User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2007 December

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
This Mobile Star is awarded to you for your helpfulness and advice to another Wikipedian and for helping Wikipedia grow, evolve, and improve. --Ludvikus 23:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


Archives

White rabbit?

Do you know where my UBX went, please? -- MJ Digs (talk) 07:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Tommiesox

Why did you delete the post I added? -- Tommie Sox

  • Asssuming you mean this edit, it was a very badly formatted link to a page which was going to be deleted as blatant advertising. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Sonic Porno

Mr. RHaworth I have no idea why you insisted on removing this page. Please refer from doing it in future, asi, if you read it, you would see that it cited it's sources and is 100% accurate. As this was probably the only source of information you looked at about the band, I assume that you marked it as "Spam" as it contained the word "Porn" ("Porno"). I believe that you have been very overly shallow in this approoach, and, as you did not put reasons on the talk page, I assume that you just get a kick out of ERASING peoples hard worked contributions to this site. Please, in order to keep "Wikipedia" a happy, friendly, and welcoming place on the Internet, I ask that you refrain from deleting articles in a childish manner, and consult other users about them on the talk page. I am sure that if you spent a little more time on your research, you would find the article titled "Sonic Porno" 100% accurate, and I ask that you do not DELETE the page again, as I can confirm that it will be uploaded again shortly. Many Thanks for regarding USEFUL INFORMATION as "Spam", and taking a completely unneeded approach to this subject.

Oh, and by the way, creating a Wikipedia article or yourself & your family, who lack any significence in needing to be included in this "Online Encyclopedia" is just really big headed. *1*

Thanks for listening. Yours sincerely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam93 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

  • OK have an AfD discussion free of charge. What is the relevance of *1* above? What is your relationship to Sonic Porno may I ask? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


Hi, me again (User: "sam93"), I did not add the *1* above to the comment I made. I am of no relationship direct relationship to the band "Sonic Porno", but they are of considerable fame in many parts of Australia, and are signed to a major record label in the UK (Record Rebellion UK) aswell as a smaller independant label in their native Australia. They're music is commercially available in Australia, aswell as online in the United States of America, and worldwide on the Apple iTunes Music Store, thus, I assume that the band "Sonic Porno" are of adequate significance to be included on the Wikipedia website.

Many Thanks. sam93 (Talk)


Justintylerclark

Hi RH,

In answer to the questions you posted on my user page, I am teaching a class on interdisciplinary studies. The contributors you've identified are my students, whom I've asked to create articles for Wikipedia. In cases where my students had difficulty posting articles for themselves, I've done so for them. I recognize that the quality of their articles is not wholly consistent, but I think some of them, for instance Analytic Phonics and Emergent Literacy, should be considered for improvement rather than deletion. Yes, they lack sources, but the material is by no means "original research" as I believe you've tagged them. I understand if they are deleted, and I don't have the time to make the fixes myself, but can't they simply be tagged as requiring sources?

Point well taken about using the sandbox portion of the namespace; I hadn't realized that it would be a problem but should I teach the class again, I'll see that my students use their pages properly.

--Justintylerclark 06:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Thank you. My suspicions are confirmed. It is not a sin to remove {{prod}} tags but it would be constructive if you improved an article with decent references when you remove its prod tag. I re-iterate my comment about authorship, if you copy&paste a contribution you must acknowledge the original author in the edit summary or talk page. But it is better to move the page where the draft has been created, as I did with Cat 4 hurricanes. -- RHaworth 06:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

speedy deletion

Sorry, I never upload pictures so i had no idea what to pick --Mlaoxve 05:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Todo

For goodness sake, pull your finger out and deal with: Denvilles, oscoor, granite posts and Croydon schools. -- RHaworth 08:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

User Warnings namespace

Is there such a rule prohibiting it? I am trying to make it more organized and thought that might work out better than having Archives? Now my page looks bad, *1* I might just add the User Warnings Namespace to it. =P Nescio sed Scio 01:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Of course there is a rule. Namespaces are defined in the implementation of the Media Wiki software. You cannot create them at random. *1* Which page looks bad? And why? They look all right to me. -- RHaworth 01:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, why did you put a *1* in my post? Nescio sed Scio 05:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Sorry, the *1* was meant to link down, as now fixed. But you did not answer my question: which page looks bad? -- RHaworth 13:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Copy and paste

I thought about that briefly and decided to WP:AGF that they knew something I didn't about the subject, like it was the title of a book or something. But I was definitely focused on the GFDL issue. Sorry to freak you out! -- But|seriously|folks  16:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Peru Surfing

Hi, I've added a number of sources since you last commented on who invented surfing. I'd appreciate your looking at the new documents especially #4. Also, Henning has written a lot about surfing including one book about Polynesia...his reseach indicates Peru as the origin and is generally accepted in the most of "Knowledgable" surfing community. The authors and their credentials of Document 4 are a sign of this acceptance. Surfmac2004 21:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Origins

Thanks for moving that user subpage to its correct address, and apologies for my oversight. (When ready it will be placed in the main space.) Apcbg 08:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikibully

Here's a new term to add to Wikipedia. Wikibully, someone who is committed to editing as many pages as possible for the sole purpose of becoming a famous Wikipedian. The user does not take into account the meaning or educational value of articles, but instead looks for any reason whatsoever to remove articles that do not have meaning to them. They enlist other wikibullies to vote alongside them and run ramshod across the pages of Wikipedia, completely disregarding the concept of community knowledge. They do not engage in dialogue with other authors because their elitist mentality assures them no reason to seek truth, only to increase their power and influence. For an example of such a person, please visit: User:RHaworth Andyhartman 14:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Fazlymohamed

He seems to be at it again, from what I gather from the notes you left on his talk page, at Real estate investing guide et al. Not exactly what speedy criteria it might fall under, so I'm turning it over to your judgement. shoy 02:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Rangblock category

Roger that! I don't mind your changes. I really appreciate your help and I see you've added other rangeblock to the new category. --VoL†ro/\/Force 10:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Actually, you added them! As a result of this edit. -- RHaworth 10:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Old issue, back again

Back in October of 2006, you deleted Image:PetrovskyAward.jpg. In response to a question from the uploader you expressed skepticism about whether the uploader really owned the copyright.[1] As it happens, the same image was uploaded again by the same user a few hours later. Without having seen your previous questions, I also questioned the copyright on the image and similar images a month later.[2] The editor in question, user:Sfacets, let some of the images be deleted rather than contest the copyrights. While I still had doubts about the ownership of some other images, the matter lay domant until Sfacets sought to have an image deleted that he'd claimed to have created. First saying that he'd decided to copyright it, upon learning that the GFDL cannot be revoked he changed his story and said that the image actually belonged to someone else and that the tag was fraudulent (his term). Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 October 14 (There's more, that's the short version). This new claim of his that he had used a fraudulent license has resurrected the dormant questions about other a few other images he's claimed to have created. The resolution I've proposed is that Sfacets should give proof of his creation of the images promptly. Some of my questions about the remaining images date back to March '07. If evidence (of the type you requested a year ago) isn't forthcoming then I'll remove the unsourced and un-creditable licenses, placing the burden of proof to re-establish them back on the uploader. You needn't to do anything, but I thought you'd like to know that your early skepticism appears to have been borne out by events. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 10:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Amateur Astronomers Association Delhi

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Amateur Astronomers Association Delhi, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Amateur Astronomers Association Delhi is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Amateur Astronomers Association Delhi, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 08:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Port Revel

I hope you will not mind my undoing your moving the section on "similitude of ship models": the page I had dedicated to this subject is going to be deleted because of "insufficient context". I accept this reason for deletion of the page Similitude of ship models. However I believe this somewhat scientific explanation is really useful and very rare (although it is common knowledge for insiders). So please let it survive in the Port Revel page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.244.3.18 (talk) 14:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

PS: I am Artreve, I use 2 different computers but only one is with my profile *1*. 213.244.3.18 16:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Please sign in before doing any Wikipedia edit. *1* is a total misunderstanding. Your "profile" is stored on the Wikipedia servers. You can sign in from as many different computers as you need - but please do not tick "Remember me" on shared computers.
Please pause and carefully read the tags at the top of Similitude of ship models and my comments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Port Revel and Talk:Similitude of ship models. Similitude of ship models is tagged for improvement not deletion on the grounds of no context. It is tagged for deletion on the grounds of "original research" which means "no references". As such, the text would be equally deletable if it was in the Port Revel article. All you have to do is to provide a few external links to show that the maths is well established. You may then remove the prod tag (but not the {{context}} or {{wikify}} tags). Do you understand? -- RHaworth 16:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Ok I'll try to register my 2nd PC on my Artreve profile. I think I understand both your points. I tried to add some context and some references. I'll look for more. Thanks for your help and patience. Artreve213.244.3.18 16:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • ok the term "sign in" had no meaning for me !! I now understand it is just "log in". Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artreve (talk • contribs) 16:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I added some nice references on scaling techniques for physical models in Similitude of ship models. This should satisfy even the most demanding scientists. I also tried to improve context and presentation. Is this satisfactory? Artreve 15:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

calphad

There's another article on CALPHAD. Could you look at that, since you've handled this matter before? Is the Calphad method not notable enough, since you made this change? Thanks! — Ksero 19:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

SQL Return Codes

Hi. These SQL Return Codes are refered to in the main IBM DB2 article. I put them up, as they are used by many many managers and programmers in the applications/computing world. The reference material for these on the internet is largely non existant. I have also now included an explanation in the talk and also an intro. I would hope that the article could be rapidly improved by myself and others over time. All articles have to start somewhere, you know. Thank you. :) Wallie 09:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

That's hard. Remind me not to cross you anymore. I guess you are sending me a message not to interfere with IT technical documentation. Hardly anyone would refer to Wikibooks for info, and you know it. Thanks a lot. (not) Wallie 22:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Update. I can see what you have done now. You reinstated the deletion tag. I didn't remove the first one. User Addhoc did. Subsequently I tidied up the article and then removed the wikibook tag. Then you reinstated the deletion tag and actually moved it to wikibook. It will be easy for you to delete it from there. I think that's really nasty and sneaky. You seem to have a set on this article. Wallie 23:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Now you are stonewalling me. Your actions are counterproductive to wikipedia. You just do things without explaining yourself. It's pathetic. Wallie 16:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Reply in preparation. Watch this space. -- RHaworth 17:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Lists of Christians

You asked "why do we need an article when we have a category?" Because lists perform functions that categories cannot. In the case of Lists of Christians, the master list presents sub-lists in a thematic way that can aid navigation (by denomination, by profession, etc.). The category only presents the sub-lists alphabetically. The following quote from an AfD post by User:Pia L makes the case for parallel lists and categories well:

Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes states, "These methods should not be considered to be in competition with each other. One should not be deleted in favor of the other. Instead, each should be used to update the other. This provides two core methods of navigating Wikipedia. See the navigation menu at the top of Wikipedia:Contents. The "category camp" shouldn't dismantle Wikipedia's list-based navigation system, and the 'list camp' shouldn't tear down Wikipedia's category system". In accordance with the precedents for list deletions at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Precedents#Lists , "lists nominated for overlapping categories are often kept"... In the explicit guidelines established in Wikipedia:Categorization FAQ#What is the difference between a list and a category?: ''Grouping articles into a category is not the same as making a list of articles. If you have a category that has vague criteria or that adds and removes members frequently, then maintaining a simple list is often more appropriate."

Cheers. Nick Graves 14:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

  • OK. Thanks for the precedents, even though they weaken my case for the deletion of Schools in Croydon. -- RHaworth 18:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Talia

The Talia Madison article will be fine in a couple of weeks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThisDude62 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Do not try to post it. You must take it to WP:DRV. -- RHaworth 17:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Saeed Jalili

FYI, I recreated this article which you previously deleted. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2007-10-20 15:51

List of mayors of Turkey

I changed the sentence case, all removed the phones/fax numbers. Please check. DenizTC 17:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Aviators Model Code of Conduct

Roger, As you suggested, I've uploaded a futher revised edition for consideration. Thanks very much for your assistance. --Michaelsbaum 17:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Since uploading the revised edition, a tag appeared asking for catagorization. In reviewing current catagories, I have not identified an exclusive, perfect fit within an existing catagory. However, some possible options could include: Aviation, General Aviation, Air Safety, and Flight Training. Other options could possibly focus on pilots and aircraft. In your view, is there an obvious (or at least preferential) place to start? Thanks again.--Michaelsbaum 19:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

  • "Tag appeared" indeed! Did it appear all by itself? -- RHaworth 07:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Thank you for the category edits Roger. I've now made a few proposed links in response to the "orphan" tag. --Michaelsbaum 19:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I noticed that you tagged the page Eco House, Dublin for speedy deletion with the reason "db-inc by person with COI". However, "db-inc by person with COI" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use WP:PROD if you still want the page to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes but {{db-inc}} is a criterion so why could you not delete it? -- RHaworth 04:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The lists with the courts

Hi. Why do you think that the lists with the courts should be deleted? It's for people to be able to know which courts there are, and to read the articles about them. A.Z. 03:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Write the articles first! -- RHaworth 03:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons why lists are useful is that they allow people to know which articles are missing. And the information currently on the lists is already useful: it has the names of all the courts. A.Z. 03:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Are these articles ever going to be written? Are there really sufficient differences between the 24 Regional Labor Courts to justify 24 separate articles? Why cannot the list be merged with Regional Labor Courts of Brazil? And please start to put the word Brazil in all your article titles. -- RHaworth 03:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • There's no need at all to put the word Brazil in the titles, if there are no other courts with the same name. Please, remove the word Brazil from the title *1*. Yes, the articles are going to be written. There are really sufficient differences betwween the 24 Regional Labor Courts. See Category:United_States_courts_of_appeals. All the US courts have an article. A.Z. 04:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • No, check this out instead. All district courts in the US have an article of their own! I did not know that. Each article has the name of every single judge of the courts. That's possible because Wikipedia isn't made of paper. A.Z. 04:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
(edit conflict)*By the way, the articles are called "US district courts", not just "district courts", because there are eight countries that have courts called "district courts". A.Z. 04:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • *1* Why me? Are you incapable of moving an article? -- RHaworth 04:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • It would be nicer if it were you, since it was your mistake in the first place, but I can move it. I would like to have your agreement first, though. Thanks for agreeing. A.Z. 04:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • The articles have been moved. A.Z. 04:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

A question about TIA

hallo RHaworth,

thank you very much, that you have give me so much informations. But i can not very gut understand, why schuld my artikel deleted. Can you tell me something more about that? May be should i just wait until the discussion is closed. And then the articel can bleib there? PS. that is not a advert, but a Description.and i can take in the source. i just want to descript a strategy.and the strategy is from Siemens.that is all. i think my artikel should bleib there. thank you =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Show Time 2008 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Bleiben sie nicht until the discussion is closed but:
  • No disrespect but find someone fluent in English to re-write the article. As a minimum, replace the irrelevant external link with this or similar.
  • Contribute to the AfD discussion.
-- RHaworth 11:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I have already deleted the links to Siemens. and a little bit later i will correct the text. So, is that mean, the text from me is safe now;-) Wunderbar, dass Sie Deutsch sprechen können=)

In addition, i have read the text again about:Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. i think what i done, i mean the link. that is not wrong.Show Time 2008 14:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC) unsigned comment added by Show Time 2008 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Removing the link makes it worse! We need: a) a link to this or similar to show that the term is used by Siemens and b) one or two links to independent sources to show that anybody else is the slightest bit interested. I am sorry, but it just seems like an empty phrase dreamed up by Siemens' management gurus to motivate staff. But do please contribute to the AfD discussion your comments will be welcomed (even if the article is not!) and your English does not matter. -- RHaworth 15:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

do you get jokes

do you get jokes tildetildetildetilde —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carpenoctem (talk • contribs) 18:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, but: a) Wikipedia, or at least its (Main) namespace is not a place for jokes and b) if you think you have made a joke, you will need to spell it out more clearly. The first thing I think of when I see Azn war is the Battle of Gallipoli which was far from funny. -- RHaworth 18:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Question about WP:EL

Hello. I'm contacting you to ask you a question, if you could answer me, about the relevance of this link added in the article Pokémon. Should be left there, or should it be removed, since the site in question is basically a fansite? As far as I understand, WP recommends to keep official websites. Besides, anyone could access to this kind of information through Google. Thanks for your attention. --Mushii 18:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

  • No idea really. Does not look like blatant spam; leave it for the moment but repeat the question at talk:Pokémon. -- RHaworth 18:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: History of Longitude

There are several articles that duplicate the information (often with errors or contradictions). I want to remove those sections from each of the pages and point to a single page that discusses the topic. See the discussion page Talk:Longitude#Measurement of longitude. --Michael Daly 01:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

  • OK. -- RHaworth 01:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Nowheristan

Thanks a lot! I will work on improving it. I really want to visit Croydon now... :) -- Bahaab 12:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The phenomenon of existence

Good day. Nice to be scrutinized by you again (when being introduced to Wikipedia under my previous username Mortsggah, one of my first mistakes was to create a little geneaology tree here). However, this time I'm sure that the article is justified. I'm talking about "Existence on appearance, longevity and reproductivity phenomenon". Please state your points to why you reinserted the deletion-tag. Mikael Häggström 17:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I have looked very hard for our previous interaction but cannot find it. Strange. If someone accuses you of original research, do you think it might be an idea to provide some evidence, eg. external links to show that the ideas in question have been published? My points are stated in the AfD nomination. -- RHaworth 19:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Ioeth#Socks

I replied to User talk:Ioeth#Socks on my talk page. I didn't know if you'd be watching or not, so I thought I'd leave you a heads-up here. Thanks! --Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 17:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Dekuben

It's easier to do this way. Dekuben 16:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

You pompous elitist! I was still editing that page! What gives you the right to delete someones hard work, when they haven't finished it?

My apologies, but i was hurt by the fact that something i had created was deleted without my consultation. If you have any further problems with something i have done i would appreciate it if you could tell me before getting rid of it, as it is easier to edit something than create something from scratch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dekuben (talk • contribs) 16:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Kevin Murray/R&I/bainer

HI. Thanks for catching my goof. Bainer is the name of an admin who closed and AfD which resulted in the merger of many articles into one. The version I saved was his original work, before the wolves fell upon the carcass. Cheers! --Kevin Murray 10:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Haworth

Nice to meet you!! My name is Trevor Haworth from Springfield, IL, USA. Haworths will soon take over the world. :Thumbs Up: Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 20:13, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

"The Four Universal Truths"

You deleted the Four Universal Truths claiming that I wrote it, you fornicator. But I did not, I was merely editing it. How you failed to notice this I'll never know, probably the fact that inbreeding makes one dumb is to blame. Anyhow I think that you ought to put it back up because it was a meaningful article, certainly more meaningful than a life spent making "useful" edits to Wikipedia pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtCorvalay (talk • contribs) 00:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Equally, you failed to notice that I did not delete it. And in fact I did not fail to notice, I merely assumed that only one person would be interested in this and that you were a sock puppet of Will.Smith586. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion rationales

Please, please, be very careful that, when you delete a page for being defamatory trash, you do not include any of that defamatory trash IN THE DELETION RATIONALE. Deletion logs are public. They can, and sometimes do, turn up in websearches, and then we sometimes get frantic requests to have the deletion logs themselves purged, which is apparently very difficult from a technical standpoint and requires the intervention of the developers.

Read your own deletion log, see how much stuff you've left visible. DS 15:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Oh dear, I suppose "this rare species of dickhead usually inhabits the cavernous areas of piles of faeces" is the sort of defamatory trash that you are talking about and which I have let through. I shall try to be more careful. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Poem 8 and other Practical Cats

Just wanted you to let know, that poem went over particularly well, though I, personaly, feel like some things were lacking in place of just trying to be funny. But it's the classic Invisbile Man conundrum; namely, what to do with him after you've got him. Still, the fact that it was removed so speedily, twice, and my accounts banned with equal speed, again, twice, was a great boon to the project. And thank you for adding the 'nothing of interest to contribute,' or whatever it was, dig. I don't know what I would've done if the page hadn't been removed, and if i hadn't been personaly and aestheticaly derided in public. Obviously, the effort itself would've been a failure. Cheers. AfterBorges 20:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

De Soto High School

Thanks for your feedback and ideas- especially the idea of tracking new pages added to Wikipedia. I am new to Wikipedia and am learning how this works- adding new content, editing, etc. I am going to try again with the high school page, linking it to the city page here in hopes of keeping it as an encyclopedia entry. I hope this conforms to the Wikipedia rules. Thanks again for your great feedback! --Integrated3 02:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Integrated3 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

King Alfred's Tower

Hello friendly sysop. The article on King Alfred's Tower which you have edited is completely infested with copyrighted text from the website linked at the bottom of the article. You can clearly see here. Please delete this article and its history completely so that we can start the article anew, away from the evils of copyright violations. Thank you. Interesting wiki 15:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Grrr, refactoring my words is unnerving! :P - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I certainly was not going to put my own comment four indents deep, so what was I to do? -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Gawdforbid you be so far indented. Is it demeaning or something??? :P (totally kidding) - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • For goodness sake, have your indents back! Was it all right for me to add a section heading or do you consider that "refactoring"? (I tend to use quite narrow windows so indents look more ugly for me than for other people.) -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Ha, ha. I have a 16:9 LCD monitor. I thought I was just catching up to the rest of the world. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Zeitgeist (video)

Administrator

Hello! I've been taking a look through your contribs, and I'm really quite impressed. Have you ever considered becoming an administrator? I'd be happy to nominate you. :) Let me know, okay? GlassCobra 02:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Actually I have been an admin for some time! I just don't advertise it because I believe strongly that Wikipedia works on the consensus of all established editors and being an admin is "no big deal". (And some people won't believe I am an admin even when I present them with irrefutable evidence!) -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Ah, I suspected as much! I should have done a little more research! No offense intended, of course. :) GlassCobra 03:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
    • By the way, I just read that link that you included to your archive in your above comment there. Just..wow. It seems like that editor manages to get into a conflict with everyone she comes across. GlassCobra 16:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Raugh

Just curious, why did you delete my article over the word Raugh? 69.34.188.238 22:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Kindly sign before editing. I assume you are XXTINKSXx. The article was deleted because:
    • Dicdef's go in Wikitionary not here.
    • It was a self-confessed neologism - see NFT.
If the word ever becomes notable enough to qualify for a dictionary, then someone will add it to Wiktionary. Until then, please do not waste our time. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Newtonic Oath

Hi RHaworth,

I am no way as experienced editor as you are but I would suggest to give the Newtonic Oath page bit more time, maybe a month, before deleting it to see if it is notable. It is being discussed in Physics Forum for instance. I am not suggesting to discuss or to include the oath, but just leave the page as a stub. I read above your suggestion about putting hangon template and I did that. So, please advise. Thanks. Zeyn1 12:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

  • You are probably better off letting it be deleted. Wikipedia editors tend to come down heavily on any promotion of new ideas, bands, products, etc. And we would need to wait until a serious text has been drafted instead of the present rather silly one. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 13:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Eggzactly

here are more i found for you to delete, nice work, you really know how to look around to back your arguments!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coddled_egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiled_egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omelette http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poached_egg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrambled_eggs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirred

or, hey, try ADDING something to an article instead of just going around deleting them! what an idea! that's why it's called a stub, so you do something called WORK, not just hit "delete" -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holon67 (talk • contribs)

  • Noted. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
    • "Noted" noted. And by the way, don't EVER touch my talk page again, OK? Covering up for your puppets? Holon67 (talk) 01:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

class project

I think you may not have noticed that History_of_baltimotre_riots_for_a_class_project was in fact a class project, and the author clearly in need of help--so I left him a note that may be of some assistance to him/her and his/her teacher.DGG (talk) 23:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Langbar International

Langbar International and Crown Corporation plc.

Hello. I just got a note from a new page patroller asking me to take a look at Langbar International. It looks as though it might be a speedy candidate (G10 and A7), but I noticed you recently moved it and wanted to get your thoughts. Thanks for your time. — Satori Son 15:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I am sorry to endorse Sharara's statement of "I am dumb". The operative words are "biggest share fraud on the Exchange to date". Which makes it in my view a totally valid article. The only problem was that it had been posted two or three times! The description on Image:Crown Shares.jpg indicates that the author is involved with the Langbar Action Group but I did not feel that a {{COI}} tag was needed. (Do you actually think of the speedy criteria by code numbers? "G10" and "A7" are total gobbledegook to me.) -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Understood. -- Satori Son 00:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Saskatchewan

Re Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan/New articles. Hello there. Thank you for the clarification. I hadn't noticed that Wikipedia was missing in the front title, as usually when making additional add ons to started projects, I begin with the original page and add the /.... Sorry, about that, I didn't do it on purpose, and I try very hard to do Wikipedia naming conventions so that there is continuity. I hadn't restored it, just gave the reason on the talk page why it was made it the first place. Everything should be good to go now. Someone said wikispace and article space but I didn't see that the word wikipedia was missing that was probably what they meant, but I didn't know what wikispace and article space meant. Thank you so much for explaining it. SriMesh | talk 00:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

DRV notice

An editor has asked for a deletion review of GOOOH - Get Out of Our House. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jreferee t/c 19:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

East Malling Stream

Thanks for correcting this from East Malling stream. Mjroots (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Gender Portrayals in Media

Hello. I am wondering why you put the deletion message on my page - Gender Portrayals in the Media. I am compiling research for a school project and do not see a need to delete my page.

Please let me know.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwilli11 (talk • contribs) 00:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is not for research for school projects! Please keep your research on your home computer. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The point of the project is to teach people about gender representations in the media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwilli11 (talk • contribs) 04:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

  • You may improve its chances of survival if you convert those horrible SHOUTING section headings to Wikipedia standards. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:30, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I have changed the headings and added a disclaimer at the top of the page. I would like this page to be printed off without the deletion message on the top so I can turn it in for my project tomorrow. After I receive my grade I will delete the page. Can it be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwilli11 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

  • You chose to post this to Wikipedia, you must accept the consequences and leave the AfD notice in place. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

User Alex Burns became a spammer

User Alex Burns not only has a wiki page with his name but he has started to spam other articles by including false references to his own work.

On November 25th he spammed 8 wiki pages.EconomistBR (talk) 16:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot error

I've written to User:Emijrp as follows:

Your bot seems to have altered List of British railway-owned Locomotive Builders to List of British Railway-owned Locomotive Builders. I would submit this is an error. The organisation British Railways did not come into being until the twentireth century. The works listed were opened by, and owned by, a variety of British railway companies. Chevin 11:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

continuative deletion: please refrain

it's three hours someone (always different) delete the common documentation licence datasheet I'm inserting, and I'm forced to waste a lot of time of my work. Since I apply to your rules please stop deleting our page, there must be something else that discriminates us from other companies that published their datasheets on wikipedia. Please refer to [email protected] if there what the problem is, if it's a matter of fare or whatsoever. Can also be we made some kind of mistake while editing, but if you keep deleting light-speed we cannot provide a solution. I hope I'm talking to professionals.

Thank you for your understanding.

Paolo Russian ItalTBS Group Trieste paolo.russian#italtbs.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolo.russian (talk • contribs) 10:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Please refrain from trying to advertise on Wikipedia. Which other companies have "published their datasheets on Wikipedia"? Let me know and I will see that they are deleted! -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

be bold

jesus christ I'm blind!

thanks, Cf38 (talk) 22:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Subpages

Hi

Just out of curiosity, why is creating a subpage off a users's talk page a no no, rather than off his user page? I looked at WP:SUBPAGES and didn't find anything that said one couldn't do that. It even talked about archiving talk pages. It doesn't matter to me whether it's a subpage of my User or User_Talk, but I just happened to pick my talk page. As to why the html link—the wikilink didn't work on Benjiboi's talk page, so I used an html link. However, I could watchlist my talk subpage before you moved it. Strange... This was my first time creating a subpage, so please give me a break. BTW, how did you notice that, NP patrol? Anyway, thanks for fixing it. — Becksguy (talk) 02:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

  • I fully admit the move from user_talk: to user: was not really necessary - it just seemed a better place for an article draft. Whilst user_talk: is of course the proper place for archives of talk pages. And yes, now you point it out, a wikilink would not work. So apologies for carping. And yes I spotted it through NP patrol - I only look at the (Main) namespace but your mistake meant it counted as (Main). -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Your rationale makes sense. Learn something new everyday. Thanks again for fixing it. Regards — Becksguy (talk) 03:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

tekphoto

Hello RHaworth, This article (Thomas Krueger)is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. The references have been added to the page making it and the artist notable. This is simply a Biography of the artist. All of the references and External links verify this artist. Please help me resolve this. --Tekphoto (talk) 05:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/Archive_to_2007_December&oldid=1143249542"