User talk:RHaworth/2013 Aug 06

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is an Online Ambassador on the English Wikipedia
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives

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.]

Alpha Rwirangira

Hello RHaworth, My email is not so much of why you deleted Alpha Rwirangira, but it's more about how can I make it better... I am from East Africa and we don't have that many artists on Wikipedia so I am trying to start updating the world with what we have going on in East Africa. If you can still pull up my article and help me do it right or let me know what I should and should not do, I will greatly appreciate it sir.

I also have another article waiting for review, but I think I might have also wrote it the same way... Again, I am only here to learn and f you're willing to help me, I will send a pray your way and if not, i will still send a prayer your way, because I will eventually have to get it right one way or another. Stay blessed -- Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk) 00:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I am not sure why I am bothering to talk to you after the horrible shouted title you gave originally to this message. (It may be because you bless me, unlike Phil Bridger who seems set on following the opposite course!) In fact the only thing I deleted was a redirect left at Alpha rwirangira after the article had been moved to a proper title. Before you do anything else, I recommend you to create an article about the Tusker Project Fame. It already has four incoming links and will lend a bit more credibility to the article about Alpha by eliminating a red link. I have restored the article to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alpha Rwirangira. Please see the copyedit I have done to the article - mainly removing spurious capitals. I think it contains sufficient evidence of notability. You could just submit as it stands or you could first get the views of Nonsenseferret (talk · contribs) who tagged it for deletion and INeverCry (talk · contribs) who deleted it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello everyone, thank you so much for helping me with this article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Alpha Rwirangira. I've made lost [lots?] of changes to it and I hope I gave enough reliable sources. I am still working on giving more sources I could find. If you could please take a look at this other artist Bebe Cool's page. I used almost the same sources as this article that was approved Bebe Cool. I'm still a work in process so I am open to what ever you tell me to get it right. --Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk) 18:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

  • I am not everyone, I am one person. Please learn wikilinks. It is most depressing to find you reverting other people's improvements: I say the word is Rwandan not Rwandese; world music, reggae, soul, etc. do not take capitals. You have converted proper {{cite web}} references to some non-standard idea of your own leaving them with naked URLs. Why do you put () round year numbers? Please reply. Until you put back all the improvements done by JetBlast and me, you will get no support whatsoever from me. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth, I am sorry if I offended you, That was not my intention... I am not sure if I put back all the improvements done by you and JetBlast, but I have re-edited everything you suggested above. I removed the () around year #s.Changed Rwandese to Rwandan and I also created a Tusker Project Fame page as you requested User:Hemdee Kiwanuka/TPF (draft) so please don't give up on me, I am here to learn from my mistakes and get better. That's all good day.--DeeAfrican 13:50, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

RHaworth I do see the difference between Rwanda and Tusker Project Fame and I thought the reason you asked me to create an article for Tusker Project Fame http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hemdee_Kiwanuka/TPF_%28draft%29 was because it didn't exit in Wikipedia. After I created it, I thought you were going to look it over and let me know if I was moving the right direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC) RHaworth Sorry I forgot to sign my last communication to you, but I remembered it's one of your dislikes, so I came back jut to sign. -- DeeAfrican 19:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

  • If you can see the difference, why: a) have you not incorporated that difference into the Alpha Rwirangira article, b) why have you, incorrectly, used external link format to link to your draft immediately after your claim to see the difference and c) why does not your signature link to some aspect of you - preferably having the three links of my signature? Why have you done nothing about the refs in the Alpha Rwirangira article? Come on man, lets deal with basics of editing before we discuss content. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I am going to try and address all your questions... Mr. RHaworth, as I expressed to you since I join Wikipedia, I am here to learn and making mistakes, is part of learning. It's one thing if I am not trying to do what you have requested, I am and I have. When I don't know, I go and ask for help and that's how I learned to include external links. And once you mentioned, I did just you suggested and changed Rwirangira's article. As far as the refs in Rwirangira's article, I have worked on them and I thought I got it right, please tell me what I am doing wrong. — DeeAfrican 03:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk • contribs)

Mr. RHaworth it was a pleasure working with, I appreciated all you tried to do for me, but I guess I was not a faster learner as you wanted me to be. All I was trying to do was to try and help my East African community onto one of the most respected sites, but I see you don't have patience and your too fast to get upset, even though I never once got upset with you. I am going to continue working on this, but since you're not really into helping me to get better, then I also don't want you to help me any longer. You forgot that I was new at this and I was putting in 5-6 hours a day, because I enjoyed it, but you were taking the enjoyment out of working for free. Good day and always stay blessed sir. -- DeeAfrican 20:49, 28 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk • contribs)

  • Noted. Best of luck in the future. I am pleased to see that two of your articles have now made it to mainspace. Final comment on wikilinks: I suspect that you have not noticed that the SineBot has been following you about. This is because the SineBot requires a signature to contain at least one wikilink to a page associated with you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you and please be a little more kind to new users... We're here to learn from you and we don't understand some of these lingos used in Wikipedia, even if you tell us. I am still working and willing to learn from those whom are willing to teach. --DeeAfrican 12:43, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Slovenly speedy deletion / wheel warring

Didn't you notice that another admin had just reversed the speedy deletion of Cheveley Park Stud before you deleted it again? Does your incompetence have no bounds? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

It was with both of you. Aren't you supposed to check before deleting things? And please now sort out your further disruption that now makes it look as though I created the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

And now you're continuing with the disruption. Of course it's fucking ready for mainspace. Once I've calmed down a bit I'll think about starting an RFC about your adminship, because your actions have progressed from the merely grossly incompetent to the positively disruptive. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

  • (edit conflict) Hi both of you. Phil, I've done a history merge so that the attribution is preserved now. RHaworth, I see you userfied the page again, but I'm not sure what the problem is now that the stub is referenced. Could you let me know why you don't think the article is ready for mainspace? Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 21:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Mr. Stradivarius, admins are not supposed to get any special treatment here, so please do what you would do to any other editor when it is necessary to prevent such disruption. I erroneously moved User:Horseprev/sandbox to User:Cheveley Park Stud, forgetting to change the namespace, but then when I tried to move it to article space I found that he's even protected the title from creation. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

  • If I recall correctly, notability criteria say multiple references. Also while the purists say that refs to paper are of equal value to online refs, I feel that online refs could be easy to find for this subject so I say it is not ready. However if Mr S thinks it is ready, I have no objection to his moving it to the proper title. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

That is total bollocks. How many references do you expect to be added in the minute or two that you leave between your disruptive actions? And a book published by a university press is a far better source than anything you'll find by a web search. And notability criteria require that sources exist, something that would only take you a second or two to check. And perceived lack of notability is not a reason to remove articles from mainspace. You are very keen on admonishing brand new editors for not knowing the ins and outs of Wikipedia markup, but seem yourself, as an admin of many years standing, to be completely ignorant of the important thing here, i.e. building an encyclopedia rather than disrupting others' efforts to do so. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

  • "In a minute or two" - but why was there any urgency to add references? Would it hurt for the article to reside 48 hours in userspace while references were found? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree that another reference or two wouldn't hurt. I had a look at the current source, and the passage about Cheveley Park Stud was quite short, so by itself it may not be enough to prove that the subject passes WP:CORP. (Although on Google Books the page numbers had been removed, so I can't be sure it was the right page.) About the online vs. offline thing, though, the source is published by Johns Hopkins University Press, a well-respected university press, so I don't think there can be any question of its general reliability. And we don't penalise offline sources (see WP:V#Offline sources). I have to go now - work is calling - but I'll have a look at this later on when I get back. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 22:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Article improvement is a collaborative activity. If an article is not in mainspace then potential collaborators won't find it. That is the basic point of a wiki. Phil Bridger (talk) 05:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Something we might be able to agree about

I note that there is no central noticeboard for requesting revision deletion, but that the procedure is simply to ask an admin. For some reason you were the first admin to spring to my mind, so would you agree that the revision of Douglas Kinsella created at 17:09 BST today should be deleted? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Now where did I read someone saying "aren't you supposed to check before …"? In this case, aren't you supposed to check for other similar edits. In particular why are you not asking me to hide this just as bad edit which you reverted. And there are numerous other similar edits. Just to show willing, I have reverted the one you requested but I don't usually get involved in this area so I request you find another admin to fix the rest. AIV seems an appropriate place to request it. Incidentally, you need to learn how to link to a diff report as I have done above. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:16, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I know how to link a diff, but deliberately chose not to do so for the same reason that there is not a central noticeboard for such requests, i.e. to avoid having direct links to abusive content. Stop lecturing me and learn your job properly. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Interesting to note that the IP address which did persistent vandalism on 2013-05-24 is registered to the Canadian House of Commons. Why is it that I must not lecture you but you apparently have unlimited license to lecture me? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:22, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Flock Associates

Hi there, I posted a page about Flock Associates. I know you would like a link to the page but I'm not sure how to do it as it has been deleted. I am not writing to try and get you to "un-delete" the article, I would just really like some advice on how to write the article better in order to avoid deletion in the future. I would really like to publish an article about Flock Associates but don't want to come across as though I am promoting the company. Please help me! Many thanks! Liberty — Preceding unsigned comment added by LibertyS91 (talk • contribs)

  • Why should linking to a deleted page be any different from linking to a live one? Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Seventh Framework

This section now at User talk:RHaworth/framework.

Your submission at Articles for creation

Arctic Cross, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

editors

After you blocked Femmes2020 (talk · contribs), they came back as Vodoo13 (talk · contribs); and did the same thing; I almost never deal with sockpuppetry, so I simply blocked F. for 2 months and V indef. I do not know if anything more formal is needed DGG ( talk ) 19:09, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

American College of Parliamentary Lawyers

Roger, I'm new enough to Wikipedia that I may well have messed something up, so I'd appreciate any guidance on why this article was deleted or your suggestions on how to fix it. The American College of Parliamentary Lawyers is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) tax exempt professional organization like the American College of Trial Lawyers and the American College of Trust and Estate Lawyers (seeing their Wikipedia pages is what made me realize there was not one for the ACPL). I attempted to follow the outline of those pages in writing this article as well as looked at parallel professional groups with Wikipedia pages like the American College of Pediatricians, the American College of Physicians, the American College of Surgeons, etc. Perhaps those articles are inappropriate too, but if not, I'd appreciate any help in making this page like those as I believe the subject is appropriate and would provide useful information on Wikipedia. Also, I'll feel badly if my poor Wikipedia skills prevent the page from being created! Thanks in advance for any assistance. Jhslaughter (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Thank you for declaring your COI in this page - incidentally it is hopeless vanity, kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you. Please blank the page.
As to your ACPL article (still visible to my talk page stalkers at User:Jhslaughter/sandbox/acPL), I have a certain sympathy for you because it is not much worse than the National Association of Parliamentarians and American Institute of Parliamentarians articles to which you link. The problem is that Wikipedia has become more fussy in the eight years since those two articles were created - we demand evidence of notability and you have not provided any. Also it might also be useful to tell us whether the College actually does anything apart from providing mutual back scratching opportunities for its members. Suggestions: Steve Glanstein (talk · contribs) may well be known to you - see his contribs history - he might help; improve the references and re-submit via AfC. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Roger, I don't have a role in the organization any more, which is why I don't believe there's a COI. The organization has been active in a number of state statutory and nonprofit act procedural issues. However, I'm a big believer in avoiding "even the appearance of impropriety" and since you feel it's inappropriate, I've deleted everything (as best I can tell) and hope or will request that someone else re-submit. Have a good day. Jhslaughter (talk) 15:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Refreshing change to see someone bow out gracefully! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Sculptor generator

Hello, you removed page Sculptor generator. You applied G11 however it clearly stated that "describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion". I never used any superior word about this framework and I wrote simple facts about it. It's open source software for community, pretty huge (near to 100.000 lines of code) and used also as research tool for Model-driven architecture and development. Any mentioning of name can be used as 'promotion' however in this case I don't see any difference to other frameworks used for example on Domain Driven Design page section about Software tools. How to write about tool without 'promotional' aspect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paveltavoda (talk • contribs) 12:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your tool is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm user of the tool. Anybody who can write about it, have to be user of the tool, than is automatically in COI? I don't own this tool. I'm not author of this tool. I use and improve it. Original author is Patrik Nordwall if you are curious. I would like to know what is problem with this tool? Is it too small for wikipedia and you would like to keep wikipedia 'small' or article was biased or you just don't like it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.89.232.234 (talk) 09:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry didn't notice I'm not logged in. Yes it was I who wrote the above. Paveltavoda (talk) 09:36, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Being a user is not a serious COI. Your mext step would be to write a non-spammy version of the article and re-submit via AfC. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Invest Financial Corporation

Hi, I would like to contest the speedy deletion of Invest Financial Corporation's article. I am new to Wikipedia and have reformatted the article. Please advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CPeffley (talk • contribs) 14:24, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

So must I wait for it to be approved? I am a little confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CPeffley (talk • contribs) 12:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Yes, of course you must wait - that is the whole point of AfC. (But submitting the draft might help.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

‎Freddy the Forecaster

Please review the new changes and corrections I made to Freddy (weather), TVB Hong. I am the copyright holder and have indicated such. I do not think I have violated the rules as I have not included my email or business addess. FairmanR (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Subject to removing the spam and duplications, your edit was OK. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Sultan-ul-Faqr …

Hello, you deleted the article Sultan-ul-Faqr (Second) Hazrat Khawaja Imam Hassan Basri Razi Allahu Ta'ala Anhu . I have added the source of the matter in the article and the OTRS # please guide me what am I doing wrong.--Rizwantdf (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC) rizwan

  • I have to admit that I was dubious about it being an hoax but since it fell firmly into the insult category - read this - I had no hesitation in deleting it. You have made absolutely no attempt to create a Wikipedia article. Please study existing articles about comparable guys, actually go to the trouble of creating a proper article, which should be about a quarter the length of your original submission and then submit it via AfC. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

So far I have detected Fahadtdf (talk · contribs) and Ahmedggness (talk · contribs) as your sock puppets. One more and I will block Rizwantdf for being a puppet master. I told you to cut an article down to a quarter of its length. This you did but I also said "create a proper article" and that you simply failed to do. I omitted to stress above the vital importance of providing links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Submitting OTRS tickets is pointless - by the time one of your proposed articles is properly written, it will cease to be a copyvio! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Deleted articles - what to do next?

Hi RHaworth, I tagged 2010 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships – Men's K-2 1000 m for deletion under A7-event and you deleted it. When I go to the user's contribs there are many similar related articles. There is also a good, well-written 2010 ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships article. What now? I almost went to tag all of them for deletion, since they are all results stated in the main article, but decided to redirect instead, but I redirected a couple and then wondered when anyone would ever actually find these redirects necessary. So, what to do now, redirect or tag for deletion? Thanks! kikichugirl inquire 23:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

 Doing... Thanks! kikichugirl inquire 00:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done Thanks again and I hope I got them all. — kikichugirl inquire 20:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Thanks for the advice! — kikichugirl inquire 05:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

TMA Solutions

Dear RHaworth: I have been working on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/TMA Solutions and I believe that it is ready to be published. However, the article name has been salted. Although there are still a couple of press releases on the reference list, I believe that the reliable sources include enough info to pass notability, and confirm the one claim to being a large software company. If you agree, can you please de-salt the title? Thanks. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Musashigawa Beya

Why did you delete the Musashigawa Beya page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.111.249 (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Cavalry scout

After some more research, I went back to remove the request myself from cavalry scout, having found evidence to support it being lower-case, and the articles on WP that cap it – the 33:7 19:5 in article space majority – to be wrong, including the article internally itself. Looked like plenty of evidence to cap it, along with my own comparison to rangers and other specialized names (which are, as I now see, units and not job titles). "Ridiculous", though? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:54, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Your message is unclear - which way round is the 19:5 ratio? It is somewhat nit picking to criticize edit summaries. I know that job titles and ranks are different but I feel that template:military ranks gives a pretty solid ruling in favour of lower case. When I have an hour or so to spare, I will go through and de-capitalise list of United States Army careers! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
It was 19:5 in article space (33:7 overall) that got it wrong, capitalizing Cavalry Scout. Look at the links to the article, and how many are via the capitalized redirect. (I don't know about other articles that don't currently link to either).
As far as nit-picking the edit summary, you didn't communicate with me in any other way other than to call my proposal "ridiculous" in your edit summary. I don't think that was an accurate characterization, and thought I'd explain why. Looking at some of the articles involved, some treat it as a unit name (which would be cap'd, like Rangers), while others cap all sorts of other job titles incorrectly. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 18:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

KSSOLV

Hi RHaworth, Recently, I wrote an article about KSSOLV that was approved. However, today I noticed that you marked it for speedy deletion - G11, or unambiguous promotion/advertising. I went to the Wikipedia online help center, asked if the article seemed to promote KSSOLV, and was told that it shouldn't have been deleted, and that I should ask you to restore it.

KSSOLV is a Matlab toolbox that I have no real connection to, and I believe that I wrote the article in a professional tone. You can read it again here. Please ask me if you have any questions. Thank you for your time and I hope you restore the page. — Tamcd00dle (talk) 03:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Please learn wikilinks. Tkuvho (talk · contribs) marked it for deletion. I actually did the deed. The article was moved from AfC to mainspace by a well established editor so it deserves more than speedy. Have an AfD discussion with my compliments. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Pratyya (Hello!) 15:05, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Revival Info

Dear RHaworth, Please give me a direct guide what to change in the deleted page the Revival Info for it was clearly informational though your reason to delete it was that it is promotional. The full article was requested to have an outer reference which as checked with online talk team and approved http://issuu.com/ufmag.org/docs/ufm_issue_4 page 39-40. No other changes were made, only this addition then it was suddenly deleted. thanks for help in advance. — Chris Springer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedinfo (talk • contribs)

Alpha Rwirangira - part 2

Hello RHaworth I have made lots of changes to the Apha Rwirangira article, I also created a Tusker Project Fame account User:Hemdee Kiwanuka/TPF (draft) as you suggested. Can you please let me know what you think and if I am heading the right direction, because I have been getting help by the help desk.--DeeAfrican 15:16, 27 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemdee Kiwanuka (talk • contribs)

  • I am beginning to get fed up - are you actually reading my messages? Please read my latest at #Alpha Rwirangira above and address yourself to the two matters I mentioned - wikilinks and references. What is the point of your asking me for advice if, when I give it, you do not follow it? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:21, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

PissedOffDemento

I was wondering how PissedOffDemento could be a "nonsense page; not a genuine redirect"? PissedOffDemento is/was Damien Demento's youtube account and the redirect went to Damien Demento. GB fan 19:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Add to PissedOffDemento: ADementedMind, Father Tarot and ADementedOne. Possibly described as nonsense because the tagger, McPhail (talk · contribs) knew that deletion as implausible redirect (R3) might not work since R3 has a recently created condition and these were created in 2008. I have no strong feelings. If you re-create, I will take no action. But I suggest that first you should: add all these names in bold as akas near the top of the Damien Demento article and explain to McPhail why you think they should live. I have been known to refuse deletion on redirects such as these on traffic grounds but none of them seemed to be well used, eg. see stats for Father Tarot. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I am just wondering because I had declined the speedy deletion of PissedOffDemento about 7 minutes before you deleted it. I didn't even know who Damien Demento was until I saw the speedy deletion request. I do not plan on recreating anything. GB fan 18:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I already understood why it was tagged, because there are no speedy deletion criteria that actually apply to these redirects. I am wondering why you felt it should be deleted as "nonsense page; not a genuine redirect"? GB fan 20:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

    • When I moved the page to Damien Demento and began fixing the double redirects, I spotted the four redirects above which, as noted by RHatworth, do not appear in the article. I'd question whether YouTube user names are valid redirects. McPhail (talk) 12:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
      • I question whether they are valid redirects also, but when we question something we should be using WP:RFD not speedy deleting for non-criterion. GB fan 13:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I would have to disagree with the pair of you. If it's a particularly high traffic YouTube account, than many people will know the owner of the account under that name. They do need to be used in the article, though.--Launchballer 13:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
This is why this should have been discussed rather than deleted under dubious criterion. I have restored the redirect. GB fan 13:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

The Lifeline Program

You recently deleted the article I created about The Lifeline Program for being too promotional. What is expected to round out the article so it is not seen as such? I would like to be able to continue editing it. — Tkwalker13 (talk) 18:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Abstractlogixmusic

I accepted the token name change request by Abstractlogixmusic (talk · contribs) and unblocked them. Since the only edits that were relevant to that name were to their now-deleted AfC submission, they really shouldn't have been blocked. Daniel Case (talk) 23:59, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

  • What weird logick. Of course they should be blocked - corporate user names are not allowed. OK, perhaps {{spamusername}} is not quite the appropriate reason but I prefer not to use {{usernameblock}} because that template says "you are encouraged to choose a new account name" and this guy needs to be strongly discouraged from writing about his company. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Etisalat Lanka Logo.gif

Hi, you deleted File:Etisalat Lanka Logo.gif, however it was not any kind of duplicate file, instead it was actually on commons and someone tried a delete nomination on Wikipedia, creating a file page where none existed before. Still a F2 is applicable though. So just a note for watching out for this situation! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Lauren Aquilina

Hi, I asked Scottywong to restore this since he closed the AfD for this article but he's semi-retired, so he's not responded. Aquilina has had a #72 hit with "Fools" and on this week's singles chart, a #66 hit with "Sinners". Please restore to User:Launchballer/Lauren Aquilina. Thank you.--Launchballer 10:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

How did that fail an AfD? "Her first single Fools received its first UK national radio play on BBC Radio 1 on October 15, 2012 on the BBC Introducing show." That is enough in itself per WP:MUSICBIO criterion #12 and possibly #11. But thank you anyway.--Launchballer 12:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

ComputerSupport.com

I am contesting the deletion of the ComputerSupport.com article. The services section of the article should be removed as it is promotion, however, as the company is highly notable, receiving accolades from the CRN, and Boston Journal, the article should not be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisroy (talk • contribs) 15:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Yespole64

Yespole64 definitely knows what he is doing. You have to give him at least some credit for that. Jamesx12345 17:31, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Article restoration request

Hi, please can you restore the Football at the 2014 Central American and Caribbean Games article? New information has been published that'll help the article. TheBigJagielka (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Not worth restoring. Here is the entire content of what I deleted:

==Teams==

— RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Communication Disability Profile

Hi Mr Haworth I am new to wikipedia and this is my first attempt to create an article that I am sure will be of great value to those who support people who have had a stroke, and as a result have difficutly communicating. You have deleted my post Communication Disability Profile for violating copyright - was the violation the inclusion of information realting to the publishers (ukconnect)? If so I am the author but have given copyright to this charity. I believe many people would benefit from knowing about this resource. I am now unsure how to resubmit given the deletion. Can you advice? I have to say I do not find the admistrative processes of wikipedia easy to understand and have searched unsuccessfully for explanation and help. So two simple questions, 1. if I delete the reference to ukconnect will it then be acceptable? 2. having deleted this reference how do I re-post usign the same title (no other titkle makes sense) given the current 'block' Many thanks for your help - I do hope that you DO respond I know you say you probably won't. — Kate — Preceding unsigned comment added by KateSwinburn (talk • contribs)

  • Your message indicates that you have read my boilerplate at the top of the page. But instead of following my instructions and providing a link and signing your message, you say pleadingly "I do hope that you do respond"! Please read this about what I think of people who copy their own stuff and think they have created a Wikipedia article. But do not try to re-write - kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the test is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Frederick Jackson (singer)

Hi RHaworth, The Frederick Jackson (singer) article was started twice and WP:CSD-d twice. The second time around, I put a little work into it to remove the obvious deficiencies of both starting versions, but did not remove the CSD tags as I was sort of "WP:INVOLVED". From what I can see, there are genuine indications that Mr Jackson may merit a Wikipedia article based on the usual notability criteria for opera singers. Obviously Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion is not the forum for contesting this deletion. I have taken the step of "self-userfy-ing" the article into my own userspace and will soon ask for thoughts at WikiProject Opera. Is this OK with you? Pete aka -- Shirt58 (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Self-userfying is an excellent idea that more people ought to use. However it must be done by a move so that the previous editors get full credit. That I have now done in the case of this article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Sneakbo

Two things; I went to stick a helpme template on Sneakbo's talk page, but saw that there was content deleted by you. Could you restore it? In addition, the source I use to source the genre says "Rap, Reggae, International". What do they mean by "International"?--Launchballer 15:37, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Restored. How on earth am I to know what "international" means in this context? As the person who wrote it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
They don't have a contact us button per se, but on closer investigation International redirects to "World music". I'll create that redirect here.--Launchballer 16:02, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Smoke Season

Hi Roger, I noticed that you deleted the article I created for Smoke Season, a very well-known band from Los Angeles, CA. The deletion was cited as (A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject).

I wanted to let you know that the band has sold thousands of albums, been featured on a significant number of TV and news publications. Jason Rosen (@theroser on Twitter), is one of the founding members and is a verified Twitter used with over 38,000 followers, has performed on Jimmy Kimmel, at Madison Square Garden and much more. There is much much more information about the band that I can provide for you at your request if need be. In summation -- the article is significant because the band is famous.

Please let me know what else is needed to get the page undeleted. I'll be happy to provide whatever necessary. Thanks and hope you're having a wonderful day! Brighteyes13 (talk) 19:39, 2 August 2013 (UTC) Brenden Brenden — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brighteyes13 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Your contributions history suggest very strongly that you are Gabrielle Wortman, one of the founders of Smoke Season or her agent. What is need to get the page back? Simple. Get a well-established editor to re-create the article for you. If the band is as well known as you claim, there should be no difficulty finding such a person. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I do work with the bands on a promotional basis. I will have no problem finding such a person. If the page has been deleted though, how will it be reactivated? I will want to make sure it gets listed under the same name as I originally used. Thank you for your patience.Brighteyes13 (talk) 21:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

  • When, and only when, you find that person, they and not you will simply post a new article at Smoke Season. I have not (yet) protected that title. I have e-mailed you your last edit. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:01, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to explain what to do and sending the content. I've already started looking into well-established editors who have written about other bands in their genre and location and will reach out as suggested. Please do not block the title. Best - Brighteyes13 (talk) 22:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

IHE deletion

Did you read my objection? The copyvio was literally limited to one line by my reading of it. Why was the whole article deleted instead of excising that line? -- Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

  • What are you talking about? I have never touched IHE and it has never been deleted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:35, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I neglected to post a link - it was Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise. Apologies. -- Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

  • When I looked at the article, I did not actually bother to read the deletion reason, I assumed it was being nominated for lack of notability and just deleted it. Then I read your message and decided it was not grounds for restoring. Now I see that the article was eight years old, so I am happy to restore it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Powerfin

FYI: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Powerfin nominated for speedy deletion. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 10:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Amit Goswami

-- Hi "distinct homo sapiens" especimen!.. I'd like to have access to Amit Goswami's deleted article, is it possible? Also, I'd like to know the reason why it was deleted. (It was not the same page as the the previously deleted version & the subject seems notorious enough -- eg., 15 references to it from other wikipedia articles) (...sorry for Portuguese "accent" here.) Thnx, Townsaiso (talk) 16:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

  • The reason for deletion is clearly stated in the deletion log and I can only see 5 incoming links from mainspace. But I accept that there may be grounds for appeal so raising the matter at deletion review may produce useful results. But before you do so you need to produce a draft with better evidence of notability. I have e-mailed you two states of the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Getnetabebe

You recently blocked Getnetabebe (talk · contribs). Is it time to remove his talk page access? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Delete Blood Cancer DKMS page removal

Hello, I am writing to inquire why this page was removed and what edits you would need to accept it as an even-handed entry about an organization. I helped write it with another volunteer for the organization because we hoped it would be helpful to those considering registering as bone marrow donors as well as complement the Wikipedia entries for the National Bone Marrow Donor program and Gift of Life, two other U.S. bone marrow donor registries/center. We did not intend for it to sound promotional; our goal was on keeping it informational. Thank you for any guidance, Caroline — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hi5kitty (talk • contribs) 16:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

  • See my comment to Dequinix in this thread. You have a declared COI and should therefore be careful when editing the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:13, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Travelers' Century Club

Hi. You speedy deleted Travelers' Century Club due to a copyright violation. The article is no longer there for me to review the history, but I am fairly certain that (1) only portion of the article was a copy of the list of retired countries, (2) the article had earlier versions without this information. I understand we normally do not undelete copyright violations, but in this case, I beleive there is a properly licensed version without copyright violations that should be there. The article has just been kept due at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travelers' Century Club. Can this be restored? Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 00:39, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Truther2012 (talk · contribs) had inflated the article with tables which may have been copyvios but certainly added nothing to the article. I have restored and reverted to a reasonable length version. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Unjustified speedy deletion

You just deleted a page that did not fall into the category of promotional by any shape of the imagination, though it's subject was a business (with a history dating back 100 years). I will be looking for whatever wikipedia's method of complaint against an editor may be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perlarenee (talk • contribs) 03:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Your message is a statement not a question. Wherever you do find to ask a question I strongly recommend that you provide a link to the article about which you are talking. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/2013_Aug_06&oldid=1172214051"