User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2009 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

Archives

Kosal State movement

Hello RHaworth, Could you remove the merging tag from Kosal state movement. It can be a separate article because of significant political developments. Please see: http://kddf.wordpress.com/category/demand-of-koshal-state/. I also propose the name of Western Orissa should be changed to Koshal region. (15:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skarmee (talk • contribs)

I have written few things at talk: western orissa. I also urge you to have a look on the complains lodged in the talk page of Kosal state movement and kosal. — Skarmee (talk) 16:10, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry it is talk:Western Orissa. I can remove the merging tag but do not know how to change the main title. — Skarmee (talk) 09:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

  • To change a title, you use the move operation - depending on the skin you use, this will be a tab at the top of the article or in a pull-down action list in the same place. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Minecraft

I recently wrote an article about the video game Minecraft, and noticed that you had deleted a similar article in late October. I came here to see if you'd allow me to post my newer article or not. I noticed that the reason for the last article's deletion was that it was spam, so I don't know if it was just a meaningless "lol minecraft rox" article or what. My potential article can be read/checked here. Thanks. —Preceding undated comment added 07:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC).

Erfan

In order to create an article for the musician Erfan, I noticed that previous pages have been deleted, the last one by you. I followed the guidelines in "deletion review" section of wikipedia and it notes to follow up with last person who deleted. Can you look into your deletion and release the article page please. Let me know what you think, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishoil3 (talk • contribs) 07:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

  • What do you mean by "release the page"? I will gladly let you see the deleted text - read this. Given that six different admins have deleted the article, I am certainly not going to uprotect it without a deletion review. I suggest that you create an article on the Persian Wikipedia about the guy. If that sticks for a month, come here and create your draft article in User:Fishoil3/sandbox. Make sure you add references from reliable, English-language sources. Then raise the matter at deletion review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your note. Please email me the last deleted version of the article so i can start correcting the last version. By "release it", i meant to unprotect it, however that seems to not be the right way to do it. If it needs to get a deletion review then let me know how I can start that process with your help. I do not know how to write in the Persian wiki, so i'm focused on the English version. since i do not know the Persian version, i will proceed with your suggestion to create an article in my sandbox and add references from reliable, English-language sources. Then I will raise it with deletion review. Let me know if you think this is the right/wrong approach. I understand your concern with 6 other people deleted it but 6 wrongs don't make a right :). I will attempt to correct the article and post it in an acceptable wiki format as you suggested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishoil3 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your geo converter

Note to self - action. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Alvin Fields

This is another request to un-delete Alvin Fields for editing. Re: Michael Zager Band - "Let's All Chant" composers. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhasheene (talk • contribs)

Seduction Community Guy

There is an article on a guy from the seduction community called Adam Lyons. It seems like it most of its sources are blogs and dead links, making it not notable enough and lacking credit for an article. Could you have a look at it? 54Boofie (talk) 23:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

  • I find the whole idea of a "seduction community" rather distasteful (and awfully 20th century!). I also hate naked URLs. But I will let you to take it to AfD. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:18, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I wish I would know how to do that, but I have no clue. Could you get the ball rolling on this? Wikipedia needs to stay clean of articles that don't belong on here. Thanks! 54Boofie (talk) 01:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey RHaworth, I was wondering why the article 'Adam Lyons' was nominated for deletion before the issues of the references were raised on the discussion page. I am not that familiar with the deletion procedure, but as the issue seems to be with some of the sources, why is this immediately being considered for deletion? I have updated the sources, if you could have a look and see what you think that would be great, it would be good to see what you think DRosin (talk) 11:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Only today the news is pupils as young as five will be given lessons in "gender equality" …. I think that the whole idea of a "seduction community" is a throwback to earlier, sexist times. Taking the article straight to AfD ensures its exposure to a wider number of editors. But you may take comfort from the number of people flocking to say "delete". (Please fix the naked URLs in the article and the spurious external links in the AfD.) — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Hey RHaworth, I have got rid of the naked URLs, I put 'Retrieved' all for today, let me know if it still needs improving. Gender equality is interesting with regards to the seduction community. One of the reasons I think Adam Lyons is a good representative of the seduction community is that he teaches female clients as well and addresses gender equality a lot. If you feel strongly about it, it might even be worth emailing him with your thoughts. There are some other people in the community who have interesting views on gender equality, like Johnny Soporno who talks a lot about notions of property and monogamy etc. I agree with you that a lot of the seduction community, especially the marketing, is deliberately sexist though. I would say though that here in Britain, that mainstream advertising and media have a worse and more far-reaching effect on gender equality than the seduction community, especially concerning LGBT like that article mentions. There are also religious forces that are topical in Britain today like woman's rights and Islam, not sure how topical it is in America though. Anyway, interesting stuff! DRosin (talk) 16:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Please unprotect 1E

The article 1E has been protected because of a number of attempts to put up excessive spamming, according to the log. I would like to use this page to put up factual information. Are you able to help? Thanks. (Michellehazelton) 14:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I had no intention of hiding my draft (I presumed you would look on my user page)and wasn't aware that as an employee I wasn't able to produce an information page on the company. I am simply trying to create an information page similar to Microsoft or BigFix for example. Is is possible to have the page unprotected for some whom does't have a COI? Thanks for your guidance. Michellehazelton (talk) 16:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

  • I repeat: go to deletion review (DRV). But read this suggestion that you find a "sponsor" to raise the matter at DRV. If the decision, in the strange terminology of DRV, is "overturn" then unprotection will be non-controversial. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Your rushed closure of an AFD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series (2nd nomination) The AFD had only been going on in one day. The fact that three previous AFD happened in 2006, and one previous one happened in 2007, should not have anything to do with the current one being held now in November of 2009. I found one news source for it. Other things may exist as well. Please go through proper procedures and give the AFD its full week. Dream Focus 12:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

  • The article I have just deleted presented no evidence of notability and gave no hint that anything has changed since 2007. Have you actually looked at any of the videos? Do you consider them notable? Your edit summary was: "no speedy delete, it is in AFD now, which it has survived on many occasions". Please remind me of just one of those occasions. After that many deletions following AfD discussions, the correct place to discuss the matter is deletion review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I opened a deletion review. [1] I do believe everyone should have the right to have a week to participate in an AFD, to determine its outcome. Dream Focus 17:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Sock Puppetry

Is there a specific group of admins to report sock puppets to? I have found that these two:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Coaster7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Handrem

seem to only edit things related to Love Systems, and everything else they edit is just for show, for example adding one Wikilink to a random article before moving on. Could you have a look or point me in the right direction please? Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but they are both voting on the delete page of Adam Lyons within minutes of each other, and their editing looks very similar. Thanks for your time RHaworthDRosin (talk) 10:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Geography of Somerset

Hello, can I (as a relatively new user), make the following observation?. If there is an intention to redirect / merge / delete an article (in preperation for a collaboration project, or otherwise) that maybe a note could be left on the talk page (or article), or maybe a short note (of intent) to the contributer to that effect first? I am perplexed and frustrated by conflicting information and actions by editors. Is my assumption that discussion should precede action incorrect?Francis E Williams (talk) 22:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I always cite the Wikipedia motto "be bold", which can be used to justify action first. However, I will not make excuses: I should have left an explanation of why I was redirecting Geography of Somerset.
A few hints:
  • for section headings we use == and ===
  • get into the habit of creating Wikilinks as you type - Geography of Somerset contained not one single link!
  • its as in "its surrounding hills" does not have some strange character after the s. It's permissible to use it's on talk pages but in an article we expand it to "it is"
  • there is no need to make vague statements such as "would the person who did" - use the edit history!
  • please upload your photos at the maximum resolution available, and do so to the Commons
— RHaworth (talk · contribs) 04:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello again. Thank you for your comments,as a new (now retired) user all are very useful.
  • (1) Yes, an explanation would indeed have been appreciated.
  • (2) I agree "it is" should be used instead of it`s. (its` refers to the plural.)
  • (3) If the person who contributed to the talk page was you, why did you not add your name? (hence the vague statement) I do not feel it`s pro-active to add third party names to my comments. I know about edit history, thats how I restored the page again.
  • (4) The graphic was uploaded at a (suggested) size for those many viewers with only 640x480 screen displays, was placed in the commons (hopefully) when originally uploaded.. (See my link to commons on my user page) along with my other images for other articles, it is used in two school articles for Bath. Please do not interfere with my personal user page or sandbox in future. I do not wish my experience and minor contributions on Wiki to become a negative one. I would like to make my local area knowledge and willingness to travel available to this project. It takes me hours to type a paragraph, I suffer with Macular degeneration and have to read and type one letter at a time. Shall we start over again? Francis E Williams (talk) 10:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
The plural of "its" is "their". its` is pure nonsense - show me just one example of its use.
I did not add my name because I was interrupted by a woman from Wiveliscombe (that's a gender-specific variant of person from Porlock!). I explained that in my next edit.
The photo of your old school was originally uploaded to Wikipedia (not the Commons). Since it is 519px wide and you are thinking of people with 640x480 screens, why are you stretching it to 820px wide on your user page? But we still upload at the highest resolution and let the Wikimedia software scale it. See Sea Trek (Mormon project) for example: the image there is fine for people with 640px wide screens but the image links to Commons:File:Sea Trek statue Liverpool 309.jpg where people have a choice of five sizes for viewing it right up to 1200px wide.
Incidentally, do not move File:City of Bath Technical School Emble 1.jpg to the Commons - I am very dubious about the licence tag. Check out the licences in Category:School shields. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello again, (1) I have to apologise with regard the graphic, I have checked and you are correct. Even though I clicked on the the upload, the commons symbol (or what I thought was the symbol) appeared and took me through the process. Can I not do as I wish with this image on my private user page?. Its size there does not govern the image in the article. (That is set by a display variable). (2) The School Shield (or Badge) was designed in 1954 by a Mr. Box, the school is now defunct. It is not a direct copy of an original (it was constructed pixel by pixel) using different colour variants (from memory) in 2001. I have seen an original since then, mine cannot be considered a clone. (3) Grammar, I am aware of a few technical issues. Please Google "Writing and Grammar, Huddersfield University." I quote, " Apostrophes to Show Possession. The apostrophe signals the door belongs to the manager. When the possessors are plural the apostrophe goes after the final S.

"The managers' doors were always open." end quote. Therefore its`(the counties`) hills belong to the counties. Or do you consider this also technically incorrect?, if so do you have an example showing this is so? (4) I think that obscure references are not the way forward to convey meaning within your messages, they only convey misunderstanding, as is the case for me about the "woman from wiveliscombe". (this part of your edit never appeared on the page, just the words "you did not delete the article").Perhaps I misunderstand you, are you trying to add some light hearted content? P.S. aren`t you supposed to send your messages to me and not post them for me to find on your discussion page, or have I been mis-informed again?Francis E Williams (talk) 16:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Your prod of Heart no Kuni no Alice

I deprodded Heart no Kuni no Alice. You may have been mislead by the date on the {{refimprove}} template. In any case you might have done a search that would have revealed that a game as well as an anime production (delayed) could be included in an expanded article. I you want to contact me about this please leave a {{talkback}} on my talk page. -- allen?names 16:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Civil War Painting

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Civil War Painting has been removed. It was removed by Fashion Environmental with the following edit summary 'expanding, sourcing, untagging {{dated prod|concern = nauseating peacock language but no evidence of notability|month = November|day = 12|year = 2009|time = 08:49|timestamp = 20091112084930}}'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Fashion Environmental before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Montmorency (character)

May I just ask why the page Montmorency (character) has been deleted. It states that it was deleted due to not enough context. How would something have enough context to identify the article's subject. If I uploaded more pages concerning this book series would that be enough context. Thank you in advance. Rock drum (talk) 15:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

  • OK, deletion was harsh because you had established the context in the infobox. But it needed to be repeated in the first sentence: thus. Unfortunately, for my generation there is a dog more notable than your person so I have redirected. What I suggest you do: add references (!!) to the Montmorency Series article to show that it is notable then add your info about Montmorency/Scarper to that article. All your text is available via the history. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks for that. I've added the changes you pointed out. Does this mean I can re upload it now? Rock drum (talk) 13:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

PS Im sorry if I sound sour. Rock drum (talk) 15:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

  • What have you added? Please show me by way of a "diff" report. You may find it simpler to re-upload, but none of your edits have been deleted - do you know how to recover them via the histories? PS sorry if I sound petulant. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

At the beginning, instead of just saying "the protagonist of the series" I have put "the protagonist of the Montmorency Series by Eleanor Updale". *1* I hope this is correct. Cheers again. Rock drum (talk) 16:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

  • I still cannot see these alleged edits. If you want to show me stuff you have done off Wikipedia, put it in User:Rock drum/sandbox. But *1* in any case, I had already showed you that change. What is the point of telling me about it again? A redirect at Montmorency/ Scarper has been there for two years and sets a precedent. I said above: add references to the Montmorency Series article to show that it is notable then add your text about Montmorency/Scarper to that article. Do you disagree with that advice? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I have added five references to the page which I have up loaded to the Montmorency Series page and the Montmorency (character) page with references is available at my sandbox. I think this is the right thing and I'm sorry is it isn't. Thank you. Rock drum (talk) 17:59, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Concrete Thanks

Thanks for catching yourself on Properties of concrete. I nearly had to yell at you. I think Properties of concrete is a better name too. Josh Parris 09:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rock Music Racism

The article Rock Music Racism has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Improbable search. No articles linked. Pointless redirect.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 02:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Rock Music Racism

I have nominated Rock Music Racism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nebolish mastiff

Hello! Just noticed that Nebolish Mastiff had been re-moved back to Nebolish mastiff, lower case. I was just curious as to your reasoning? I'd originally moved it when I found it because it seems that all of the mastiff breeds follow the capitalized-mastiff convention (seems Mastiff is part of the breed name, eg: English Mastiff, Korean Mastiff, etc. and most of the mastiff breeds follow the convention and have capitalized articles, as per the Molosser page). I'd like to switch it back on those grounds (redirect Nebolish mastiff, use Nebolish Mastiff as main article) but figured if you'd moved it, you'd had a reason, so I figured I'd ask before I did anything... As I'm sure your reason for moving was probably more compelling than my own. Thanks! Tehae (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

  • Sorry. Looking at list of horse breeds, I see no consistency as to whether horse and pony should take capitals. So I will leave dog lovers to decide re dogs. Feel free to move the article back but more importantly, clean up the tone of the article so that it no longer looks like a copyvio. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the response! I was definitely surprised to see there was some sort of consistency in the naming scheme, but that's how the dog fans on Wikipedia did it, I suppose. I'll shuffle it around and strip it down to its essentials to get rid of the copyvio/biased POV. The contributor who started the article seems to be a breeder of the dogs (one of the only breeders? unsure as to breed notability, I'm not much of a dog person) who pulled the info off a couple of breed sites... Big mess of an article. Thanks again. :) Tehae (talk) 21:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Motivations of the September 11 attacks

hi rhaworth, please provide your motivation for flagging Motivations of the September 11 attacksSpencerk (talk) 08:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Alexander Wortley

Hello RHaworth, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Alexander Wortley - a page you tagged - because: short Google News search reveals both importance/significance and truthfulness of the article. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. SoWhy 12:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of the ROLLBACK tool

This was a very highly inappropriate usage of the WP:ROLLBACK tool which is accorded to you in your status as an admin on Wikipedia. Please do not do this again. Please, engage in discussion on the article's talk page. Cirt (talk) 15:56, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

  • If I had done the roll back via a straightforward edit from an IP address, would that have been abuse of admin rights? The long introduction was such a blatant fork, I felt that no explanation was needed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I would like an apology for your abuse of the ROLLBACK tool. It implied my edit was vandalism, and was inappropriate. Cirt (talk) 16:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Rollback implies obvious vandalism. Even if it was done by an IP, you could assume good faith that the IP editor does not share your view on the appropriateness of lengthy introductions in list articles, or is a newbie and does not understand the difference, instead of assuming that the IP is deliberately doing something he knows to be damaging to Wikipedia. In this case, the editor is not an IP but a registered user and fellow admin, and assuming that he was being intentionally harmful, instead of simply disagreeing, is out of line. Rollback was not intended for content disputes. Please don't allow a molehill to be made into a mountain. Thatcher 16:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the apology. Please take further discussion about the content dispute itself, to its talk page. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 16:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD: Katsunori Wakabayashi

I have brought for discussion at AfD Katsunori Wakabayashi, a page you previously PRODed. I am not sure whether it meets the test of WP:Notability (academics). See WP:Articles for deletion/Katsunori Wakabayashi. Cnilep (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Your trout

On my talk page, you left a rather hostile query. Here it is, with my reply, in case you do not travel back my way:

Sock / wife?

What is your relationship to Self-ref (talk · contribs · logs)? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

He's my husband. His name is nagasiva bryan w. yronwode. You can view pictures of our wedding here. Enjoy! Oh yes, and please assume good faith. Thank you very much. cat Catherineyronwode (talk) 04:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

In short, strange as it may seem to someone with your stringently bivalent logic system, he is neither my "sock" nor my "wife".

This clue has been brought to you by the United Trout Distributors of English Wikipedia, Limited. --cat Catherineyronwode (talk) 04:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:A10

Hello! I don't know if you're aware or not, but there's a new speedy criterion specifically for duplicated materials. I think that WP:A10 may have applied to Luke rebueno, which you deleted as a copy of Anderson Silva. Enjoy! --SquidSK (1MC•log) 14:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Thank you. But A10 is intended for content forks. Luke Rebueno was pure vandalism or, to be more charitable, some young non-notable martial artist intending to create an autobio based on the Rebueno article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a question

Why do you move so many pages without redirects? Some of the articles you move have yet to be marked as patrolled, and this makes it harder to do so. --I dream of horses @ 04:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. That's understandable. :-) --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 17:00, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tna cross the line

An article that you have been involved in editing, Tna cross the line, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tna cross the line. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

Favonian (talk) 19:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for text

RHaworth, I noticed that on 3rd December you deleted both Masterseries and MasterFrame, if possible would i be able to have a copy of the text from masterseries sent to me? I understand that masterframe could be seen as solely for advertising, but i believe that the information i provided in the article for masterseries is quite relevant and factual. I will be editing the first paragraph to remove the reference to masterframe. I am affiliated to masterseries but would like to have a page set up purely for an informational purpose and not as a form of advertising. Any help you could give me with regards to this would be greatly appreciated! -- Unowhonos (talk · contribs) 12:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Text of MasterFrame and Masterseries (get the capitalisation right!) have been sent. What on earth makes you think that removing the reference to MasterFrame would make the article less spammy? Please read what we think of any contributor with a COI. If you persist, remember that an article will be deleted again if it does not contain links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Capitalisation of MasterFrame and Masterseries are both correct due to our product names!! Secondly I did not get notification of the reply that you sent (even with watching the page) and so reposted the link with the changes I stated. The arrogance and attitude of your post to my discussion page was unneccessary, and speaks volumes! Unowhonos 09:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Adam Lyons

I've had a go at cleaning up the above article. If you would like to have another look to see whether this affects your comments at the AfD. Cheers. Quantpole (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ben Andrews

Hi. I see you deleted and salted the above; I'm not sure what was there but expect it was about a pornographic actor. That's not the only Ben Andrews out there. Could your please unprotect the page so that I may paste something like the following there? Over time this may become a disambig page; TBD.

Ben Andrews, BSc PhD ANU, is a Senior Fellow at the Centre for Mathematics and its Applications at the Australian National University.<ref> "ANU - Mathematical Sciences Institute (MSI) - People - Ben Andrews". wwwmaths.anu.edu.au. Retrieved 2009-12-09.</ref> In 2003, he received the Australian Mathematical Society Medal along with Dr Andrew Hassell.<ref> "Aust MS : The Australian Mathematical Society Medal". www.austms.org.au. Retrieved 2009-12-09.</ref>

References

{{reflist}}

You should see my comment at Talk:List of male performers in gay porn films#Spot check of link clean-up for context. Thanks, Jack Merridew 12:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

  • In fact the two most recent deletions were for two different, non-porn actor people. I have unsalted but I am very dubious about whether "some other Ben [who] is good at maths and won an Aussie medal of some sort" actually meets our notability criteria. But you can try. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    Thanks. I only stubbled into this per the BLP issue with tangled links. I'll expand the stub a bit further if I can find more info. I'm generally pretty hard-core re notability, but am working on my inclusionist side. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
    He shows well in Google Scholar [2]
    Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ekopedia or Wikipedia

You are right to delete my mistakes. I am using Wikipedia as a refence to enrich Ekopedia. Thank you for correcting my mistakes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioakar (talk • contribs) 15:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Your right about the something-fishy link though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 7mike5000 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Nitrome Skins

I've noticed that you tagged List of Nitrome Limited skins for deletion. Well, I added more content, so please take a look at it. I'm sorry about the un-professionalism of my writing, but I'm trying my best. Also, please see the discussion page for my argument for non-deletion, I hope I bring up a good point. I respect you as a user, but I don't think this matches criteria for deletion. Thanks. 97.115.123.159 (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Why?

I wasn't aware that was a violation... which one? TomA8 19:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Osseolink

Kindly advice on what to do to keep the OsseoLink article. Feel free to make any changes or delete sections but not remove entire page. Thanks for your time and clarification! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.147.249.56 (talk) 21:56, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Kindly log in before doing any edits. I do not think there is anything you can do to make me change my mind. OsseoLink is product of interest only to clinicians. I think it has no place in a general encyclopedia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:06, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I apologize but you are right about being made for clinicians but the end user is the patient and general public who need to know. Any tips on making this work will be much appreciated. Many thanks for your time and support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.147.249.56 (talk) 16:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

  • I told you above to log in before doing any edits. If you ignore simple advice like that, is there any point in my giving you advice? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: Cat

If you would look on my userpage, you would see that I have a userbox for it. I thought it automatically adds my username to the category but for some reason it's not there. Oh, and there is no need to be cussing at me!

Thanks, Wolfdog406 17:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfdog406 (talk • contribs)

Doug's Gym

Deprodding of [[:{{{1}}}]]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from [[:{{{1}}}]], which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!

  • I believe that the references to the nationally known Muscle and Fitness magazine as well as to extensive coverage in the local media establish notability. Wissembourg (talk) 02:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series

Request for starting this article again, as the series recently won the Mashable 2009 Open Web Awards in the "Funniest YouTube Category" Paradox295 (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Have you read the deletion review less than a month old. You can try another deletion review but don't expect much success. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Prods

Hello RHaworth. Could you please clarify what you mean when you "prod" an article with the rationale of "no evidence of notability" [3] [4] ? Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 05:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Don't be ridiculous. You have been here long enough to know the notability criteria. And why did you add the evidence to the talk pages instead of to the articles themselves? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 06:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Ack. Here I was asking you to clarify, while being completely unclear myself as to what I was getting at. Very sorry. What I was meaning to ask was what you meant by "no evidence": no evidence in the article itself, or additionally no evidence by way of a search for sources? In other words, I was hoping you were doing a good-faith search for sources before tagging something for deletion, but was not completely sure. (And you are right, it's best to put sources right into the articles, but sometimes I do a quick list on a talk page when I'm feeling rushed, or perhaps lazy.) Anyway, sorry again for how that came across; I can see why you thought I was being difficult. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 17:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Obviously I meant no evidence of notability in the article. Indeed in both cases, I could have given simply "no evidence" as the reason. I do expect editors, especially when I suspect COI, to make some attempt to provide links. If they cannot be be bothered to point me to the evidence, why should I go and hunt for it? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

New editors are sometimes confused about the need for sourcing or how to do it. (I also give much less leeway to obvious COI editors.) The old spirit of "don't delete an article if can be improved" compels us to search for sources before tagging, at least that's been my understanding. WP:N says it rather explicitly, "If it is likely that significant coverage in independent sources can be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources." Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 23:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

  • That is why I prod them rather than deleting them! It is notable that in both these cases, even the prod was insufficient to make the original authors add the evidence themselves. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Walaa adel page copies

I did just do a mass nomination at MFD for these, but I don't see the need to delete them speedily out of process. No harm in letting anyone who thinks there is a reason to keep them around speak up at MfD, in my view. DES (talk) 16:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I not only read that msg, i linked to it in the MFD nomination Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Walaa adel page copies. I'm afraid I can't read arabic, so the link to http://ar.wikipedia.org is of little use to me. I agree that if the translations are complete, there seems no reason to retain these pages. But I don't know if they are complete, in-process, or abandoned. If, however, they are still begin used for something the MFD provides a forum for that to be mentioned. I don't expect many comments at the MFD, but one never knows. DES (talk) 17:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Can't read Arabic - that's no excuse! I can't read it either but I went to the Arabic Wikipedia and set my language preference to English, which helps greatly. Follow my link - you will see that the edit summaries are in English and tell you all you need to know. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 04:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
    • Thank you, i didn't know one could do that. DES (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Christopher B-Lynch

Can you please help me with info on the Christopher B-Lynch page deleted 12:57, 26 May 2006

From what I can see it was because the page was an empty redirect - but that could be completely wrong!

I have started on a new version so would appreciate any help you can give :¬)

Any chance you can tell me what went on and please could I have the text from that page prior to blanking/being turned into a redirect/whatever happened ?

thanks for your time. -- Chaosdruid (talk) 05:05, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

  • I have e-mailed you copies of the deleted articles but you seem to already have much more than was in them. I deleted them because they were copyvio in one case but also because they seemed to be blatant self-promotion. As to your draft: I am shocked! I thought you were an experienced editor! Why on earth, even in user space, have you got a massive copyvio from www.awarenesstimes.com of an interview plus an who's who entry? Christopher Blynch's suturing technique (lower case s & t please) may well be notable but you will have to write a proper article with evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs)
Thanks for the e-mail(s) and the speedy reply
As for notability - I was also toying with the idea of perhaps just a suture article.
What draft ? Its just a notes page - not even in my sandbox yet where my drafts go. When I have a draft ready you can read it in my sandbox...
Also - His name (as you can see) is Christopher B-Lynch
Lastly - why did you delete the text from my user page ? (please don't bite me)
Chaosdruid (talk) 06:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
  • An article about the technique will probably stick - the title should be B-Lynch suture technique rather than B-Lynch Suturing Technique, as in the deleted article. I see him described as professor so if he is a properly tenured prof of a reputable university, he would almost certainly be deemed notable enough for a bio. Sorry, the distinction between notes page and draft was too subtle for me - I deleted to suggest that the material was unsuitable for an article. But please remember that copyvios are still copyvios even on a user notes page - better to keep such stuff on your own computer. Yes, I see he is B-Lynch - Blynch was just me being silly. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:38, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the info - I have done a bit of editing but this is only my second article creation ;¬(
I was obv incorrect in leaving poss copyvio's in my user pages, assuming they could not be seen as they did not appear on searches (I searched myself to check) was obv not right as you found them lol
I am thinking that as his site says he teaches post grad for the royal college of surgeons in the Oxford region he probably is tenured (I'll check obv), but it was more on the lines of that plus his published papers and general use of his inventions besides the suture and being used as reference by so many other publications as well as the membership of the various institutions should take care of at least three of the notability requirements from the guideline.
Thanks for not biting btw !
Chaosdruid (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

dePROD - List of Nitrome Limited skins

You have told me before that I am too kind, and will probably think so again; the newbie author didn't dePROD this, but he did write "Oppose. This shouldn't be deleted... " on the talk page so, though greatly tempted to IAR, I have AfD'd it here. JohnCD (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Walaa Adel & Why

Just to be as simple as possible

we're copying the articles and leave them untouched cuz we translate them into arabic with Google's toolkit

  • And we don't just do that with the original version for two main reasons
    • To Compare the output with the exact revisions the articles were at when the translation started
    • To Remove any extra links / References that got added to wikipedia's blacklist after the articles creation, and now they prevent us from publishing the article on the arabic wiki
  • And I don't by any means understand why would copying the article into our user spaces would be considered vandalism if we don't edit it! we Actually Edit it, but on our own wiki, and after we finish we'll ask you to delete them anyway, so what the problem is???

I can send you a copy of the contract between Google, and the Company that employs the translators (DAT) "but it will be in Arabic"... and I can make admins on both the Arabic & English wikis assure you of the credibility of the project and that it doesn't have any other targets other than translation...

I know wikipedia's rules very well, and I'm pretty sure that as long that we're not Violating GFDL nor CC&CC bu copying them to our user space,, specially that they are there for a purpose and they will be deleted later, but after the scope is DONE..

If there's anything you'd like to know please contact me... or User:Meno25 who is our Arabic Wiki's 'krat & an admin on the english wiki

Thank You Koraiem (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Prod removed

The author of List of distinguished Kaikolars removed your prod and redirected the article to List of distinguished Sengunthars. It looks like cleaner listcruft now. Drmies (talk) 04:26, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

London Exchanges

I've just had occasion to check a London telephone number from 1947, re this edit, and I ended up on your page. Is there no end to your range of expertise? Very useful, thanks.--Old Moonraker (talk) 22:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of "Look to Norway"-speech

I have nominated "Look to Norway"-speech (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (in question) 23:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Insect indicators of abuse or neglect

Can 'Insect indicators of abuse or neglect' and 'Forensic entomology' be merged? If you are the original writer of 'Insect indicators of abuse or neglect'? You should know that it was fascinating and very enjoyable to read.

If we switched the titles of these two articles, would anyone be able to tell the difference? – bpage (talk) 01:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Why bother to ask me? Just go ahead and do it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

en: -> ar: translation project

Users: Walaa adel, Maynassar, Beebarose, & Wikidocster==

  • Hi, I have contacted you before about actions that were annoying you from some of the users mentioned above... I thought we had the problem was settled when I told you about the whole project we're doing here, and our need to have a copy of the original article source to translate.. but it seems you still have something you want to say, so let me make this is a straight & simple as possible..
  1. All these users are part of a translation project to test the "toolkit" made by google
  2. Most of them work only as translators & they have very basic knowledge of wiki syntax, and sometimes none at all, so sending them messages all the time, and then deleting their articles because they're not explaining what they're doing is NONE SENSE because they don't even know how to reply to you, and sometimes don't even understand what you want... and I'm starting to think (sorry) that you're using this so you can do whatever you want
  3. I know we can just change the destination address in the toolkit, but this is Not Enough, because we need an exact source that no ones changes daily so we can compare the input with the output... we also can't risk comparing specific revision numbers because this is too complex & long procedure and is still editable by oversights... we needed a basis to evaluate the output and that's why we're copying articles.
  4. the copying procedure does not conflict with GFDL nor CC-BY-SA, as long as the original article remains intact with all its details, and can be even referred to at the beginning of the article.. besides all these copies will be deleted after the project is over (and this date is very soon now)
  5. if you're worried about search engine indexing, & categories disable them from the copied page yourself, it's much easier than creating a discussion page for deleting the whole article
  6. stop accusing these people of bad faith, we explained the whole thing to you, don't pretend we didn't, and this project is made in the end to contribute to Wikipedia, and all this effort has to be respected.
  7. I told you before who are the people responsible for this whole thing here, and are able to communicate with you & with other users.. the people are again for the record User:Meno25, ME, and User:AhmadSherif.. if you really want someone to answer all the messages u're leaving on the translators' pages, contact one of them.. and NOT THE TRANSLATORS cuz they don't know how to answer you! and those who know can speak only for themselves, so I'm trying to make your life easier here..
  8. I wish you a Happy New Year! :)

Koraiem (talk) 14:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

Are you sure that there is a link between User:ModTheRod and User:Drsjpdc? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

  • The only edits by ModTheRod were to Stephen J. Press and were made on 2009-09-23. Five days later Drsjpdc re-creates his autobio. ModTheRod has not protested the block. What do you think? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Well there was a recent SPI here where one sockpuppet was blocked. So far, Alison hasn't responded to my request of a quick checkuser, but if that was a sock, then he is in a lot more trouble. See his talk page for more, but I'm thinking of AN/I for him based on his actions. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Dance Marathon at UCLA

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dance Marathon at UCLA. OCNative (talk) 04:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

RfD nomination of What is ARGT

I have nominated What is ARGT (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (in question) 21:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Rhodes Scholars

Re this edit. Hey! Don't blame me; blame Bill Gates!! Y'know, you really don't have to be quite so rude, but never-the-less, thanks for removing them. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

  • I would apologise for the use of the word "silly" but first explain what Bill Gates has to do with anything. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Lol! I deserved that, didn't I! I warn you, the explanation is not very interesting. The initial file is/was a .xls from the rhodeshouse.ac.uk site. In converting it from .xls to "wikitable" format, some of the "strings" (and I don't know why only some, and not all) acquired quotes. (And I agree, they are/were silly!) As it was Bill Gates' software that put them there, I blame Bill! (After all, wouldn't you?) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

So give me a proper link to the XLS file! (Note there is an ox in the domain name.) I still do not see what Bill Gates has got to do with anything - this is a simple matter of CSV file syntax and that was introduced when Bill gates was still at school! (In case you did not notice: "Boys High School, Stellenbosch" requires "s to indicate that the comma is part of the field whilst Cape Province has no comma so it don't need "s. Actually rather messy - better to quote all strings.)
Yeah. I know. I'm more than well aware of what you're saying.
But given that Bill is responsible for .xls, I think you're being a bit unfair in saying he has NOTHING to do with it ..
However, I'd rather hoped that you had picked up on the fact that I was being flippant ...
Ho hum. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Postscript: If you're interested: Actually, I didn't use .csv files. I highlighted the table in .xls and copied; pasted into Word; converted table-to-text; then find-and-replaced to add in the "||" between fields, and the "|-^P|" at the start of the lines. I didn't notice at which point the extra "s appeared - I expect it was when I converted-table-to-text.
But seriously, I am considering nominating your lists for deletion as listcruft. How many of the people you have listed are actually notable enough for articles here? If you want the lists to stand any chance of survival, you will go through and check every blue link that has been created. I checked seven names - five of them pointed to disambiguation pages or to people who were patently not Rhodes scholars; two pointed to South Africans but even there I did not see confirmation that they were R. scholars. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh come on! Didn't you read the page header? (Clearly not!) Well, here it is again:

This page contains a Complete list of ALL Rhodes Scholars, 1902-2009, and various statistics about numbers of recipients by region and by time.

The main intended uses are:

Sources
etc.
Have a look at List of Rhodes Scholars/Complete List for more info.
If you want to be a royal pain in the arse and nominate a series of pages that are clearly and prominently headed with: under construction
then no doubt you will.
And being only one person, there's no way I can stop you, and no way I can achieve an acceptable product in the limited timeframe this would enforce.
However, if you give me time to develop the pages to a state where they can justify their existence, then there will be no need for you to make such a nomination.
(BTW: If you want to help me achieve that end, then I assure you, I won't complain!)
Please note that the page List of Rhodes Scholars already exists, and well-and-truly satisfies notability requirements.
So please, give me a break. And please, don't start harassing me. I'm only one person, and there are over 7,000 people who have been awarded Rhodes Scholarships - it will take me a while to "beat it into submission".
"How many of the people you have listed are actually notable enough for articles here?" - That's not the point. It's a LONG way from the point. What you're referring to is the page List of Rhodes Scholars. As I've already said, that page "well-and-truly satisfies notability requirements."
I've no interest in you starting a harassment campaign against me. I have little doubt that if you do, you will be successful, because I have neither the time nor the interest in countering it.
I am devoting what time I have to bringing this set of pages to an acceptable standard. I'm not willing to divert that effort to unproductive passtimes.
Sadly for me, the ball is in your court.
If you choose to nominate these pages, then the many hours I have devoted towards progressing this set of pages to an acceptable state will be flushed down the toilet. I'm sure you won't be surprised to learn that would piss me off. But, there isn't anything I could do about it.
So I will now freeze my effort until I know what you intend to do. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
P.S. It's now 2:30am here - I won't be replying for at least 12 hours. Pdfpdf (talk) 16:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • What a remarkably angry response! You are essentially admitting that your lists are listcruft in that the vast majority of the people do not satisfy our notability criteria. I note the "under construction" tag. The problem is I have no idea in what direction the construction is going to go. So to save you wasting time on edits that may get deleted, the kindest thing may be to discuss their deletion as soon as possible. The best solution is to move them into user space, ie. User:Pdfpdf/List of Rhodes Scholars/SouthAfrica, etc. And publish their existence in talk:List of Rhodes Scholars. But don't moan about work being flushed down the toilet - Wikipedia is not the only website you know. The best place for these lists is on your own website - see comparison of wiki farms if it is important to preserve the wiki markup. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:36, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
"What a remarkably angry response!" - Really? That's of concern to me. To me it just sounds like a "tired, frustrated and resigned-to-failure" response. (After all, it was 2:30am.) Do you really think it's angry?
"You are essentially admitting that your lists are listcruft ... " - Well no, that's not quite what I'm saying. But from your POV, I can see (and understand) how you would come to that conclusion. So, from your POV, you're probably right.
"in that the vast majority of the people do not satisfy our notability criteria." - Yes, but that's not the point. As I tried (apparently unsuccessfully) to explain above, the aims are to facilitate determining: which of the 7,219 ARE notable; whether there's any amongst the 7,000 that are not already in List of Rhodes Scholars (and hence add them); and to facilitate confirmation that those already in the list are/were Rhodes Scholars.
"I note the "under construction" tag. The problem is I have no idea in what direction the construction is going to go." - Yes.
"So to save you wasting time on edits that may get deleted, the kindest thing may be to discuss their deletion as soon as possible." - I'm not quite sure what you mean, but in principle that seems a good plan. (And thank you for seeking the kindest option.)
"The best solution is to move them into user space, ie. User:Pdfpdf/List of Rhodes Scholars/SouthAfrica, etc. And publish their existence in talk:List of Rhodes Scholars." - Yes, that does sound like a good plan. I expect that I can make those moves myself. (If, for some reason I can't, may I call upon your assistance?) [Postscript: I was able to do all the moves myself.]
"But don't moan about work being flushed down the toilet - Wikipedia is not the only website you know. The best place for these lists is on your own website - see comparison of wiki farms if it is important to preserve the wiki markup." - Thanks. And I will investigate those options.
But again, you've sort-of missed the point. I neither need nor want to publish the information - the Rhodes Trust has already done that. As expressed, my aim is to facilitate maintenance, expansion and verification of the already-exising wikipages.
"Incidentally how do you reconcile your activities with the message "© 2005-2009 Rhodes Trust, all rights reserved" at the bottom of this page.". - a) Facts/data are not copyright. b) Fair use / reasonable use for research purposes.
Thanks for the useful suggestions. Most appreciated. I'll get started on the moves. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Moves completed. (I hope!)
Y'know, the more I think about it, the more I like your solution. As I said, I never wanted to "publish" this data. Putting it in my user space achieves what I want, and avoids all the problems associated with "publishing".
(I wish I'd thought of that before I started!)
Many thanks. Regards, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:39, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Mass deletions

Thanks for that.
Is it possible to do a move without leaving a redirect behind? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

mySQL

I agree the silly quotes are Microsoft's fault. My version of Excel does not even allow me to create CSV files but when you ask it to do a tab-separated list, it puts in "s as though it was doing a CSV file! I went on and converted the tab-separated list into a mySQL table. If it is of any use to you, you may copy it from here - it can be opened as a plain text file. Sortable wikitables are all very well but for real flexiblitiy you can't beat a good bit of mySQL. For example, I have created User:Pdfpdf/sandbox from my table.

I fear that you are going to have a long and unrewarding search. I shall be happy to be proved wrong but I will be very surprised if you find more than a dozen R. scholars who have articles here and who are not already in the list, the cats or special:whatlinkshere/Rhodes Scholar.

Brenton Brown & Kenji Yoshino are not in the list article - but you could have found them via the categories. Andrew Zawacki and Monica Youn could have been found via special:whatlinkshere/Rhodes Scholar. David Phiri has just popped up - he is a fellow of the Rhodes Foundation (new article needed?) but was apparently never an R. scholar - but it is possibly his granddaughter Natasha who has just gone up to Lincoln. What is special about JACKSON SCHOLAR Baboke Dambe? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

"If it is of any use to you, you may copy it" - Ta. (I've put a copy in my C:\WP\RhodesScholars folder)
I hadn't come across the Montenegro domain before. (It looks like they may have usurped Tuvalu - I see that .tv is now addressing a niche market, which further suggests they've been usurped. Nothing stays still for long on the internet, does it!)
"Sortable wikitables are all very well but for real flexiblitiy you can't beat a good bit of mySQL."
Mmmmm. Aren't you comparing apples with oranges?
I wouldn't attempt to actually DO anything using sortable wikitables as a tool. Whereas SQL is a (very) powerful toolset.
I'm not familiar with "MySQL" - What is significantly different / better / more useful about it than any of the other SQL alternatives?
"I fear that you are going to have a long and unrewarding search." - It depends what I do, and how I do it.
To date, the List of Rhodes Scholars has been constructed (tediously) from non-Rhodes House sources. (e.g. the "jurisdiction" data was so vague and poorly defined that I decided to use "University".) As far as I'm aware, the data on http://www.rhodeshouse.ox.ac.uk/RhodesScholars.htm is new - previously one had to scour the individual "Jurisdiction" websites, and of course, they were all slightly different in the information presented.
Initially, I've been concentrating on statistics. My next step after that is to verify the entries that are currently on the page. Then? Well, the Indians are grossly under-represented; I'd like to beef that up a bit. And I'm sure you'll not be surprised to read that I want to beef up the Oz representation!
I have to admit, I'm not rushing into the task of identifying the "missing persons", probably for similar or identical reasons to those you have identified.
"I shall be happy to be proved wrong" - Not as happy as I'll be. But I have no expectations that I'll be doing so.
" ... are not in the list article " - Ta. "All contributions greatfully received!!"
"he is a fellow of the Rhodes Foundation (new article needed?)" - Yeah. Probably. But one thing at a time ...
(Q: How do you eat an elephant? A: Slowly, and in small pieces.)
"What is special about JACKSON SCHOLAR Baboke Dambe?" - I have NO idea! I suspect it's some sort of typo. The source data contains many inconsistencies, typos, spelling errors, and some plain outright errors. There are also some unexpected entries: e.g. ('Mousavizadeh', 'Nader', 'Denmark', 'Christ Church', 1992) and ('Boone', 'Jan', 'Netherlands', 'Nuffield', 1993).
Yeah, well. Bedtime. Thanks for your interest and efforts. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/Archive_to_2009_December&oldid=1173526576"