User talk:RHaworth/2018 Mar 11

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

Emotional Speech Blocks Deletion Syndrome

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

2017 Sydney Roosters season

I notice that you deleted the 2017 Sydney Roosters season article. I was wondering if I could have the deleted article sent to my sandbox, so that I may salvage something from it, and create the article afresh. &mdash Fleets (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for that. Put a smile on my face. — Fleets (talk) 10:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

TARGET 2 instant payment

Dear RHaworth, I have red your comment about TARGET instant payment settlement wiki page, please consider that it is an initial version. I do not see a "non neutral" point of view, because it is like the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T2S or https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARGET2 wiki pages, which are related to other European Central Bank projects. Do I need to add other external sources to improve the level of trust? Please let me know your opinion on that. Kind regards, Nicola Caione (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Nicola Caione, I cannot see the deleted article's contents, but can say that, in most cases, nearly all articles could always benefit from more references, so long as they are reliable and secondary. Articles should also be written in a neutral point of view and those who work on them should declare if they have any conflicts of interest (just stating the they should, not meaning to imply that you do. Again, I cannot view the content in question) or abstain from editing the page(s) altogether. As for those other two, please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Just because one (or two) bad page(s) exist(s) on Wikipedia doesn't mean that we should go around creating more bad pages. If the page you're working on needs more sources, add some! If you think that T2S or TARGET2 should be deleted, nominate them for deletion! Always look towards the betterment of Wikipedia. -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

TheSandDoctor, I published again the article as a draft just to receive your commento on that --PLEASE DO NOT DELETE IT --. I'll add the proper reference. T2 and T2S pages are not bad pages in mi humble opinion :-), mine has to be improved.... Kind regards, Nicola Nicola Caione (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Nicola Caione, don't worry, on Wikipedia, non-administrators cannot delete pages. Adding references is a good thing. If you would like me to take a look at it afterward, I would be happy to do that. -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
  • But I say to Nicola: kindly have the decency to wait until a) your service is actually launched, b) becomes notable and c) someone with no CoI writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

TheSandDoctor and RHaworth, I've reviewed the article, I hope it now is in line with wikipedia editorial standards. Regarding RHaworth's comments I would say that the service is under testing and it is expected to cover the large majority of instant payment in Euro. The TARGET system (the TIPS gemini for large value, is currently managing an average amount of €2,621 billion in payment each day. Kind regards, Nicola Caione (talk) 16:30, 04 March 2018 (UTC)

Marder

Why did you delete a practice article in my sandbox? It was not yet published and I was trying to learn. Who are you to perform such an action. — CRedram (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2018 (UTC)?

  • CRedram, who am I? I am an admin with janitorial responsibilities. But I have been soft and restored it. It has not escaped my notice that Redram is Marder backwards. You are liable to get into trouble if you do not make proper declaration of your CoI. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:19, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification and your advice. I was not trying to hide the fact that it was me at all but honestly didn't know I had to explain but I thought the article was pretty neutral. Would you suggest that I just let someone else add an article some day if they feel it? I did begin one because I am referenced quite a deal in others but probably saw it as an easier task than is. I would appreciate your advice. Thanks again, CRedram (talk) 08:22, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Now I have restored it, you might as well submit it before you give up. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

How to proceed

Hello, some days ago you moved an article called dale of merchants to draft:dale of merchants. I would like to know what needs to be done in order to restore the article. Thank you very much. -- Salvadorcases (talk) 12:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Salvadorcases! At current, the article contains only one source which is not properly formatted (I fixed that for you). I would suggest taking a look at this helpful guide to referencing and add additional reliable sources to the draft. Once that has been done, you can place {{subst:submit}} (copy and paste) on the draft, and a volunteer reviewer will come along and take a look at it for you. If you are curious on how notability is rated, you can check this out. I hope that this helps! If you have any more questions, please feel free to ask. -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I have added more sources of information and they are properly formatted, and I have expanded a little the article draft:dale of merchants, do you think it is ready to place a <submit> or something else needs to be done? -- Salvadorcases (talk) 08:34, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

  • You have been contributing here for six years and still have not learned about wikilinks or bulleted lists. So if you think you have provided sufficient evidence of notability, click on the "Submit" link. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I wanted a vertical list, not a horizontal one, what's wrong with a vertical one? -- Salvadorcases (talk) 12:11, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

  • There is nothing wrong with a vertical list - they are much to be preferred. So what is wrong with using the proper wiki markup for a bulleted list? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:51, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Spergularia rupicola

I see you deleted this species from the Copeland Island/Copeland Bird Observatory saying that the species does not exist! I see it does: Spergularia rupicola L. (Ref. Clapham, A.R., Tutin, T.G. and Warburg 1968 Excursion Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge Univversity Press; Parnell, J. and Curtis, T. 2012. Webb's An Irish Flora. Cork University Press ISBN 978-185918-4783.) I am to cautious to write it up - what do you think? Osborne 17:11, 26 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osborne (talk • contribs)

  • I have no thoughts until you provide links and provide a signature that links to at least one of: your user page, your user talk page and your contribs. history. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:17, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

The species is listed in: Hackney, P. 1992. Stewart & Corry's Flora of the North-east of Ireland third edition The Institute of Irish Studies. p. 157. I'll write up the page if you wish. — Osborne 17:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osborne (talk • contribs)

  • Osborne, you left a message at 17:11. I replied, remarkably quickly by my standards. You left another message at 17:29 which completely ignored mine of 17:17. Do you want a reply from me or are you just going to talk to yourself? If you are an hyperpedant, note that when when I talk of link to a deleted article, I mean a link to the page that tells you who did the deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks - I hope I am not a "hyperpedant" but you appreciate I am not as confident in the use of Wikipedia as you seem to think. Sorry about that, I will try to "learn more". I do not know the meaning of "link" as used. You did reply quickly, thanks for that, but it is getting all too complicated for me. Which link and where? Sorry if I offended you. But I will give up and not offend you again - unless you wish to instruct me! I will see if I can find "the link to the page you refer" to. — Osborne 19:59, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Further study! Is this the link:- "23:16, 21 January 2015 RHaworth (Talk|contribs) deleted page "Spergularia repicola" (G7:One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page." That's all I can find! Sorry I ended a sentence with a preposition above - this is the sort of pedantry up with which I will not put". — Osborne 20:25, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Utterly, utterly unbelievable! Editing for more than eleven years and you say 'I do not know the meaning of "link"'! Please look at this edit. The words "this edit" are a link (but not in the format I want). Follow it and you will see that in your edit you bracketed three phrases with [[]]. How would describe your action in doing that bracketing? Please reply.
You say above "deleted the species from the Copeland Island/Copeland Bird Observatory ". So give me a link to the article in which I did the alleged deletion.
It would also be good if you could provide a link to the article about Spergularia rupicola. This provides an intellectual problem for hyperpedants who say "how can I provide a link - the article does nor exist"? If you are one of those, then I say: provide the link that was valid when the article existed. You say 'Is this the link:- "23:16'? No! That is not the link. That is what you see if you follow the link that I am asking you to provide. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:42, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah, here speaketh the "hyperpedant": Spergularia rupicola is included under the heading "Flora" (link 1) in the file: "Copeland Islands" (link 2). Regards. Osborne 19:45, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Utterly, utterly, utterly unbelievable! No!! Writing "(link 1)" after a word does not turn it into a link! I suggest you phone me - numbers on my website. But we have a Catch 22: I want to explain to you on the phone what links are but in order to do that you need to identify that my website is a link! So I will make one last attempt. Please answer the following question. On 2018 Feb 21 at 20:28:35 you did an edit to Polysiphonia brodiei in which you added the words "Shetland Isles" and you placed [[]] around the words thus: [[Shetland Isles]]. Please explain why you put [[]] round the words. What difference did it make to the end-result? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I placed double brackets [[ ]] around the Shetland Islands because that would link it to the file on Shetland Islands. I know that those islands are part of Great Britain but consider it worthwhile linking it as those isles are so far north. The [[ ]] are the link! I do not write "(link 1)" or the like! I find your replies rather aggressive, I had hoped for some wise advice. While your kind suggestion that I should phone you is kind I fear my ignorance would frustrate you. I am grateful for the time you have taken but you have made me despondent - perhaps I should cease Wikipedia altogether. Regards. Osborne 21:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

PS You still have not told me why you deleted the page Spergularia rupicola! — Osborne 21:22, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Please do not cease Wikipedia just because you have fallen foul of one very rude admin. One reason I suggested a phone call was because I come over less aggressive on the phone.
You say 'I do not write "(link 1)" or the like!' But that is precisely what you did do on this page! Has it never crossed your mind that links can and should be used on talk pages as well as in articles? Please reply. Spergularia rupicola should have been created as a link to assist me in looking at it. "Copeland Island/Copeland Bird Observatory" was an improbable title so you definitely should have gone to the trouble of getting the correct title and linking to it. So, prove to me that you can do it - give me a proper wikilink to Spergularia rupicola (see my note above re hyperpedants).
You say "you still have not told me". But you have already told me. In your message of 2018 Feb 26 20:25:58 you copied the deletion log entry instead of providing a link to it. Hint: the deletion reason begins with "G7". Which of the words in it do you not understand? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Finger heart

Would you tell me the reason why you delete article finger heart (with talk:finger heart)? I can't believe that the article have been deleted, because that there is some references in the article, and now well-known as sign used by Thomas Bach and squads at closing ceremony of Pyongchang Olympics. Thanks. -- Garam (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I know what is "G11" etc. My point is, why did you see the talk page and contents of article page? In other words, this is means, I think there is no reason to delete that article. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2018 (UTC) add some words later. -Garam (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

  • What has "G11" - whatever that means - got to do with anything? What reason did I give for deleting finger heart? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

My point is, there is no reason for delete, and you could reject it in my opinion, if read talk page and search for it. Nevertheless, you deleted that article, and I don't understand this. Thanks. -- Garam (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

  • You know that I deleted it so you should be able to tell me what reason gave for deleting finger heart. I will give you an answer but only when you quote that reason to me. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:39, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand your point. But If you see the article's talk page you deleted, you know what I say now. My key point is, I wish you would restore it. Thanks. -- Garam (talk) 14:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there Garam, RHaworth made this a while back explaining further. Essentially, if you know that he was the one who deleted the article, then you can also find out the reason why (it is to the right of his name). The log entry for the page in question is as follows:
  • 13:01, 26 February 2018 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Finger heart (A10: Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, Hand heart)
What is inside the parentheses the '()'s, is the reason for deletion, along with clickable links to find out more about what the acronym(s) mean and any relevant policy(ies) associated that resulted in its deletion. In this particular case, it was deleted because it was a duplicate of an already existing topic (what A10 means). The topic that already existed was Hand heart. Hopefully this helps explain a bit further. -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

@TheSandDoctor: Thanks for your explain. But as I said in talk:finger heart (deleted), I think there is no reason that this article was deleted. Because, last time, user Isingness put a deletion-related template on the article, so I remove the template and explain why we should keep this article in talk page. However, user Isingness said to me that you (I) shouldn't remove the template. So, I unavoidably kept the template again. As a result, user RHaworth deleted this article. It is my point. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Garam: What I said before also included the reason that it was deleted, it was a duplicate of an existing topic. At most it should have been (and is currently) a redirect to Hand heart. Please read A10. Are you saying that it was not a duplicate? (I cannot view the content of the deleted page (only administrators can), that is why I am asking) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 18:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
@TheSandDoctor: Please see special:diff/827583917 and special:diff/827765328. The original contents in Hand heart is from Finger heart #. And in fact, I wanted to discuss it with AfD, if someone really want to delete article Finger heart. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 08:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
  • SandDoctor, you are too kind. Garam, at least you have been given a redirect rather than a straight deletion. So - go to hand heart, add to it your definition of finger heart and, if you really insist, add a note at talk:hand heart proposing a separate article. But consider this: even if it is agreed that hand heart and finger heart are different things, it may be better to compare and contrast them within one article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
@Garam: courtesy ping -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you RHaworth, I am just trying to help out where I can -- TheSandDoctor (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

restore article

Good morning, Draft:NATO Stability Policing Centre of Excellence Would you be so kind to restore the abovementioned article? You removed it yesterday but it being deleted does not give me the change to maybe rewrite it. Thank you in advance KlaasDB (talk) 08:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there KlaasDB, RHaworth would most likely direct you to this and request that you follow the directions listed there in order to possibly get a copy of the draft. I should note, however, that it was deleted under CSD G11 (click link to find out more), but essentially that means that it was considered "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and that a fundamental rewrite would be required. Based on this, the argument could potentially be made that it may be better to just start writing it again from scratch (and a neutral point of view). If you have any questions, please feel free to let us know. --All the best, TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
  • "Being deleted does not give me the change to maybe rewrite it". Patent nonsense! There is nothing (at the moment) preventing you submitting a new version. However: in the article you used an <h1> heading and provided a contents list. Here you left your message twice and used external link format. So please wait until someone who knows Wikipedia standards and has no CoI thinks your institutions are notable and writes about them here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Patoo

Hi RHaworth. I was wondering why my page about Patoo was deleted. This place is the only place I could contact you. My friends are sad my page was deleted. Can you please restore it as it wasn't hurting anyone. The website for to back the information on the page is Patoohub.weebly.com. Please consider restoring my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julsi67 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Julsi67. I'm not RHaworth, but I hope I can help you out. I've moved your question to the bottom because that is where new messages should go. Anyway, the reason your page was deleted is that Wikipedia needs to base its articles on significant coverage in independent reliable sources. This means that a good amount of discussion in places like newspapers, magazines, etc. that are not connected to the subject. The site you provide does not appear to be a reliable source, one that has a reputation for accuracy.
If you can find independent reliable sources about this bird, then I suggest you create a draft article here. That way it can be reviewed and it will be partially protected from deletion. — Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 23:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
  • For goodness sake! Wikipedia is not a free host for you to write about your pet bird. You allege the existence of a page at Weebly but since you are incapable of creating a link, I am not going to look for it. Be satisfied with that page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Please restore deleted draft article

Hello, I was working on a Draft of an article for a school Draft:Wayfinding Academy. I had gotten specific feedback and was waiting for some more external sources to amend it to reflect the guidelines. Someone else was also working on it and had added the advertising style stuff, which would be removed. Anyway, we would like to have the draft back for a basis to create a new page. Would you please restore it? Also, I am wondering, as I am new to creating Wikipedia entries, why would Drafts be deleted since they are not published? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlameSus (talk • contribs) 23:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi there FlameSus, RHaworth would most likely direct you to this and request that you follow the directions listed there in order to possibly get a copy of the draft. If you have any questions, please feel free to let us know. --All the best, TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I am puzzled. I can see nobody suggesting that it was spam. I think it was finger trouble on my part. I meant to give the reason as: WP:G13: Abandoned draft or Articles for Creation submission. I have restored it. Please note that you must submit it for review within six months or it will get deleted again. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleted page: Draft:ITS page 1

Good afternoon, My name is Mike McBride and I am the Marketing Manager at Industrial Test Systems, Inc. I recently had our intern create a Wikipedia page for our company and it was a draft (Draft:ITS page 1) that had not been published that was indicated having been deleted by you. In the explanation, it mentioned being an advertising page and we are willing to edit it to fit the Wikipedia standards (we've never done this before so we thought there may be some form of a learning curve) but the information is owned by our company and not a copyright infringement to the other webpage that was linked in the message about the speedy deletion. I'm not sure about the process about verifying organizational affiliation but I did disclose that I am paid by the company and am subsequently being paid for my submission to Wikipedia and that was accepted. Our intern did a lot of work to get the page formatted in the correct way and at the very least, I'd like the text back so that we can have the formatting work that she did. We will explore the resources and prepare an article that is more adherent with the standards if that is the main issue. Thanks for your response, Mike at Industrial Test Systems, Inc. (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

  • You claim the article was written by an intern but all the edits were under your username. If you have given the intern your password, that is a serious wikicrime and demands immediate blocking of your account. Text will be emailed when I get a clear explanation. But in any case kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI, thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Lady Kitty Spencer

Hello. You recently deleted the article Lady Kitty Spencer, which I had rewritten after a previous deletion. I had reached out to the previous editor who, upon consensus, had deleted the article and they voiced approval of me rewriting the article (I had not been the original author) in a way that established her notability. The previous article depended on her familial relation to the late Princess of Wales for notability, instead of her career as a successful fashion model. I rewrote the article focusing on her career, not her relation to the Royal Family, and provided dozens of credible sources, but the article was still nominated for speedy deletion. I believe this was done so without looking into my version of the article, and was simply decided because the subject had had various articles before that were all deleted because they lacked establishing notability. I would like to request that this be re-looked at, as I feel the article was deleted even though the subject is notable in her own right and the article provided information and sources that backed this claim. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 07:30, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for opening the draft. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Will, what is the difference between reaching out and simply asking? Please reply. Article restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't believe there is a difference? I asked and the admin said they didn't see a problem as long as I could establish notability aside from the subject's familial relations. Thank you. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 20:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

  • No difference! So why not use a straightforward "ask"? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I didn't realize it mattered whether I said "ask" or "reached out". -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 20:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

  • At one level it does not matter. But I feel that "reach out" is pointless affectation when one can simply say "ask". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank God someone else despises this expression as much as I do! Deb (talk) 09:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Personally this conversation seems inconsequential, if not patronizing, but noted. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

శ్రీ వెలుగొండ వేంకటేశ్వర స్వామి

Hi RHaworth, Greetings to you. I did not create శ్రీ వెలుగొండ వేంకటేశ్వర స్వామి, but believe I raised CSD. However, on my page creation log see here #9 [1], it shows on the list. Could you please help to remove it please. I seek you help as you are the admin who deleted the page- see here శ్రీ వెలుగొండ వేంకటేశ్వర స్వామి. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Interesting edit conflict: you obviously had had the page open for editing for more than five minutes during which time I deleted it. You then did the utterly pointless edit of replacing the content which already had a speedy tag on it with {{tlx|Not English}} . Because I had already deleted the page, your edit appears as a creation. And in two further edits you still did not actually manage to apply a speedy deletion tag! As to your request to have it deleted from the log - stop fussing. (In fact, I believe it is not possible to change the log.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:23, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, RHaworth, If you have edited it while my edit still open for I didnt know you have deleted it which now show on my creation log as delete - it effect my right for appling auto patrol. I didnt not create the article - for such I show not appear on my creation log. There should be a way it could change it. — CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:20, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Having it in the deletion log is not a big deal at all CASSIOPEIA and will probably not affect your ability to apply for auto patrolled at a future date. Don't worry about it. -- All the best, TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

@TheSandDoctor: Hi Thanks for the info. However, it does. I had applied before and I was rejected because I have 2 deleted articles even though they met the GNG but failed the sport specific notability - WP:NMMA. My understanding is that GNG superseded SSN but yet they were PROD and voted for deletion. I have seen in AfD discussion where by many cricketers without the last name nor WP:RS and the comments from editor ranging from speedy delete, speedy keep, delete all, keep all, redirect and merging and resulted in no consensus and all 20 plus pages remained in namespace.

I just applied for auto-patrol the second time and was rejected because of admin "discretion" that the English in the article was not "perfect" from a cheery picking sentence of one of my articles. My understanding is that by policy Wikipedia is allowed to be imperfect where other editors could copy edit the page. I have a total 75 article (55 are BLP articles) in the namespace and as a new page reviewer myself, I have patrolled 600 pages in my short 4 months of gaining the NPP right - [2] and according to Autopatrolled, an editor [[should have created at least 25 articles and must be trusted, experienced, and must have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:BLP and Wikipedia:Notability, and I believe I meet the criteria for all my articles are well-sourced and meet GNG. As I am an English second language (ESL) editor, (actually, I grow up needing to learn multiple languages and dialects for I have no 'mother tongue" as other would claim to have. A conversation among 4 people could result in 3 languages plus 3 dialects in the exchange), my article might have preposition mistakes such as "on" instead of "in" or visa versa and other minor grammar mistakes. Should my command of English is that bad the "admin" would not be able to understand my explanation/message nor I could have secured a Asia Pacific regional managerial position in a multi-national company (MNC) where English is the only language in communication . To say all that, it is still subject to the admin "discretion" where at time is not based on Wikipedia policies or guidelines but cherry picking one guideline/opinion over the other. I am not being difficult on this discussion here and I know that all of us doing voluntary work for Wikipedia at their best ability and judgement. It is the beauty of the openness system/concept of Wikipedia and the issues it brings along just as in the cooperate world the rigidity/bureaucratic structure and the problems one faces. I apologies for taking up RHaworth's talk page for my message, and thank both of you for taking your time to respond and provide assistance to my concern. Thanks again and have a good day. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Mutlaq zaid

I will need to request an emergency block on user:Mutlaq zaid. — CLCStudent (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

  • It would have helped if you had told me why you wanted a block. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Normal deletion for the Arctic Zero Draft

Please nominate Draft:Arctic Zero for the normal deletion. I started to rework the article but was not given enough time to do so. Thank you. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Disclosure: I worked on this article as a paid editor. There was a disclosure at the Talk page, just in case. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 09:59, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

  • The article was given a normal deletion about six minutes before you left your first message above. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Where can I see the deletion discussion to see the opinions of other editors? Usually the deletion last around 7 days and gives the opportunity to fully review the issue to the participants and some time for the author to edit and improve the text. This doesn't seem to be the case here. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Unambiguous advertising (spam) is a criterion for speedy deletion - that means no discussion is required. But I accept that the assessment as spam is open to question so I will let you have a discussion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of 'Homoplasy' page

Dear RHaworth: On 3 March 2018,23:30, you deleted the Homoplasy page with the following reason G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://en.mimi.hu/biology/homoplasy.html. Would you be so kind as to explain this decision as I cannot see where is the problem? Actually, 'homoplasy' is an important notion in evolutionary biology, and elements of explanation can be found for example on the cladistics page, in the paragraph about homoplastic character states. Thank you! Manudouz (talk) 07:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

  • I cannot see much copyvio. Text emailed. If you try again, I suggest you challenge Jbhunley, who applied the speedy tag, to explain the copyvio. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@RHaworth: All right. Thank you for the clarification. All the best, -- Manudouz (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleted Draft: Abie Loy Kemarre

Hi RHaworth! Yesterday at an edit-a-thon, I created a draft of a page for the Australian artist Abie Loy Kemarre, which I had intended to develop further before submitting for review. It was marked for speedy deletion for the following reason: G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.kateowengallery.com/artists/Abi134/Abie-Loy-Kemarre.htm, https://japingkaaboriginalart.com/collections/abie-loy-kemarre/).

I certainly didn't mean to do that, and would like to create the page again in accordance with copyright and licensing policies, so I wanted to clarify the cause of the infringement. Was it the list of exhibitions from https://www.kateowengallery.com/artists/Abi134/Abie-Loy-Kemarre.htm, or that I listed these two pages at the bottom as external links?

Additionally, would it be possible to restore the elements of the page that were not infringing on copyright? Thank you for your patience! I'm new to the Wikimedia movement, and still learning :) . Cheers, Dbudell (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

  • External links are never copyvios! Certainly the list of exhibitions could be considered copyvio and they were listcruft anyway. Text emailed. If you try again, I suggest you challenge Pkbwcgs, who applied the speedy tag, to explain the copyvio. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! Noted re: the exhibitions and listcruft. Will address on the next round. Pkbwcgs actually left me a message suggesting I contact you first. I'll challenge them to explain the copyvio mistake before trying again. Thank you for your patience, your help, and the emailed text. Warmly, Dbudell (talk) 16:00, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleted File: Niko Klansek.pdf

Dear RHaworth! First of all, thank you for contributing to the Wikipedia Community that helps global community and many individuals, including myself. I saw, that you have deleted the File:Klansek Niko.pdf on 20 February 2018. I have directly emailed the admins at [email protected] as well as an author of the photo (the photographer) who agrees for the photo to be shared and the owner of the photo who also agrees with the photo to be shared. I have no problems with the Photo being deleted at this point. I only have a question about the draft of the page draft:Niko Klansek. Is the draft still existing and waiting for the review? And another question, is it possible that the site file:Klansek Niko.pdf is deleted somehow? Thank you very much for your help! LkHk (talk) 07:38, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Utterly unbelievable! You ask "is the draft still existing" but immediately before those words you have created a link to the draft. Are you incapable of following your own link? File:Klansek Niko.pdf is not a site!! It is just one page on a fairly large site. PDF is a wrapper for holding various formats and is not acceptable. You must: upload the image as a JPG to the Commons and jump through the necessary hoops to establish permission. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! I just wanted to double check. Some of us is still learning... I can take comment like this quite lightly, but some would be offended, not to mention sad. Take care! LkHk (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

name dropper

You have incorrectly deleted my wikiuser105 page. Brief biographical details are allowed and the brief info on my page is required so that editors know when articles I write about are subjects to whom I am related . The brief bio declared my familial ties to two public figures. Sir John McCauley and Lawrence Douglas Stewart. Kindly undelete my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiLance105 (talk • contribs)

  • You have incorrectly referenced your page as wikiuser105. So look as a few user pages of well established editors and create a user page instead of a fake article. By all means say "I am the grandson of John McCauley" but say it thus in the first person. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Done. — WikiLance105 (talk) 10:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Making a mochery of Wikipedia

Why was the Victor Mochere deleted, can we requested it to be recreated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.232.70.177 (talk)

  • Anon comment from very rude, vanity-only account. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft:Dr. Yogesh Dube

Dear RHaworth, I need to know about deletion of article/page Dr. Yogesh Dube. Dr. Yogesh Dube is great personality who has his own website www.dryogeshdube.com. How it will came in violation of rules - Duplicate content if this website is completely addressing his biography. Please let me know. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemantrj18 (talk • contribs) 09:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

@Hemantrj18: While I cannot view the deleted content, based on the deletion reason given, it was deleted because of the fact that it was a copy of the website (or a large portion of it), which is a copyright violation. You can read more about copyright violations here and the reason for deletion itself (the criteria itself that the draft met to be deleted) here. Hopefully this helps. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
  • Extremely dube-ious notability. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI, thinks this guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Yernly Fyerls and Nesbits

Forgive me for asking this, but why did you remove the speedy deletion tag on this redirect? This is a completely meaningless and nonsensical redirect, so I think tagging it under G1 was justified. I'm not complaining; I can easily send it to RFD. I'm just curious. And if I've completely misunderstood something about speedy deletion, I'd like to know about it. Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

request to un delete article

Hello there

I am a newbie and my article was deleted by your good self as it violated copyright. I am seeking permission from the website owner to use the factual biog of Dr Zoe Svendsen and so would like to request that you un delete my article entitled Dr Zoe Svendsen please. — Columbian Winedot (talk) 11:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

  • So wait for permission to arrive then try again. But it would be better if you would kindly have the decency to wait until someone who a) has no CoI, b) is capable of writing in their own words and c) knows a bit about wiki formatting (Eg. sub-headings, external links at the end.), thinks this woman is notable and writes about her here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Request to unblock

Hello, am James. I will like to request to enable me rewrite and work on an article that was deleted. Draft:Winning Jah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaynee007 (talk • contribs) 11:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Please un-delete the profile of Yogesh Dube

Extended content
Dear Sir,

Yogesh Dube is a well known social worker and politician of India. He received many awards. The question here is that such a prominent and genuine social worker must get acknowledged. he left politics since last 10 years, only to serve humanity.. he has taken so many risks to save the lives of children from being trafficked and being harmed. There is no point if we cannot appreciate and acknowledge the genuine efforts of such people. I was told earlier that the reason for deletion was "copied content from website". Now the content is unique and all the details are true. We have not mentioned so many of his works so as to make his efforts live at least. I would request you to un delete the profile of Yogesh Dube as being Human is our first duty and no person who is genuine working for the betterment of society should be punished in any form just for being a Real Person.

I shall be highly obliged and pleased to see a positive response.

Thanks & Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemantrj18 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

LangÉcole® School of Languages

Hi RHaworth, I would like to understand more about this page created by me and Speedy Deleted by you - LangÉcole® School of Languages. This page should not be speedily deleted because...as this is an article about a Language School based in India and have changed life of more than 500 students already by providing them languages training, research and additional aides and is similar to Zabaan Language Institute or Eurospeak Language School. The above two articles are equivalent and similar to the article I wrote. However, As I am new contributors and if you think my writing style need changes of some part of the content, please advise. I will re-write it and publish it. Regards, Amitabh Kumar (talk • contribs) 15:46, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Your page was doomed even before I opened it because we do not use ® . Please search this page for where I have used the word "kindly" and you may get the idea. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Yogesh dube

Hello RHaworth, can I please know who recreated Yogesh dube today? as I can't see it under Hemantrj18's contribution. Thank you – GSS (talk|c|em) 17:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Adda52

Hi - I noticed you have protected Adda52. Two questions - can you email me the deleted text? I am a new editor (very new). Am I allowed to create a draft for a page that is so new? Just to explain my rationale for asking for this page - I studied a Supreme court case this company fought and almost changed gambling laws in India. If this causes any trouble for me, I rather stay away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geymarfan (talk • contribs) 22:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

  • I have sent you three states of the article because I believe that, unusually, they may have been created by largely independent editors. But possibly all three (and you!) are editors paid by the company to promote it. With luck, the worst that would happen from creating a draft would be that the subject would still be deemed non-notable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Fliggy Corporate - Speedy delated

Hi As I am a Wiki newbie, I would like to understand more about this page was Speedy Deleted by you last night. I just introduce why it called Fliggy and the target audience of this the Alibaba new online travel agency. And I was not published in the Alibaba article, it just edits in my sandbox, why it also could be deleted. Could you please advice? And would you please sent me the article since I was not saving these things in my computer. Thanks, Annachan77 (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Count yourself very lucky: you did not provide a link to your page but despite that, I have restored it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:12, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft: The Pauses deletion

Hey RHaworth - I'm looking for guidance on what needed to be changes for draft:The Pauses article to adhere to G11. Looking over the draft and the rule, I'm having trouble finding the conflict. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larkaen (talk • contribs) 15:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

  • It is pointless to create an article with a speedy delete tag in place. But that is what you did and left the tag there for two further edits. But in any case kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI, thinks your band is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

The Fantasy Footballers Podcast

Hello RHaworth, I noticed that my submission for the page The Fantasy Footballers Podcast was deleted on the basis of Copyright Infringement of www.7smgmt.com. However I indeed work for 7S Management and The Fantasy Footballers are clients of ours. Would you kindly reconsider the deletion of this page, as we hoped to have a central location where our new and continuing listeners have the chance to learn more about us, our goals as a company, and what we have achieved. This ties into a Fantasy Football Charity campaign we are starting up here shortly. I appreciate your consideration. — 7sIntern (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Thank you for that explicit declaration that you intend to use Wikipedia as a free host. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Ozana Giusca Page

Hello. I've received a notification that you deleted my page. My question is how can this page fulfill all wikipedia's requirements? I read your comment that Youtube and Facebook aren't reliable sources so I deleted the links to them. What else was wrong and what can I do to change it? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OzanaG (talk • contribs)

  • Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI, thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Draft: Maximo (software)

Somewhat miffed as I was trying to redo the article in draft space. And now I've lost 3 hard found citations/references. WP:G4 allows me to do this to this. You have not assumed my good faith in this endeavour. Its not like its in mainspace. Will you consider restore to sandbox? Thankyou. I recall briefly spotting it was up for delete but I have many balls in the air and it was only change to a page on my watchlist that triggered its demise. Like the guy who said keep I thought no way are would Maximo go .... awaiting your response. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Learn to provide a link when you talk about any page. Text emailed. I am not sure of the best way to prevent it getting deleted again. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
  • As I have already told them, they need to go through DRV. This was deleted yesterday after an AfD. Re-creating it immediately, even as a draft, is not really the way to go. --Randykitty (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@RHaworth: Thankyou for sending the page you deleted, Please accept my apologies for not providing the Wikilink ... various things where on my mind today. I estimate that page you deleted probably contained only 20% content intersection with the original page and recovering the remaining 80% is useful. It contains 3 citations of varying quality that were not from the IBM website. I may wish to reintroduce that content to wikipedia. Apologies for not creating such a link to assist you. I am preparing information in a sandbox related to Maximo that *may* be introduced to wikipedia, that *may* or *may not* be as an article but may be a section within another article. Doing this is a sandbox means it is likely on my own footwork. — Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Randykitty:. I am currently not at a point to go to DRV. The DRV would likely be pointless unless changed content unless changed content is demonstrated. To do that I need to develop content either in sandboxes or drafts (or offline to wikipedia using my own resources ... and I shouldn't have to do that). I would like to point out that WP:G4 excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, ... , and content that has been moved to user space or converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not 'simply; to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). I actually currently feel too tired to make sense so I might try and go editing some content e.g. twin screws or getting a ship out of my sandbox. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Djm-leighpark, sorry, when I said "not sure of the best way" above, I forgot about DRV. "Not at a point"! But you are at that point! You must request DRV for Draft:Maximo (software) now. Hopefully, if you point out that your version is different, DRV will approve your continuing to develop it in draftspace. But when you do, put a big notice at the top saying "this page has survived DRV". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/2018_Mar_11&oldid=1172210368"