deletion reason I gave. While you are on that page, look at the colour of the talk page link. Learn to look at your contributions history. And I why on earth should you post the page at /Plumbee? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I get that I'm a newbie but I'm asking for advice, not a reprimand. The reason given simply says "duplicate" which is why I was confused as to why it had been deleted. I had re-submitted it as I had made a number of changes to give the article more authenticity and notability, as per the advice I had been given following my initial submission.
I'd looked at the talk page after the submission had been declined and saw nothing relevant. Could you expand on what you mean by looking at my contributions history? Are you saying that because I've not contributed enough I should not be allowed to make a suggestion for a new page? Like I said, I'm not trying to be difficult. I want to become a more active member of the Wikipedia community and I'm merely asking for some guidance. Many thanks, Grepus (talk) 12:53, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
- This really calls for a good "I don't believe it". The only stuff of yours that I have deleted was just one edit at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Plumbee: "2014-01-14 10:48:35 (4,478 bytes)". Now look at the edit history of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Plumbee. Do you see an edit made less than 2 minutes earlier and leaving that page at the same size as the page as I deleted? Need I say more? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Jimbo copyvio
Re file:John James "Jimbo" Fisher, American college football coach.jpg: I am confused how a a photo used on other "wiki" sites and meets all the criteria for fair use was deleted. — Nolephin (talk) 01:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- OK, this page claims the image is public domain. However this CNN page attributes the image to "Streeter Lecka/Getty Images" and as far as I know Getty Images do not place recent images in the public domain. I suggest you contact FSUfan95 and ask for sound evidence that the image is in the pubic domain. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:33, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Would this photo be acceptable? — Nolephin (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- At the bottom of the page it says "Tallahassee Quarterback Club © (2014)". What does that suggest to you? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- Nice "attention-getting on a watchlist" section heading there.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:18, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- @Nolephin:, outrageous suggestion: contact this Jimbo and ask if he has any pics of himself available under suitable licence conditions. (And did you see this in the Getty Images article?) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:48, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Please explain
You have deleted an article I am working on, Branchipodopsis, on the grounds of copyright violation, apparently without checking my contesting of the deletion tag, nor even acknowledging it. I intend re-instating it, but before I do so, could you please explain the basis for your impression that it violates anything? JonRichfield (talk) 12:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Your indulgence sir! My objections and your actions appear to have overlapped.JonRichfield (talk) 12:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- The duplication detector report currently reports99 matches which is certainly a prima facie case of copyvio. Possibly a bit more re-write might be a safeguard against re-nomination for speedy: "second most speciose anostracan taxon" and "race against time" struck me as candidates. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:48, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
There is irony here! This is a field with extremely sparse literature. The main paper I referred to (only the abstract accessible to me, please note) I largely paraphrased, with the knowledge of the author, whom I expect to meet next week. Maybe he will supply more material; you never know your luck... I take your point about re-nomination for speedy, because there is no point kicking against the pricks of nominators who don't read the matches to see whether they have anything to do with the subject matter (for example,would you believe that there were hits on the citation of the article?) By now there still are nearly as many hits as there were when I started, practically all of them being such things as region names and the like, or expressions hard to avoid in that type of article. And the irony? I do not plagiarise, and I was quite comfortable with the material that I referred to in the original version of the page, but now, nitpicking my way through the report and what I wrote, I feel dirty, justifying good faith material with bad-faith edits! Think about it if you like. I nearly have given up thinking about it. Cheers JonRichfield (talk) 15:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- Can you continue watching this article...the user's recent edits seem to still be close paraphrasing too close to not be copyvio, and some of the interim edits incorporate phrases from [1] and an article titled Hatching phenology, life history and egg bank size of fairy shrimp Branchipodopsis spp. (Branchiopoda, Crustacea) in relation to the ephemerality of their rock pool habitat by Bram Vanschoenwinkel • Maitland Seaman • Luc Brendonck, and published in Aquatic Ecology in 2010. (DOI 10.1007/s10452-010-9315-y). This user doesn't seem to think anything is wrong with lifting or closely paraphrasing copyrighted material, and looking at other contributions might be indicative of a larger pattern.--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- @ColonelHenry Congratulations CH! At a stroke you have supported my impression of your competence and ethical standards. Furthermore, you have neatly demonstrated the vacuity of your criteria. The sources you mention have not yet been consulted at this end (but don't worry I'm still exploring!); so as an exercise for an active investigator with a deficient sense of logic, I ask you to imagine how I "lifted" or "paraphrased" text from sources that I have not yet read. Nothing easier: 1: I use the same language so that unique creations such as "the time of the day and the stage in the" come leaping plagiaristically to my fingers, and 2: I write about the same subject matter so that I can "lift" the likes of "branchipodopsis species are" without gratitude or acknowledgement, or indeed awareness of the source.
- I freely confess that you astonish me and also that I was foolish to be astonished, but then certain types of people are easily astonished, so don't let that astonish you. Love and kisses; thank mother for the ducks (lifted from...? ;-) ) JonRichfield (talk) 19:17, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- RHaworth, my apologies for using your talk page for replying to that sort of muck, but I was left in doubt about the simplest and most honest option. At least I promise not to do it again on your talk page, no matter what form of underhandedness or ignorance the next provocation might take. JonRichfield (talk) 19:17, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, and BTW, in case you hadn't guessed it, or cared, I am quite happy with your monitoring any work of mine you see fit to take any interest in, in admonition or not. As for CH... never mind...! JonRichfield (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Deeeleeete Award
 |
For your tireless work in dealing with criteria for speedy deletion, I hereby award you your very own Cyberman to assist with whatever needs deleting should you ever need a break. It's perfectly safe(*), but if it ever starts giving you any lip, just pretend you're dealing with trolls by showing no emotion and give your local doctor a call. :P Keep up the great work. =) Cheers, --slakr\ talk / 05:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC) |
<shouting removed/>
Hello Mr Haworth, Yesterday I created a page for <shouting removed/>, innocently thinking that I wasn't doing anything wrong. You have accused me of publicizing <shouting removed/> and deleted my page. I have no intention of publicizing <shouting removed/> through Wikipedia and find the situation which has arisen quite upsetting. I would therefore appreciate it if you could facilitate the deletion of my entire account and page so it doesn't appear on search engines at all. I have tried looking into this but I seem to have to ask permission - therefore that is what I am asking of you.
Please could you delete my entire account so <shouting removed/> doesn't appear on Wikipedia at all. I do not wish to be listed on Wikipedia at all. Thus proving I in no way wish to publicize at all on the site. Thank you, Heidi Cocking — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.204.215 (talk) 23:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
German fake article
Hello, I've seen you've just deleted the German fake article at User:Nacranoth. Could you please also delete the related fake images File:Fabrikationshalle ax56ns.jpg and File:Absturz ax50.jpg? If I tagged them for a speedy now, another admin may not see the context. Thanks. --91.15.160.203 (talk) 01:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Undelete request
Hi, I'm looking at an OTRS ticket that points me to the CC-BY-SA release available here that appears to relate to this file you deleted earlier today. It seems an odd image, but the background seems verifiable. Could you undelete and I'll add the ticket and mark it for moving to Commons? --Fæ (talk) 21:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, tidied up on the OTRS side now too. --Fæ (talk) 23:20, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Long gone article
Hello, The page Long Island Exchange was deleted years ago, I think in 2007. If you search for it you should see your username near it and you may remember. Is there a formal or proper way to dispute a deletion and get a page created? Please let me know if there is anything I can do to get the page created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishnagles (talk • contribs) 02:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
- If you know I deleted it, you can also see exactly when I did it. There is no need to say "I think". I am amused to see that the AfD discussion and DRV discussion have both been blanked (but my links point to the unblanked versions) because someone, probably you, complained about my use of terms like "pure spam" and "blatant advertising". Now if I had received such a blanking request about someone else's use of those terms, I would have refused on the grounds that they were well within the limits of parliamentary language. The deletion review process is still available but I do not see that anything has changed in the last seven years. I have emailed you the last state of the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately, I did not receive your email reply. If you are willing to take a few moments and let me know how to request a review, I will do that. I am not sure what to do. Will do the best I can to notate the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishnagles (talk • contribs) 20:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Text emailed again. If you don't receive it, check what address you have given in your preferences. Go to WP:DRV to request a review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
OK, Thank you. I will check into this WP:DRV section and look at how that works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishnagles (talk • contribs) 02:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Deletion Review (DRV) suggests working it out with the closing admin first to see if we could resolve it together. I take it you likely saw my response via email. Do you still feel Long Island Exchange requires Deletion Review (DRV) as being absolutely necessary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishnagles (talk • contribs) 02:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Deletion review for Long Island Exchange
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Long Island Exchange. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Fishnagles (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Your sole purpose here is to promote yourself and your online newspaper. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks these subjects are notable and writes about them here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Obvious vendetta. No reference will be good enough. Will move to DRV. Fishnagles (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
RHaworth, another editor has agreed with you. I apologize, you were right. I will return to this topic only when and if I have the appropriate citations required, at some point in the future. Thank you again. Fishnagles (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia delete-Special page
That page I submitted to you didn't nessesarily have to be an article. You could always have it as a special page. I don't know what "subvert" means, but I think it means replace. It wasn't supposed to replace WP:AIV, it was designed to work with it. (I am not an admin). Finally, WHY did you have to delete it from my sandbox!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Thanks, Aharonz1 (talk) 11:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
- I suggest you look "subvert" up in a dictionary. In this case it means an attempt to replace an existing Wikipedia process with, a different, messier and less efficient process. I have restored the page since, so far, it is harmless. It is not AfC material - do not try to resubmit it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you!
... for deletion of Template:R from printworthy other capitalisation and associated pages – Joys! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 01:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
PS. also for Template:R from printworthy plural/doc PS added by – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX!
Ortho-Bioonmy
Greetings, I started the process of creating a page with title Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ortho-Bionomy and received a message: "A page with this title has previously been deleted …". So I am contacting you. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Toojin (talk) 07:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Ortho-Bionomy was deleted as blatant spam. The AfC submission was too stubby to survive. But kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the topic is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| very good dude , Ahmedkamal849 (talk) 14:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
Thamping
I don't know the reason, behind the deletion of p.v.thampi profile page. I feel it is purely your ignorance or lack of readership quality to analyze an article outside your knowledge world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.56.178 (talk) 17:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
dj phantasy page
hi, I'm confused as to why the page was deleted? it seems from your auto response you get asked this a lot. the site doesn't seem to explain it in layman's terms to normal people like myself. so sorry to bother you but what did i actually do wrong? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJ Phantasy (talk • contribs) 21:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- I consider "advertising" a term that every layman understands. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. "I have seen my name on this site many times". I make it just three times. I suggest you contact the people who have added your name and see if one of them is willing to create an article about you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Castle Brands Inc
I noticed you deleted the Castle Brands page I created due to "unambiguous advertising or promotion". Can you please give details on this? All info was obtained and and referenced from brands/company pages. There was a short paragraph about the company followed by the brands it has. Nothing was promoting any product, but rather providing descriptions of each. Thanks, CBI10168 (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Of Creations deletion
Why was my page deleted? Of Creations metalcore band from Indiana. All information was accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotturban54 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Also your autobio. Please search this page for the word "kindly". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Question
Hi... since you are an admin that I frequently see around I feel comfortable asking you for advice on this issue. The other day I BLPPRODed an autobiography from a new user (which eventually had references added) and the editor asked me this on my talk: "Clearly I have no idea how to edit / make a page? Is there a company that does this regularly that i can hire to do this for me. I am not he most tech savy individual. Thank u". (here is the diff) I'm not really sure how to respond, but I obviously know this is extremely discouraged. Suggestions? --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 01:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting: two "modest" self-promoters in one day. Fishnagles (see above) appears to have accepted that his newspaper is not notable. Ryan Allen Carrillo does appear to be notable. His autobio has been picked up by an established editor and he does not need to pay you for your services. But if someone else asks you: tell them it is extremely discouraged then (by email obviously) offer your services! Does $250 sound a reasonable price to start a bio? But be very sure to get money up-front! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Why have you deleted my sandbox?
My sandbox was not an article, what right did you have to delete it? Livin'InAGhostTown (talk) 20:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) The right and the duty of any administrator who sees a pseudo-article previously deleted being reconstructed; see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Livin'InAGhostTown/sandbox. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Tanbous deletion
Nope, no mistake at all thank you for the deletion. At first it was a spelling error on my part, so when I tried to move the article into tanbou, it had already existed but with minimal information on the subject, so I just copied my typed article over manually. I'll be better on my game the next time around. Cheers! Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Checking in re. deleted Birdback page
Hi Roger, I've just started working with the guys at Birdback and they're doing some interesting stuff with Card-linked offers, a new area. Wanted to check in to learn more about why the old page was deleted and how I can work with you to create one with the latest third party sources etc? First time at this and I know it's a thorny area, all help much appreciated. Kind regards, MaxTB (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
- "Working with the guys at Birdback" sounds like a declaration of interest. Please search this page for the word "kindly". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Roger -- here's another question though: Does this mean that we have to wait for someone to be so impassioned that Birdback must be part of Wikipedia that they work out how to contact you on here to get the page undeleted? Seems like a big hurdle vs the convenience of them creating an article about anything else that hasn't existed before, won't that hugely limit how likely it is to happen? Also, Birdback is mentioned already from the loyalty marketing page, but it currently acts as a dead link.
Since there has been a lot of talk about their launch recently, it seemed like a good time to create a page that drew on the articles to describe who they are authoritatively for anyone interested. Again, many thanks for your help, am learning as I go here! — MaxTB (talk) 09:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- The thought of an impassioned editor fills me with dismay. What this topic needs, in common with all Wikipedia topics, is a totally dispassionate editor who can form a balanced judgement as to the notability of this company. Such an editor will be familiar with Wikipedia and will certainly not see getting the protection removed as a big hurdle! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
British International School System
Hello Rhaworth, I hope you are doing good, well I registered an article named British International School System, which is actually a school system in Multan, Pakistan. People need to know about it, i was its student as well, and manage its facebook page as well, i just wanted to know why the page got deleted, i am new here on wikipedia, so i am sure i made some mistake, please let me know.. and help me to revive my article and provide my some future guidelines for the purpose, Thanks.. Waiting for your reply.. --Shahzybali (talk) 14:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC) Shahzyb Ali
- "Slovenly" is the best word to describe your submission. You cobble together a few sentences from the school's website, make no attempt at formatting and then have the cheek to claim that you have created a Wikipedia article.
- List of educational institutions in Multan links to five reasonable articles about schools. List of schools in Pakistan links to many more. Study some of these articles to see what is required then pull your finger out and write a proper article entirely in your own words, with proper formatting and decent independent references. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Awitenista deleted page
Dear RHaworth, Awitenista is the largest music festival in Ateneo de Davao University and should be considered worthy of an article. There are many verifiable sources by which Awitenista can be brought up from. There might be some mistakes in the created page, but I'd gladly work on that with all due respect. My request for Awitenista page to be accepted is willed in a good way. Please review and research to prove its validity. Yours sincerely, -- Indiecollector (talk) 08:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- I should not have to research - it is your job to establish notability and even in your latest version, I see not a whit of evidence. If it gets rejected, I suggest that you must settle for a short paragraph within the university article. If that sticks for a week, I will gladly create a redirect at Awitenista. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Our company site AllBookstores.com
Hi, I am a newbie when it comes to editing or creating entries on Wikipedia, so please be easy on me. I just attempted to add a page for our company site AllBookstores.com and it said that there had previously been a page for it that was deleted, and to contact the deleting administrator. I don't recall ever creating a page myself, although I'll admit that I can't say that I didn't attempt, memory just isn't as good anymore. We are a shopping comparison site for books, but unlike most of our competitors we don't just compare prices. We are more like a real bookstore in that we provide detailed pages on more than 7 million book titles and our registered users are able to write reviews to be included on these pages. In addition we do compare prices. We have been online since 1999 and have been featured or written about on TV programs, news articles and Entrepreneur Magazine.
Any feedback you can provide as to how to go about creating this page or to explain why it would not be allowed, or deleted if created, would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Makeit57 (talk) 15:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Could you please restore this? The person who nominated it for deletion did not realize it is not for a company called QSR restaurants. QSR means quick serve restaurants or the industry term for fast food restaurants, the template is a pattern template for creating other templates for fast food chains. E.g. Template:Burger King, Template:McDonald's. -- Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 22:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Adaalat
Get back list of Adaalat episodes please. You deleted this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.219.45.115 (talk) 01:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Tubby.co.nz
Could you please explain why you delete the Tubby.co.nz? You said "It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic". Actually the page doesn't contain any advertisements. It just talk about the goals of the company & mention some information about it. Also there is many company had similar pages. For example there is Mighty Ape & Fishpond.co.nz. regards -- Muhammad Ahmad Ayoub (talk) 04:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
- You cannot be serious: "stores like Tubby will give you the best value" is as spammy as it gets. Kindly search this page for the word "kindly". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
If the problem is some words or some sentences, I will remove it easily. -- Muhammad Ahmad Ayoub (talk) 11:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
- No, the problem is you promoting your own company. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Just restore the page & I will remove every word & every sentence promoting the company with no need to remove all the page. --Muhammad Ahmad Ayoub (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Yasir72.multan sock
Hello RHaworth. Do you mind taking a look at this new sock's user talk. Thanks -- SMS Talk 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Chavin Jewellery
Could I have the text back so I can work on editing it please? I actually part own the rights from World of Chavin Blog: Our story but will change it none the less. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogilvieharrisjf (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
- If you are going to change it, why do you need the current, hopelessly spammy page put back? But please search this page for "kindly" and then decide not to submit anything. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Not really sure why it is spammy? But I wrote it out and there were bits that were good that I would like to re-use Ogilvieharrisjf (talk) 23:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Ogilvieharrisjf
Export to Japan
Hi, I would like to contest the deletion of Export to Japan page. It is a notable UK government organisation that I came across when using another govt project Open to Export. I found the Export to Japan site a lot more useful, and created the page because I saw that one did not exist (although one exists for Open to Export). I did include three different references in the article, and I made it a stub to highlight that it was an incomplete article and allow other people to add to it and add other references. Did I do it wrong? What do I need to change? I would appreciate any advice. Thanks. Onestepdragon (talk) 23:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Policy
What is Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia policy for vectorizing those images which are in licensed as "non-free media information and use rationale – non-free logo for". Can I vectorize such images and upload them to Wikipedia or Commons? Examples of such images are 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. Please note that I vectorized and uploaded them to Commons but they were later deleted. For example, File:Laksongrouplogo.svg and File:Coat of arms of Nigeria Cricket Faderation.svg
_logo.png){kind=link}
Also there is File:Nadra.jpg on Wikipedia having a tag (obsolete|replacement image) and it is also non-free logo. Can I vectorize and upload it to Commons? -- Wárrãich šÁhiß talk • contribs 15:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
- You quote "non-free media information …" so why on earth are you uploading to Commons? What is this rubbish about File:Nadra.jpg having an "obsolete / replacement image" - I cannot see any such.
- I believe that vectorising of logos is OK but you must preserve the licence terms. For example: vectorise File:Nadra.jpg, upload it here reproducing the licence terms from the JPG file and immediately use it in the NADRA article. (You may leave the JPG file - it will get deleted eventually as orphan free use.) As to the four that quote via number links: these are all very small images. In each case I would try and find a much larger version to use as my start for vectorising.
- During my hunt for an example for Murree Brewery, I was amused to find this article in Dawn: “we have no word for cheers in Urdu. We all whisper it in English and hope nobody hears the clink”. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
You're getting angry. I'm bit poor in English. Please use simple words and answer. :( Simply tell me how, where should I upload their derivatives and give them tag of 'non-free media information'. Are such derivative illustrations uploaded to Wikipedia or not? -- Wárrãich šÁhiß talk • contribs 13:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
- Why did you think I was angry? I am a bit angry now because you seem to be incapable of following simple instructions. Which bit of the following do you not understand?: vectorise File:Nadra.jpg, upload it here, ie. to this, the English Wikipedia the same palce as File:Nadra.jpg is held, reproduce the licence terms from the JPG file, ie. the image description of File:Nadra.jpg and immediately use it in the NADRA article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for help and 'be contented'. Hazrat Muhammad (pbuh) said "do not get angry." :) -- Wárrãich šÁhiß talk • contribs 14:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Culling
I asked for the article incidents of killing animals in zoos to be moved to AfC on its talkpage. I was considering changing the title, and fixing the problems. The note said that the deletion tag was inappropriate, but the one before it wasn't. - Sidelight12 Talk 10:07, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
- I suspect that zoos culling surplus stock is a non-notable activity that goes on all the time. But text emailed. If you submit via AfC, let me know so that we can give due credit to AbbaUnca (talk · contribs) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you're right about notability. This is why I'd like it in AfC to amend the notability issue. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zoo incidents is the draft, and there were 3 to 4 main contributors to it. Thank you for your cooperation. - Sidelight12 Talk 01:13, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry - but been reading through all of the guidelines and still don't understand: (A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject.) Does this mean I should not write about my company in an advertising sort of way, and it should be purely factual? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederik Fabricius (talk • contribs) 12:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
- You should not write about your company, full stop. Please read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
- (Just passing through, adding a comment) - This might help: Wikipedia:Plain_and_simple_conflict_of_interest_guide 88.104.19.233 (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Scottifer Lampreia
Hi, Thanks for promptly deleting Scottifer Lampreia - I was concerned about that one; I almost tagged it as 'attack' on the basis of negative unsourced BLP content, but that seemed it might have been too harsh.
However, I am a bit concerned about the user page of the person who made it, LonelyLaura (talk · contribs). It's hard to read User:LonelyLaura, but it seems to have probable BLP-violations (unless the people mentioned are all fictitious or something). Toward the end of the page, they also mention autism - which might go a way to explaining things; but still CIR and I'm worried about their contribs, but unsure quite how to proceed. Perhaps you can help? Thanks again, 88.104.19.233 (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
- Actually Scottifer Lampreia was made by Catgurl6969 (talk · contribs). Laura is responsible for Rickey Yaneza.
- I cannot bring myself to plod through User:LonelyLaura. But if you are willing to do so and see any BLP-violations, simply edit them out and explain on User talk:LonelyLaura why you have done so. You could also tell her that she is here to build an encyclopedia, not spend 65% of her edits on her user page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Oops, sorry I got the wrong article. I'll have a think about how to possibly proceed tactfully; thanks. 88.104.19.233 (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Edit: Oh dear, Category talk:Eurasian Americans. 88.104.19.233 (talk) 22:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Pedigree collapse
Dear Mr. RHaworth! Thank you your contribution! First: I know it is poorly written. Second: I thought in this case of paradoxes Wiki can make an exception of own politics because of the self-reference, but I understand if not. Third: Thank you your help with the pedigree collapse link. However I think that article overlooked the core of the paradox. What do you suggest? Can I try to make an "appendix" to that article? I rather not, because I think I must write a book first about the problem to make the contradiction known. Thank you again!! — Dooorst (talk) 12:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
- What on earth is this "self-reference" rubbish? You do not create an appendix to the pedigree collapse article - if you have anything useful to add, you integrate it properly into the article. But before you do so, I suggest you try and explain clearly, either on this page or at talk:pedigree collapse, what you think is the core of the paradox that has been missed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)