User talk:RHaworth/2019 Mar 06

Emotional Speech Blocks Deletion Syndrome

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

London Skolars season 2019

Hi RHaworth, Please may I request you restore page London Skolars 2019 season, which I asked to be speedily deleted in error. Thank you, Gary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary Calder1966 (talk • contribs)

• There has never been a page called London Skolars 2019 season. So give me a link to the real page — if it existed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth, please accept my apologies, the page was called 2019 London Skolars season, deleted at 23:34 on 14 February 2019. I think the link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_London_Skolars_season Kind regards Gary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary Calder1966 (talk • contribs)

• Which is the best of these links: a) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_London_Skolars_season , b) 2019 London Skolars season and c) 2019 London Skolars season and why? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:57, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

VITA Zahnfabrik

Hi RHaworth, may I ask why you deleted yesterday my following request without any comment or explanation? Did I make any mistake? What can I else do for restoring the article? Thanks.

Hi RHaworth, long ago (in 2017) you deleted my page entitled User talk:Dinkelberger/VITA Zahnfabrik neu which should become a new version of the before deleted page VITA Zahnfabrik. I would like to edit the offending parts within a few days and therefore ask for a restoration either in user or draft space. Thanks in advance, Dinkelberger (talk) 08:27, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

• In posting your previous message you deleted an existing discussion thread so I reverted your edits as vandalism. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone who a) does not shout the word Vita and b) has no CoI, thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs)#

Thank you for your teaching because I am not as experienced Wikipedia author as you, especially on the English pages. However, I would have expected more help than criticism. The "vandalism" was because my new thread was not inserted as expected at the end of your discussion, but in the middle. That's why I moved it immediately to the end. In the future, of course, I will do that through a revert and a new attempt. Since I was not the original creator of the topic, I am not responsible for uppercase spelling, but of course I could correct that in my intended deletion of the criticized advertising. Also, I have no connection to the company. She is in a neighboring town, I created the corresponding German article some years ago, discovered that it also had a short English article and just wanted to improve it. Dinkelberger (talk) 15:24, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

• Dinkelberger, I suspect you do not know how to read a "diff" report such as this one. Also you apparently have not seen the words "deleted an existing discussion thread". If you look lower on this page JBuckley93 gets a reply even though their message was in the wrong place. As to your article - take it to DRV if you must. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion

hi. I noticed that you deleted Module talk:Track gauge/extra. However, when I tagged it for CSD I tried to explain that Module:Track gauge/extra should also be deleted (I couldn't tag that because it produces a lua error). Could you please csd the module itself? Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oops! Sorry. Now actioned. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Moderation Management

@RHaworth: I've been editing Wikipedia for 13 years and I'm shocked by the speedy deletion of this one. I have a very difficult time understanding how this was deleted under G11 as the tone of the article was not promotional and the majority of citations were from scholarly sources and discussed the organization in a neutral way. I believe this should of at least went to AfD. Archive.org link for non-admins: https://web.archive.org/web/20190219111822/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderation_Management . - Scarpy (talk) 16:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Almost by definition, a speedy deletion which is contested (on reasonably legitimate grounds) need to be restored (and presumably nominated at WP:AFD), and I'm sure that RHaworth will do this. Herostratus (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

@Herostratus: RHaworth is no where to be found. :/ - Scarpy (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Personally, I think the Wikipedia is a better place without the twice-deleted Moderation Management article. The group has always been small and I am not sure that it meets the notability guidelines for organizations. — Defendingaa (talk) 04:33, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• I have at times been told re my activities here: "get a life". Well, I do have a life and am currently living it with less time than usual for Wikipedia. Scarpy, you are hopelessly impatient and the way that you took the matter so personally and went to ANI (see below) is totally ridiculous. See my contribution history for my edits today. Is there anything more you want me to do? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Over the years, I've noticed there are personality differences between Wikipedians who mostly create content and Wikipedians who mostly manage content. If you're in the bin of Wikipedians that mostly manage content, it would be worth developing an empathetic connection to the ones that mostly create content. If someone sunk hours and hours of work in to writing with NPOV with the goal of making useful encyclopedic content only to be told their contributions were hopelessly "unambiguously promotional", I'd worry about the person who didn't have a reaction more than the person who did. It's important to take pride in your work because you're more likely to create quality work if you do.

There was/is urgency here because there was/is an AfD in progress on Death of Amanda Froistad and there was context for that article's creation in the Talk:Moderation Management. The deletion of the Moderation Management article also made Death of Amanda Froistad look less notable, not to mention it created the need for more context in that article to explain what Moderation Management is and why that was relevant to the confession being made. I also say, for better or for worse, many Wikipedians look at any deletion of an article as a black mark on it forever. In reference to Moderation Management people are still pointing out "it was also deleted once in 2007."

You may also be interested in DGG's most recent comments, if you haven't seen them yet. - Scarpy (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

ANI

A matter of which you may have interest has been raised at ANI. Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

• See above. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Moderation Management. 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. Scarpy (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• See above. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Salvatore J. Salamone

I was not given adequate time to respond to your request for deletion of this page. I do not believe this article fits within the criteria of section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, as it is not a duplicate of the previously deleted page. The page was completely re-done and has no similarities to the original article that was deleted in October 2018 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salvatore J. Salamone. Did you adequately review both articles before you deleted this version?

For reference, I modeled the new version on the following Wikipedia page: Guy Goodwin. If you review this approved page, and compare it to the contents of Draft:Salvatore J. Salamone you will find it meets the same criteria for approval. Otherwise, please delete Guy Goodwin and any similar pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBuckley93 (talk • contribs) 05:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• What on earth are you talking about? Salvatore J. Salamone and draft:Salvatore J. Salamone look pretty much identical to me. Other stuff exists is never a valid argument. If you want to try again there is another version live - see your contributions history. But my recommendation is: kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

If Other stuff exists doesn't matter, then please explain to me how the notability and the use of reliable sources of draft:Salvatore J. Salamone are not adequate enough for keeping the page on Wikipedia, otherwise I will not know how to improve the page. I made sure to use sources and notability requirements similar to other, approved Wikipedia pages of notable scientists and am at a loss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBuckley93 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

• I have nothing to add to my previous reply above except to point out that I have reversed my deletion of Saladax Biomedical (see below). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Labour against the Witch-hunt

Hi, Re Draft:Labour against the Witch-hunt, deleted for copyright infringement. I did not know that this would happen to a draft. Please can I have the text back so I can resolve the issue? — Jontel (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• (talk page watcher) @Jontel: Unfortunately not, as copyright violations cannot be held anywhere on Wikipedia. However, since the text in question was effectively copied verbatim from this newspaper article, all you have to do is mine that for information and recast it in your own words. Incidentally, while terms like "witch hunt" are normal journalese, you should read our policy on our neutral point of view, and use...less colourful lingo :) good luck with the article. ——SerialNumber54129 12:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Serial Number 54129Thanks; I mean that the entire draft of the article ws deleted, and I did not have a copy. There were 25 references, not just the challenged text. One lives and learns. The name is the name of the organization which the article was about. — Jontel (talk) 13:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• They sound great  :) cheers, Jontel. ——SerialNumber54129 15:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank, you RH! I'll keep a draft in future! Jontel (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• You as the initiator of this thread, do not use {{tpw}} when you add to it! Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Sorry. Jontel (talk) 17:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of CTP Invest draft page

Captain Haworth, In December of 2018, a friend agreed to help begin a wiki entry for the company i work for, CTP Invest. He, also new to wikipedia, did a first draft and sent me a link asking to do a quick review, and if no problems, to hit the 'publish' button. I did a read, and thought it factually correct, and hit teh publish button.

Recently, i have been asked where the page is, and discovered that it had be almost immediately deleted by one, RHarwarth. i did a read to educate myself about the deletion process, principles etc. The entry you gave was 'copyright infringement'. What can be done to get the draft back up in action, and how can we resolve the copyright infrinement. it seems he may have simply copied some info from our generic 'about' page on our website. not sure that counts as 'copyright' infringement. In any case, what to do? and would be great to get the actual texts back so that we may re-edit them to avoid the infringing violations, if any.

I am the brand director at Ctp invest and together with my boss agreed to having an outsider do the original entry for our company. Best, Teakostel (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• Copying from your website is of course a copyvio. Wikipedia is not a trade directory. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone who is genuinely an "outsider", ie. has never had any contact with your company, thinks it notable and writes about it here. If you want to see the text, read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Deleted content for Greg

Hi there, I noticed that an article of mine has been deleted for misuse of an article. I do not feel like I misused Wikipedia. Please let me know what I did wrong. This is all so new to me. The articles are The Grimm and Greg Ericksen. Also, I did not think they ever were published to Wikipedia-so I'm confused as why they would be completely deleted. I'll admit, I am on a learning curve and having trouble understanding this new world of creating and editing. Thank you for your help, JJ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJ Erick (talk • contribs) 18:13, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• You have never touched the page called The Grimm and there has never been an article at Greg Ericksen. I have restored that which I deleted so all your edits are available to you. But kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks that you and your band are notable and writes about them here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Boiiii

Fuck you boiiii. — WikiKero (talk) 06:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• I assume you are expressing your feelings about my deletion of draft:Pușcă(Pu$că) and user:WikiKero four months ago. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:18, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Saladax Biomedical

Although I requested speedy g11, since an established editor. Anthony Appleyard objected, and sent it to afd instead, it might be better to let Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saladax Biomedical have a full discussion for the 7 days, rather than delete it speedy after the afd was placed. — DGG ( talk ) 09:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

• Restored. An AfD discussion will give me firmer ground to salt the title, if necessary, in the future. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Exactly. — DGG ( talk ) 02:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Upgrade (financial technology company)

RHaworth (talk · contribs), WP:Requests for deletion informed me that an AfC submission by myself was not eligible for restoration due to G11 speedied. Below is the submitted topic: I was mirroring similar stylistic writing on comparable Wikipedia main space articles, but understand that is a lazy excuse for submitting an AfC that was considered advertorial by several. If it is possible to restore the submission to the draft space, I will hold myself accountable for the idiocy and can assure you that I do not take these criticisms lightly. Last: it is not lost on me that you have better ways to occupy your time on the Project, so your reading this is greatly appreciated. — Farquaad44 (talk) 16:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

• You do not need to ping me on this page but you do need to provide a wikilink to the page about which you are talking. Restored. RoySmith, (Farquaad44, please note: this is an example of a valid ping.) this will probably continue to be rejected but please allow it six months to live in draft space. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Will do, thanks for the ping. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Alleged copyvio

Escambia_Wood_–_Pensacola as explained on the talkpage the material is copied from a US government publication. If the linked source is not part of the government they simply copied it from a copyright free government publication. This needs to be restored please. — Legacypac (talk) 19:05, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

• People might be shocked if they knew the average time I spend reading an article before I delete it. But in this case, I spent several minutes reading it and was satisfied that the subject was notable. Pontificalibus, please note the claim that this text (which is overly long) is publick domain. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For quickly speedying the many pages myself and others send that way. — RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 19:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC) Thank you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Draft:W-GDP

There seems to be a good case that it is PD-USgov. — DGG ( talk ) 02:42, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

• If Jamespauladamson requests here instead of moaning in the wrong place, I will give him advice on creating an article about this, probably notable, subject. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Shouting redacted

Hi RHaworth, I have created a page for my establishment and i was deleted. the references that have been linked with the deletion as an unambiguous copyright infringement are third party websites that hosts the venue profile the likes of third party in which we create our content there, third party website that hosts venue and our youtube page holding our content.

all i am saying we have a specific content that we use across all profiles and its a standardized process, hence finding the same content across all. regards, kamal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatherknight (talk • contribs) 21:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

• So what? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Edwin D. Fuller Draft Page Restore

Hello. I followed your instructions to get the article draft delivered via email. Please send the contents when you can. Thank you. Imjustvisiting (talk) 20:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

• Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Human-readable interpretation

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Human-readable interpretation. Since you had some involvement with the Human-readable interpretation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Thryduulf (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

• Noted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Richmond County Country Club (New York)

I am new to Wikipedia. The Richmond County Country Club was my first new submission. I was told the reason for the deletion was because I used copyrighted material from the club's website. Actually the material I used was from the golf association which was written long before the country club ever had a website. Yet the claim is that I got it from the website. How does someone know that I got the material from the website without asking? (Post submission noticed some material was a match to the associations material and asked club members how they built the website.)

Nowhere was I notified of the offending content. It is difficult to respond to generic messages. I was editing in a sandbox. I don't understand how or why a sandbox would be deleted. Was the deleted material archived and how do I get it back? Why was the delete done so quickly? I don't have the opportunity to check Wikipedia daily.

I have over 40 years experience in IT and have a good understanding of what is a sandbox. I'm a registered CMMI auditor and have implemented change, release, and configuration management best practices for very large well know organizations that work on a global scale. I was expecting feedback on grammar, content, and copyright infringement with an opportunity to satisfy all Wikipedia standards. I understand the workload Wikipedia reviewers must face and I continued to make updates post submission (I was working in a sandbox) to avoid copyright issues to to make sure what I wrote was correct in an attempt to help the reviewers. Thanks. — Cusack301 (talk) 22:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC) cusack301

• Cusack301, slightly redundant to reply since, as I am very pleased to see, you have got over your initial annoyance and re-created the article. But I will reply to a couple of points. "I have over 40 years experience in IT" - so what? I claim 50 years experience but a) experience in IT has only limited relevance to editing Wikipedia articles and b) articles are judged on their content not on their authors. "How does someone know that I got the material from the website without asking?" Very simply: the page in question says at the bottom "All Rights Reserved" so your use of it was copyvio.

Here are my photos from the four hours I spent on Staten Island. I have mentioned on the RCCC talk page, the co-incidence of my encountering the Grymes Hill expert. Another co-incidence is that RCCC sells itself as a wedding venue but, quite rightly, you did not even mention it that in your article. The Great Hall, Toronto was built in 1889 just one year after RCCC started. It also hosts weddings. But it was its proprietor who tried to create an article about it here - see #Shouting redacted above and I zapped it because, as well as being a copyvio, the text was irredeemably spammy. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:*mp

See the reversal of the deletion of this template and this thread at tfd (common courtesy notification). — Frietjes (talk) 01:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

• Learn to provide a link whenever you talk about a page thus: template:*mp or {{*mp}}. I have no objection to its restoration. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Module:HtmlBuilder/testcases

You forgot to delete this subpage when you deleted the main module. — {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• Pppery, next time don't tell me - just slap {{db-subpage}} on it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Module pages are written in Lua and not parsed as wikitext, so you can't just add a CSD tag to one. — {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:48, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

• I think you could have fixed the situation by re-creating module talk:HtmlBuilder/testcases with content such as: {{db|sub-page of deleted page. NB. please delete the module: page as well as this one}}

But I have to confess myself confused: I cannot see how module talk:HtmlBuilder/testcases got into CAT:CSD and thus came to my attention: the most recent edit to the page was in 2013 and a speedy tag was never applied to it.

On a slightly different issue, I recently deleted module:Diacritics/testcases which did have a working speedy tag on it. I am hoping RexxS will be able to tell me how he told the system "this page is in the module: namespace but it is to be parsed as wikitext". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

That would be down to Pppery. Having gained consensus for reducing the severity of the edit filter that used prevent this, they moved a page that I had created in the [Module talk:] namespace (where the content model is 'wikitext') to the [Module:] namespace (where the usual content model is "Scribunto"). Sometimes this can be useful, so I don't object to the principle; my only objection was to moving a page where I was the sole author without discussing it with me first. For what it's worth, any admin can directly change the page content model at will. -- RexxS (talk) 23:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

• RexxS, thank you for pointing me to Special:ChangeContentModel, something I had never noticed before. But Scribunto is not one of the options offered by Special:ChangeContentModel! It looks as though I could change the model for a page in module: namespace to something other than Scribunto but I could not change it back to Scribunto! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  You might have noticed 'Page information' in the toolbox on the left, where one of the pieces of information is the page content model, which is a quick way of checking what the content model is for a page. I hadn't noticed that Scribunto is missing as an option at Special:ChangeContentModel, presumably that means you have to move the existing page without leaving a redirect, create a new page in Module: space (as that will have content model as "Scribunto") and then copy the contents into the new page. Finally clean up the edit histories if needed. What a rigmarole! --RexxS (talk) 17:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Application for Restoring my userpage

Dear Roger W. Haworth, I am a volunteer Wiki Contributor and contributing to enrich with more information to several articles from Bangladesh. Previously, I was trying to Add some Young Entrepreneurs profile in Wikipedia to encourage their social activities, which were not appropriate enough. So, all those pages got a speedy deletion. I understand my fault and ending with a promising note that, I will be more careful about what I am publishing in Wikipedia from very next. Can I please, get my user page "Tanvirshopno" restored? Thankfully - Tanvir Shopno https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tanvirshopno — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanvirshopno (talk • contribs) 11:02, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• You cannot be serious: it was a classick fake article. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI writes in mainspace about what you do in the real world. You may create a user page for yourself, written in the first person and telling what you do on Wikipedia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Pink and black

cc Liz. Would you consider restoring draft:pink black? I stumbled upon this and submitted it to AfC because I thought it should be considered by a reviewer; I did that specifically knowing it would remove G13 eligibility from the draft. Still, it was tagged and deleted, so would you mind restoring it please? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:02, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• You should have been more bold. See what I have done. I was a bit dubious about it but let us watch - it will probably survive. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

WP:ORGNAME violation

FYI Wikipedia:Teahouse#User:LearnUkrainian/Ukrainian_Language_and_Culture_School Cheers, TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• Actioned. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Bulelwa Madekurozwa

Request to restore draft:Bulelwa Madekurozwa. I abandoned this draft some time ago, and it was rightfully deleted. I'd like to work on it now and get it up to snuff. — Rac8f (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• Actioned. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Chas. Floyd Johnson

Hello Mr. Haworth, I see you deleted my page for "Chas. Floyd Johnson" today. Yes, the original version of the page was tagged for deletion but I worked hard to resolve the issues. I got the Copyvios score down to 4.8%. The only things flagged were things like "born in Camden, New Jersey", or his job titles, or place names where he worked or studied. This is my first contribution from scratch and would appreciate it if you would consider restoring the page, or at least giving me permission to try again. Also, any guidance/advice you could provide me is also appreciated. Cheers, Brian Saunders Bksaunders (talk) 21:58, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

• Rac8f (see previous thread) gave a link so the request gets actioned. You did not give a link so your request is ignored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

My mistake. Here's the link for the article I'd like to get restored or get your ok to re-create: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chas._Floyd_Johnson — Bksaunders (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)Bksaunders

• When I said "link", I should have said "wikilink" and insisted that you provide one. But I have restored it nevertheless. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion Self-Sovereign Identity

Please recover Self-Sovereign Identity article. This article is not about something that was invented by me. As I have replied in the reply "to speedy deletion" this topic is very well explored, it has a big digital footprint on the internet, it has big active live community that explores and publishes about this topic. Please see tag #SSI on Twitter, as well as other links: https://medium.com/learning-machine-blog/identity-and-digital-self-sovereignty-1f3faab7d9e3 https://ssimeetup.org/ http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2016/04/the-path-to-self-soverereign-identity.html https://www.moxytongue.com/2016/04/id2020-sovereign-authority.html Also! please note that this article has a draft page that was created 1 month earlier before I published my page. I have not seen the draft when I published mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kantakuziv (talk • contribs) 17:28, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

• A number of versions restored including the hopeless waffle by user:OYOdev. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

RHaworth reposting call to restore the page, that I wrote on the user's page that proposed it for deletion. Cabayi, the references to two blog posts about the concept of Self-Sovereign Identity were provided because they are the oldest references about this concept that I can find on the Internet. They also describe it very well. I am OK to add references like this one - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/magazine/beyond-the-bitcoin-bubble.html (the one mentioned in the draft by user Daniel H Hardman). We can use Daniel H Hardman's draft, but I like mine more as its explains Self-Sovereign Identity directly using the first principles. His by contrasting it to the usual digital identities. Please, help to restore the page so community that explores this concept figure out the best way to write about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kantakuziv (talk • contribs)

• All your edits are live. So what is preventing the community that explores this concept figuring out the best way in draft space? Please reply. In fact since the community don't seem to have any concrete proposals, I suggest that the best approach is to add the subject as a section in the digital identity article. If that is accepted, a redirect can be created at self-sovereign identity. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

RHaworth I do not see my edits. Self-Sovereign Identity section in Digital Identity article already exist. Although it is vague and a bit misleading. I will definitely correct it using inputs from my original article and Daniel's draft. Please, show me how I can access my old article. Regarding writing in draft and then validating it with community, this just adds unnecessary hurdles IMO. It is much more motivating and engaging to publish life and incrementally improve it. Is it not the wiki way of doing things? I do not see what problem is here. Do you have suspicion that I am pushing my concept? I think we established that this is not the case. It is also not a brand or a product of some company. This is a long time emerging concept, that is becoming more and more defined. Why can't we write about it. Why these additional hurdles? IMO, we trying to write ideal article, instead of just writing, editing, adding upon. — Kantakuziv (talk) 17:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• You do not {{ping}} me on this page. "I do not see my edits" - do the phrases "user contributions" and "edit history" suggest anything to you? I am extremely dubious about whether this topick is worthy of an article in its own right. I therefore want a draft reviwer to give their opinion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@RHaworth: "I do not see my edits" - found them in user contributions; as for "edit history" it does not work on Self-Sovereign Identity page. "Separate article" - this topic definitively deserves an article of its own. But, fine I'll write in the section of Digital Identity first. As for writing in draft - I do not see what the point is - who will see it? Who will be the draft reviewer? — Kantakuziv (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@RHaworth: FYI I re-wrote Self-sovereign identity section in digital identity article. — Kantakuziv (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• I repeat: you do not use {{Reply to|RHaworth}} on this page - I am alerted automatically. You would use that tag if you were writing on another talk page and wished to alert me.

"Edit history does not work" - ridiculous! If you are referring to this history, it works perfectly: it tells you that there are no edits on this title but gives a clear indication that there used to be edits and gives a clue to where they are now. But why are you looking there when your contributions show that you should be looking at this history?

Once you click on "submit your draft for review" the article will be seen (eventually!) by a draft reviewer who will usually be an editor who specialises in doing that job. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, I thought you wanted to be pinged specifically. If you are pinged anyway, what difference does it make, if I do it too. Anyway! I'll write draft. Let it be! "...gives a clue to where they are now" if there are clues - I cannot find them. As for my user contributions - as I wrote I found history there already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kantakuziv (talk • contribs) 16:30, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• Kantakuziv, cannot find clues! What did I do to Self-Sovereign Identity with a time stamp of 2019-03-03t17:36:44 (if you cannot see the seconds - it is the second of two actions I did at 17:36)? Please reply. Indeed if I had been talking about Draft:Self-Sovereign Identity, I would not have said "gives a clue": I would have said "tells you". What did I do to that page with a time stamp of 2019-03-03t17:40:12? Please reply. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

"What did I do to Self-Sovereign Identity with a time stamp of 2019-03-03t17:36:44? Please reply." you as written on the page Self-Sovereign Identity (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-Sovereign_Identity&action=history) "17:36, 3 March 2019 RHaworth (talk | contribs) moved page Self-Sovereign Identity to Self-sovereign identity without leaving a redirect". Then when you follow (in that line) the link to "Self-sovereign identity" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-sovereign_identity&action=edit&redlink=1) you can see record "17:39, 3 March 2019 RHaworth (talk | contribs) moved page Self-sovereign identity to Draft:Self-Sovereign Identity without leaving a redirect". But then! when you click (in that line) on the link to "Draft:Self-Sovereign Identity" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Self-Sovereign_Identity&action=edit&redlink=1) you have a blank page without any content or history. So you have to pay attention at the page "Self-sovereign identity" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-sovereign_identity) and see text under the red box - "There is a draft for this article at Draft:Self-sovereign identity." and click on the link to page "Draft:Self-sovereign identity" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Self-sovereign_identity) to find the page where the actual draft is and then check history for my contributions. For people who are not professional in Wikipedia editing this links chasing does not provides clues. Kantakuziv (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

"Indeed if I had been talking about Draft:Self-Sovereign Identity, I would not have said "gives a clue": I would have said "tells you". What did I do to that page with a time stamp of 2019-03-03t17:40:12? Please reply." as written on the page - "17:40, 3 March 2019 RHaworth (talk | contribs) moved page Draft:Self-Sovereign Identity to Draft:Self-sovereign identity without leaving a redirect". But because you have been changing case of the page title along with moving it from (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Sovereign_Identity) to the draft page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Self-sovereign_identity), it created mess of redirects. Kantakuziv (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I am kind of OK to have this mess of redirects now, because I understand it and intend to write and have the article about Self-Sovereign Identity published, which will resolve this redirect mess. But in the meantime, if there is someone else who would want to start writing it might have a hard time of figuring it out. Self-Sovereign Identity is commonly capitalized by the identity community on Twitter and on the Internet. But if we stick to more general rules and have Self-Sovereign Identity not capitalized on Wikipedia. Then we need redirect (clear links) from "Self-Sovereign Identity" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Sovereign_Identity) to "Self-sovereign identity" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-sovereign_identity) and from there to "Draft:Self-sovereign identity" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Self-sovereign_identity). RHaworth do you think it is reasonable? Can you add these redirect links? Kantakuziv (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Retirement note

Thanks for deleting my GA/FA reviews because of my retirement (not sure if that's legal). However, at least copy-paste my comments for improvement on the talk page. — THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

• Utterly hopeless! Give me wikilinks! From where to where do you want me to copy-paste? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:06, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't have access to content which are previously deleted. Hoping admins are capable for that. — THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 16:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• I know you don't have access - that is why you are writing to me! But did you see my words "give me wikilinks"? I mean a link like this: user:ImmortalWizard/be bold. Also read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Manuel Cortes Castaneda

Hello. The page submitted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Manuel_Cort%C3%A9s-Casta%C3%B1eda?action=edit was rejected because the same bio information was found elsewhere on the web. I can write the bio section differently but I want to know how to get the draft version back to edit that section. Now when I log on the whole page is empty as if I had never started it. How do I restore my content so I can delete the offending section? Thanks! Annaleacortes (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

• Learn wikilinks. Text of draft:Manuel Cortés-Castañeda emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you explain why draft:Manuel Cortés-Castañeda was deleted again, under "G7. Author requests deletion" this time. I gather you aren't much for offering assistance but I'm trying to learn to create content on wiki and would appreciate any guidance. Annaleacortes (talk) 01:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)annaleacortes

• Annalea, the phrase is "shooting yourself in the foot". Twice you have re-submitted the draft with the original speedy delete tag in place so as soon as you submitted it, it popped up at CSD - pointless. More importantly, it is pointless to re-submit the same text if it still contains copyvios. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Elias G. Carayannis

Dear RHaworth, Would you kindly restore this article draft:Elias G. Carayannis to draft space so that I may continue working on it? Alternatively, would you kindly email me the html file? Peace, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncdraper (talk • contribs) 01:58, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Learn wikilinks. Oh dear, you requested the html and I have sent you the wikitext by mistake, sorry. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Erick Stakelbeck

Hello there, RHaworth. The page Erick Stakelbeck was deleted due to copyright. I cited many, many sources. And I wrote factually. Can you please help me with these copyright issues? Can you please guide me as to what I need to do? I want to write this in a way that will be accepted by Wikipedia editors. Thank you! Blessings! AlaskanWolfVMW (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Text emailed. You want guidance? Here it is: kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks this guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Raju Kamble Edit

Hi , I was in a drafting stage of the article written on Raju Kamble ,a greta samaritan from INdia. But understood it was deleted due to some copyright link .Actually link was the credible source to understand my article . Request you to kindly fetch the draft so that i can work further and publish it on wikipaedia. Thanks Arhant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arhantpath (talk • contribs) 10:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Whaddya mean "copyright link"? A link to the page at Round Table India would have been fine. Copying the text into your article was not. In any case the text was irredeemably unencyclopedic. Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Sign2

Could you either fix the transclusions of Template:Sign1 and Template:Sign2 or restore the templates so they can be substituted? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 17:55, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Could you fix the transclusions of Template:Uw5 or restore it so a bot can substitute it? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 18:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Actioned. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Holding cell

The discussion is done and the decision made... The page has been listed on the Holding cell. Why do you keep reverting the change? Discussion are closed before the substitution is performed... --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you please explain why you keep reverting TFD closures? --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:42, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• I should really ignore you because you have not provided any links. My edits to which I think you are referring all have edit summaries - read them. If you have anything more to say on this topick, I suggest you talk to Frietjes on some other page than this one. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

James Hilleary

Dear Fellow Grumpy Old Man: Oopsie. I DO own the data that I used in the site you deleted.  :-) . You removed my article about the artist James Hilleary because I had engaged in unambiguous copyright infringement. You are concerned that I took the text from http://www.jameshilleary.com/gallery_reviews.htm. I understand why you might think that I copied the text, since jameshilleary.com and my draft article quote the same reviews. But I did not take the text from the jameshilleary.com website. I am the executor of Hilleary's estate. I have dozens of newspapers and correspondence and other original materials that I used to draft that article. BUT I understand that I might have violated Wiki standards by quoting several paragraphs of a couple of the newspaper articles. I would like to be able to fix that by removing the quotes. Could you please email the article to me so that I can fix that problem (and, um, any other problems you might have noted!)? Thanks so much. Micah Salb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssalb1 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• I see that you have re-created the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Express Zip Software

Hello, I am very new to writing and even newer to Wikipedia. I wanted to take my interest in desktop software to Wikipedia in order to share valuable user information with other software enthusiasts such as myself. When I first submitted this article, it was declined for basically not having enough third-party sources, which were described to me as reviews and testimonials that were more statements of opinion. I found it difficult to use those naturally in my article without directly quoting them, so that is what I did. Now, after my article was re-reviewed, it has been deleted completely. I am perfectly understanding that my use of sources and citations could use some help. I will always be a student in this sense and I am always eager to learn. However, when a student writes a paper and it needs improvements, it is usually handed back to them to fix. Not just thrown into the trash. I would be more than willing to continue working on my article to fix the issues that came about after my second submission. I have worked really hard on it and I hate to see it just get tossed without getting a chance to fix it. I feel like I really just didn't fully understand the rules or the consequences. I don't believe my article deserves to just be scrapped completely and I am hoping you will give me the chance to redeem it.

Is it possible to return it to the draft state and allow me to correct it? Am I correct in my understanding of why this article was deleted in the first place? At the very least, can I please have the content back? Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MellowModern (talk • contribs) 18:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Text emailed. You are not correct in your understanding - read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you for the additional information. My article was only a draft, though. So I should be able to just fix or remove the content that violated copyright regulations and re-submit it, right? Can the article be restored to its former draft state so that I can make the corrections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MellowModern (talk • contribs) 14:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• The article cannot be restored because it was a copyvio. But what is preventing you from re-creating the page without copyvio stuff? Please reply. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Nawlins

Request to restore Battle of New Orleans (2005). I saw this earlier today after Mr. Guye tagged it, I didn't think it merited the G10. I was in the process of declining it when you deleted it, and after thinking about it a bit I don't think it met the criteria for G10. It's a shit redirect, to be sure, but not a G10. More to the point, though, per the history, the previous content was merged elsewhere (and subsequently merged again) so if any of that material remains it's very possible we would need to keep this around for attribution purposes. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 22:47, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Actioned. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Delta Sigma Iota

Hello, you deleted my page based on copyright. I understand where you are coming from and will rewrite the page in my own words with no bias and source it correctly. Can you please re-upload the page. It took me a long time to write and format the page and I did not have it saved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frahman16 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• Please read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Burak Özdemir

Good morning, can you please recover the article you deleted: Draft:Burak Özdemir. We would like to finish our work for submission. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berlinculture (talk • contribs) 09:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Paula Booth

Hi RHaworth, thanks for keeping Wikipedia tidy! Someone who came to one of my Wikthons created a draft page on Paula Booth - the editor emailed me and said they were a bit muddled on how to disentangle this draft from a previously drafted article, and that they created the draft before they were ready to try and separate out the two, but it took me a week to get to their email and try to help with the situation because things have just been busier than usual. By this time you had seen the draft and quite rightly deleted it for copyvio, but AGF and sheer confusion by a new editor I'm wondering if the draft could possibly be restored for the editor to fix the copyvio (with my help if required - things are calmer now and I can be speedier!)? Thanks for your consideration. Zeromonk (talk) 12:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• Assuming that by "previously drafted article" they are referring to the drafts of Kairbaan Hodivala-Dilke and Victoria Cowling, they seem to have disentangled perfectly well. I have emailed the text to Zeromonk and ECyclonic, if you want to see it, read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I think they were referring to Kairbaan Hodivala-Dilke and Paula Booth, which do appear a bit messily interlinked at the top of the deleted draft you emailed over - thanks so much for sending the email (have had it set up for a couple of years now, but your walkthrough linked above is lovely and clear!), I very much appreciate you taking the time to do this. Zeromonk (talk) 10:49, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

John L. Weinberg Center

Hi RHaworth, I just noticed you deleted Draft:John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance. I had fixed all of the issues brought to my attention regarding potential copyright infringement, and provided such details in talk:StraussInTheHouse (the original administrator to flag it). I worked hard on it, and do not believe the most recent version violated any standards of integrity for Wikipedia. Please let me know if I am missing something here. Below are my comments regarding the corrections I made.

Citation 2 - Center Mission (source URL: https://www.weinberg.udel.edu/about-us/center-mission) --> I have deleted, what was, the mission statement quoted at length. I have replaced it with a succinct characterization of the Center's stated mission, while leaving the citation in place.

Citation 4 - Investor Stewardship Group (source URL: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170927005749/en/Investor-Stewardship-Group-%E2%80%9CISG%E2%80%9D-Announces-Partnership-John) --> I have deleted, what was, a line from the cited article describing what the Investor Stewardship Group is. I have replaced it with a succinct characterization of the group. — Jjeifa (talk) 14:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC) Jjeifa (talk) 14:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Jjeifa (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC) Jjeifa (talk) 15:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• I see that you have re-created it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Western values

Hello, RHaworth. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Western values, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here. Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 16:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Request to undelete my page page

Dear RHaworth, My Wikipedia page has been deleted and I want to retrieve Draft:Henry Ho (jeweler) my page. I understand that there has been a copyright issue and I want to fix it and make it right. Please allow me to re-edit my article so I can make sure there are no violations of any copyrights. The copyright issue came from my own copyright as the information I used was from my own website. I will rewrite the entire draft and structure it accordingly. Please kindly consider my request. — BabsLipta (talk) 04:54, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

• There is no need to copy a great chunk from your user talk page: you do not even need to provide a link because you have signed the message. Lear wikilinks and, above all, learn how to do references!. text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Pexels image licensing

Regarding this decline, Pexels licensing terms is not CC0. It has commercial restrictions which make it insufficiently free for use on Wikipedia. I've nominate the image for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2019 March 6#File:Adult-art-artisan.jpg. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 09:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

• Commented at FfD. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Handball (wall game)

I notice that you deleted the page I created, Handball (wall game) because it duplicated pages already existing, American handball and Gaelic handball. I created that page to be used as a possible merger between the articles. The reason I created that page is because I wanted everyone to see what a possible merged article would look like.

See the talk pages on American handball and Gaelic handball:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaelic_handball#Merger_into_Wall_handball?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:American_handball#Untitled -Sky Blu 2 (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, talk page stalker here. So you brought up the idea, got no support for it there, were opposed there, but decided to go ahead anyway. An entirely proper deletion, I'd say. (If you really wanted to show people, you could have done so in User:Sky Blu 2/Sandbox.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)