User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2011 May 22

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

Open Cascade

Hello, RHaworth, I was still in the process of creating an article about Open Cascade company when you deleted it. Was is due to the lack of external references? I was going to add them, but didn't even have a chance to finish. And now I cannot even move the finished article from my user space since it's in the blacklist. What can I do now to have this article published? Thank you. DoceNNt (talk) 09:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

[Title width guide]

++++ delete above here if no further edits - already in archive. If further edits, move below here.

Hunter Plastics Limited

Hi RHaworth. You have just deleted a page created for Hunter Plastics Limited. When the page was marked for speedy deletion I thought I gave a sufficient explanation of importance and notability. Hunter Plastics Limited have been a major and innovative force in their industrial sector and (to me) as a new page it stands up pretty well against other similar pages that have not been deleted. I think, like a lot of pages about companies, the page will get better with time as others contribute to it, but it is a pity to have to bend the basic initial history and structure of the page out of shape to give an early demonstration of great notability purely to stop it getting deleted within 12 hours of going live. Can you please reconsider your decision to delete this article.

(Completely separate comment: the oldest posts to this page are in the middle with later posts being placed at both the top and bottom. Hmm.)

Thank you. — MyrtleDene (talk) 17:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your insight. (Note to self: must try harder) MyrtleDene (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Centurion Boats

You recently deleted a page created for Centurion Boats. After reading several pages on wakeboard and watersports boats that are already resident in Wikipedia I noticed that there was not a page for Centurion Boats. Centurion is a prominent watersports boat manufacturer that has been building boats since 1976. They do not have very good SEO/SEM as evidenced by their low google ranking, but Centurion has been active in wakeboarding, skiing and wakesurfing for over 30 years. I wrote the article to objective and illustrate the history of Centurion and its founder. I used references to Centurion documentation and some historical documents found online. I used the format of other watersports boat manufacturers (notably MasterCraft and Malibu Boats) which are already on wikipedia. Please reinstate the page for Centurion.

If there are edits that you think I should make please let me know and I would be happy to make them to add or remove additional information. Thank you. -- Surfnavy (talk) 14:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

RelayFoods.com

Hi Roger, A few weeks ago you deleted the article for Relay Foods. Your comments were certainly understandable. I've completely retooled the article after spending considerable time gaining a better knowledge of WP's aim and policies. You can find a draft here: User:Wkl5n/RelayFoods.com. I would like for it to be reconsidered for publication. Can you please advise on the best next steps that I should take? Thank you, Roger.

  • The only retooling I can see is the deletion of several paragraphs. There is no extra evidence of notability. I suspect that until the service is available in a lot more than two cities in one state it will be deemed non-notable. You can submit your draft via AfC but do not set your hopes too high. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the quick feedback, Roger; it's very helpful. On the topic of notability, I included with this edit three "See also" references to WP articles on companies that offer a similar service. After following this particular company for a bit (I monitor e-commerce, emerging technologies, and the Red Sox fanatically!), I was also able to verify--and cite--my suspicion that they were in fact funded by a prominent venture capital group recently. In the 15 years I've followed this line of business, I've learned that such an investment doesn't take place on a whim; the companies under consideration of substantial investment must be "worthy of notice" and not just a "temporary" fad :) Those findings (in addition to a better understanding of WP protocol) led me believe that this article could indeed be found notable. Am I off-base in my assumptions? I've found your comments re. other articles on this page insightful, so please advise. And yes, I'll go the AfC route if you think that's best. Thank you.Wkl5n (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

  • The "see also" links are pointless - how do they provide evidence for the notability of Relay Foods? I repeat, I am very dubious about notability - see what they think at AfC. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Interesting take on "See also" links, but given your expertise, I'll surely take you at your word. My rationale stemmed from the fact that the content of the other three articles bears striking resemblance to that of Relay Foods. That is, under the umbrella of online grocers, one would reasonably expect to see Relay Foods included, as are similar companies like the three listed. Regardless, I truly appreciate your honesty and feedback, Roger. I'll take it to AfC; thanks for the suggestion.Wkl5n (talk) 20:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Austin Stowell

I was wondering if you could reevaluate the listing for Austin Stowell, as I have provided several sources of credible information to support his biographical article. One is an actual interview with Austin from a newspaper in his hometown, Kensington, CT. In addition, there is also an article online from Tampa Bay's newspaper, detailing his involvement with DOLPHIN TALE. Thank you! Rhstowell (talk) 04:26, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

blank pages

Hi there. You changed a site from Blank pages to Blank Pages. According to the website, neither word should be capitalised. Do you think it is worth amending?--TimothyJacobson (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

  • We call it a page or article not a site. Apart from their logo, I do not actually see the company's name in plain text anywhere on their rather silly website. But if you think it should be changed, be bold - change the page text first including {{lowercase title}}. If you are not allowed to do the move, ask at requested moves for an admin to do it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:54, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks. Just had another look at the website. There are a couple of places where it is spelt in lower case (in plain text). Thanks for advice. Will have a go at amending it now--TimothyJacobson (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Obama Bin Laden

I put a talk page segment and an edit summary to say "Hey, this is a plausible typo". This news story even talks about it. And yet after another person nominated it, it was deleted. Wikipedia:CSD#R3 says that implausible typos are speedily deleted. This is not an implausible typo. I am notifying you and the person who nominated the page for deletion. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

  • What other person? Only one person nominated it for deletion and I agreed with their concern. But if you really want it, have it. Please get into the habit of creating links when you discuss articles on talk pages. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:46, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
    • "Please get into the habit of creating links when you discuss articles on talk pages" - I do not understand what this means. Would you mind showing me an example?
      • EDIT: I see. I didn't think it was necessarily to link the page itself (it had been deleted), but from now on I'll link the page itself.
    • The edit summary did not mention anything about agreement about a particular rationale - it just said "R3: Recently-created, implausible" - So I had no way of knowing what the thought process was. The edit summary from the user was "Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G10)" - So in fact he used a different rationale than the one you used to delete ("R3") - So it would look like you had a different opinion on why it should be speedy deleted.
    • Even if the admin agrees with a particular rationale, the rationale must fit a speedy deletion condition, or the speedy should not happen. If the admin agrees, he/she can decline the speedy but then message the nominator "Hi! Why not make a Redirects for Discussion about this?"
    • WhisperToMe (talk) 23:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
  • What on earth are you talking about? What I see is "2011-05-02T15:51:04 ConcernedVancouverite (talk | contribs | block) (48 bytes) (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD R3). (TW))". True, there is a "Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G10)" but that is from 2009 and had been deleted at that time. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

interview request

Hello, My name is Natalia Olaru and I am a final year master student in the Corporate Communication programme at the Aarhus School of Business in Denmark. I am currently working on my final paper on the topic of the motivation of users to create content on collaborative media websites, the focus being Wikipedia. As a sample I chose the English and Danish portals. I would like to invite you for an online interview on the topic of what motivates you, as a user, to participate in editing and creating articles for this platform. Your real identity, and wikipedia account will be kept confidential through the paper. I plan on doing the actual interviews in the period between 6st and the 15th of May via Skype, MSN, Google Talk or Yahoo Messenger. I am, however, open to other channels of communication too. Please let me know if you would like to participate in this interview and the preferred channel. Thank you, -- MulgaEscu (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Happy to participate. I have never used any of the four channels you mention but I could probably manage any other than Skype (that needs special hardware?). You could even try POTS - numbers e-mailed. Needless to say before doing any interview, have a look at the victim's contributions and logs to get a feel for what they do here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

blocking of user SKD Marketing

I guess that SKD stands for Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden. If so then this user should own all copyrights related to his contributions in Albertinum. Steffen Kaufmann (talk) 16:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  • The copied page shows at the bottom "© Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden 2011". SKD, using a proper user name, must: change that copyright notice to a CC licence or give permission via OTRS, or both. Until then, it is a copyvio. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Okay, thanks for the explanation. Elsewhere I had the feeling to be mixed with this user (because we have similar letters in the name and I got messages about his contributions). So I just wanted to clarify that he is in all probability serious, but not necessarily familiar with the established contribution rules. SK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.240.229.252 (talk) 12:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Algonkian Writers Conference

Dear Roger, On the matter above, I simply followed the format of other writers conferences listed on W for a long time. Please do tell what notability links would work? Blog reviews by attendees? Listings in independent and valued sources like Associated Writing Programs? It's just that writers conferences, as such, are not usually subject to major news articles, any more than an educational institution. Thanks for your time. — RGallison999 (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Blogs are not usually deemed reliable sources. "Listings in independent and valued sources" are exactly what we need. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Dear Roger, I have: http://writing.shawguides.com/thealgonkianwriterworkshops/ and http://www.publishersmarketplace.com/members/mneff/ and http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nyc-pitch-and-shop-conference-turns-novel-writers-into-rising-commercial--stars-including-algonkian-conferences-alum-ann-wertz-garvin-author-of-on-maggies-watch-120810344.html by PRNewsWire, valued highly by Google. Thanks for your time. A listing in Wikipedia is highly valued. Thank you also for your objective stance. Regards, RGallison999 (talk) 01:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Roger, Here is another: http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/express-yourself/1 Can I take a chance on building the page again. Please let me know. Regards, RGallison999 (talk) 20:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Roger, hi. Okay, gave it another go. Thank you for your patience. Will be more than glad to edit as you instruct. RGallison999 (talk) 18:19, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Coastal Development Hazards

Hello. I'll try to save the article. I'm not sure that a big red template was the best choice. The editor is new, and this might upset her/him after all that hard work, and just an hour after it hitting the mainspace. Perhaps a gentle message on a talk page would do the trick. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Dare (agency)

Hi there. You recently (14 April) deleted an article pertaining to Dare (agency), an advertising agency based in London. I understand that this was considered to be 'unambiguous advertising' and I wondered if you would agree to reinstating it such that we could amend the content to read more in a more encyclopaedic style? As I am sure you are aware, precedent for this kind of page exists with numerous other agencies and similar organisations having Wikipedia entries. Supporting examples:

I would be grateful for your corespondence and counsel on reinstating the page. I disclose that I do work for said agency but am reasonably experienced on Wikipedia with a history in contributing to featured articles in the past.--John Gibbard (talk) 17:55, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

  • I have seen this phenomenon once or twice before: an article has survived for years, then someone from the company turns it into spam and it gets deleted. Does the name Jemimabokaie (talk · contribs) suggest anything to you? I have e-mailed you two states of the article. I do not need to reinstate it. You simply re-create it (with a lower case "a" on "agency"!). If your new text uses any of the old, and the new article survives for a week, let me know and I will restore the old text behind the new. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Deletion error

You inadvertently deleted this image that had been used by several templates (e.g the USPTO Issued Patents Template) asserting that it was redundant, but the suggested alternative does not work at small sizes. Is there a way to recover the removed file? — Aldaron • T/C 16:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Deletion was certainly not inadvertent! Taking more time than it deserves, I have created a comparison near the bottom of this page. The fact is that 45px is far too small to show the seal properly. Tinkering with the image is just not worth doing. But if you want it, you might as well have it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks! — Aldaron • T/C 17:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Fime

You speedily deleted an identical article under G11, Fime international medical expo, would you get this one, too, please? Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, done. Thanks, though. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 19:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

PC TSC

Greetings. You recently deleted the PC TSC page, which was a description page for a popular software tool, based entirely on pages for other, similar tools. Is there no circumstance that software tools should be described on Wikipedia? How could the page have been changed, to permit it to remain? Jonathan E. Brickman (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Broadband universal service

You recently marked the broadband universal service page for deletion because of "original research / fork of existing articles". I don't know much about that subject -- which existing articles is it forking/synthesizing? Thanks. :) Banaticus (talk) 06:26, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Partially a fork of National Broadband Plan (United States). In part my AfD nomination is a protest against university tutors who seem only capable of thinking in terms of whole new articles - there are masses of improvement work they could set their students on to. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm told that the current ambassador program is basically a pilot, an RFC, and will be running until September. At that point, it will shift from the current Public Policy focus to expand to all of Wikipedia. I can see why some teachers would want their students to create "new" articles. When a student has "contributed" to an already existing article, it can be difficult to accurately gauge their level of contribution (compared with simply accepting the whole article as the "student's" work). It's true, there are many other places that they could have the students focusing instead. Perhaps a topic on this subject could be started over in the ambassador section. :) Banaticus (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Public Policy Initiative research

Hi RHaworth/Archive to 2011 May 22,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

K-Delight and DJ Jabbathakut

Hello, you left a note on my page about the speedy deletion noms for the above articles, and I'm a bit ticked off that they've been deleted without giving me proper time to reply. I've created over a hundred articles, with dozens of DYKs, and someone should have assumed that the articles could be expanded (or at least that I deserved the chance to do so) to provide proof of notability. I don't know who deleted, so I'm not criticising you personally, but it was really rather rude of the person to do so with such haste.

That said, would there be any chance of the text being restored to my userspace? Are you in a position to do so? If so, I'd be most grateful :) Regards, Malick78 (talk) 21:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

  • You kindly created links to the two articles. I suggest you follow those links and you will find out who did the deletion. Creating unreferenced stubs in the hope that others will expand might have worked five years ago. Today we expect the refs to be there from the start. Userfied to User:Malick78/Sandbox. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:37, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
    • But sometimes you (and others) are far too quick on the draw (as it were). Silent Billy (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you RHaworth for doing that. I would still say that there was no hurry to delete (nothing libelous...), however, so the editor in question could have waited. I'll take it up with them :) Thanks again Malick78 (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Michael Godard

Bro, you deleted my article. I had a pretty solid argument going, I don't know if this is the right way to handle a talk page, so don't freak out on me. I would like you to put back the article. Thank You, and if this isn't the right talk page, I reiterate, don't yell at me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satan12345666789 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Roger Savory

Hi Actually it imparts a lot of knowledge by showing major works of the scholar. The list was obtained via permission through email of a professor in University of Toronto. I think I would like a 3rd opinion as I see no relavent policy of deleting it. Thank you--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Here's a third opinion. Firstly, providing a complete list of Savory's many writings is not appropriate content to constitute over 90% (by volume) of his Wikipedia biography. Secondly, the list having been obtained privately through email from a professor, means that the information does not come from a verifiable published source and therefore is not suitable for a Wikipedia article.
If you wish to seek a third opinion more formally, you are of course welcome to do so at WP:3O. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 06:56, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Gold Hat/monobook.js

Hi. Please undelete the above; it was just restored per my request at:

And please back up a rev to remove the del-tag; I can't edit it via this account.

Thanks, Barong 08:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Terima kasih, Barong 05:59, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

  • I would like to know why you cannot edit as Gold Hat and why you have two accounts. But I suspect the answer my be long and boring. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Ocean Transfer

Hi, You deleted an article about the band Ocean Transfer -- can you describe how to make this article more relevant? It reads, to me, just like every other article about a band. Isn't 'relevance' subjective in terms of the arts? I am new to Wikipedia, but don't really understand with the grounds upon which you've deleted my post. Thanks, Brian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sousabr (talk • contribs) 00:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

  • You don't even need to try. Just wait. When the band becomes notable, an editor with no COI who knows how to establish notability will write about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

George L. Fox (clown)

Thanks! --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Spellstorm

Could I have the deleted text for the Spellstorm page? I am not going to repost it here, since as you say there is no help for some of us who haven't a degree in wikiwhatever, but I would appreciate whatever the text was so I can post it somewhere else.

It is only of relevance to some 1000 or so gamers in the metro-Toronto area, so probably does not qualify for Wiki hosting anyway, but those requirements were not clear in the place that one can create the page in the first place. Putting information where people who would need it are in the position to need it is a useful way of interface design, and while I appreciate that Wikipedia is free, and I have and may personally continue to contribute to Mr. Wales' organization, I think your attitude is not conducive to making entries better, but rather to denying access. I hope your "work" continues to give you pleasure. — Dimonic (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The block of User:Bot1079

I guess this may be related: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The3rdclone --| Uncle Milty | talk | 12:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Van Gogh Early Works

Hi, I see that you made the move the Van Gogh Early Works article to "Early Works of Van Gogh" - which actually seems like a good name change. Now all the links to the article need to be updated. Are you willing to help divide and conquer the updates in the List of works by Vincent van Gogh and 12-20 articles that refer to it since this seemed to be an important move for you? Thanks so much!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Appreciate you doing that! It's been a crazy day and I've been blindsided by a number of things lately. I'll find and catch the rest. For what it's worth, I had agreed that it was a good name change. Was it necessary to be rude and a little mean though?--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

  • I consider my first sentence was a remark worth making. To help me avoid being rude in the future, please give me a revised wording which you would find acceptable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:46, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I think I am just very spoiled having worked in professional environments with the type of positions where I am unaccustomed to being talked to that way. (Isn't disability great!) That's probably a good way to leave it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Reverting

This edit didn't just restore the COI tag as you said in your edit summary, it also wiped out a series of intermediate edits and reinstated a bunch of incorrect links that I had fixed. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 01:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Humble apologies. Now fixed. Why did you not do it? There is still scope for savagely reducing the number of links but at least we don't have "rice" linked every time it is used! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
    • It was late, I was tired, and I didn't want to deal with it.  :-) More pruning done this morning. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:23, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Uh.

Excuse me? Be quiet. I had permission to use File:Sydney at night by dcafe.jpg from the author, hence why I uploaded it. The Sydney article is full of crap images and none of them capture the city's beauty, it needs some decent ones. Ashton 29 (talk) 02:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

The stated permission [by-nc-nd] does not meet our minimum standards in several key respects, being more restrictive than the gfdl/cc tag you applied. We cannot accept items with restrictions that are replaceable by comparable items with more "reusable" free-licensing. If it's really creative-commons (flickr is firewalled off from me at this location), that's great. But that means it's *completely* reusable, not just on websites and not just in articles related to the city in the image, and there is no requirement to send the photographer whatever random artwork I make out of it. It really has to be a full free-reuse release or nothing. DMacks (talk) 07:23, 13 May 2011 (UTC) [copied from file talk:Sydney at night by dcafe.jpg]
There is only one solution. The licence on the original image must be changed to one of the two which are compatible with Wikimedia: Attribution License or Attribution-ShareAlike License. When that has been done, you may upload the image to the Commons. And when that is done, you still do not use the {{self}} tag! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:01, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Why delete my post

Hello Haworth, Am trying to make a page for a site magmapage, why still on the job you delete my post, you should have allow me to finish before deleting it, can you give me reason for deleting my post ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magmanetlink (talk • contribs) 17:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Sebastienism

What criteria does my page need to meet?/why did it get deleted? Hi. I was wondering why my page about Sebastienism was deleted, their was no offence, one sided opinion on anything geneouly wrong. Is it that I am not allowed to create such pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hello5885 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

50,000 is a stretch. I'm sure notability can be achieved with far less adherents than that. Also, Sebastianism is probably the topic where Hello5885 should be spending his time. Article has no references, maybe he can give it some! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Robert J. Gallagher

Roger You recently placed speedy deletion on my article on Robert J. Gallagher as infringement due to wordpress. As a novice on wikipedia I had unknowing that it would be a violation pasted my article from wikipedia to wordpress assuming as author it was not a problem. I have deleted if from wordpress. Professor Gallagher's mission and his leadership as an educator has been instrumental in new energy and sustainable innovation platform of information exchange and education. Please provide your counsel in what I need to do to have his article remain. thank you. Daisy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisygallagher (talk • contribs) 03:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

P:EG

Didn't you read the talk page before deleting this? Obviously the bot can't read talk pages, but I did explain that this redirect points to Portal:East Germany which is currently being created in userspace by agreement with WikiProject Germany. The portal is is likely to go live happen within the next week. Your action, well intended I'm sure, was a little hasty and a note to me would have been polite. Never mind, I'll just crack on with the portal. --Bermicourt (talk) 06:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

  • The bot and I are in agreement that we do not need the redirect until the portal page is in its proper place. But why not move it now - it seems ready enough to go live. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you not understand what a stub is for?

I re-created an article for El Goonish Shive because I think it deserves an article. If it does not, then please also speedy delete Queen of Wands, Help Desk (webcomic) and every other damn article on this site that references anything that dares to be published on the web.

I am sick and tired of seeing things deleted from Wikipedia because some stuck-up ingrate thinks they aren't worthy of inclusion just because they personally haven't heard of the subject in question.

Yes, I created a stub article for El Goonish Shive. The reason I did that was because it was a) the middle of the night, b) other people know a lot more about it and its author than I do, and c) stubs are, as far as I'm aware, allowed under Wikipedia policy.

If that has changed, please do explain to the entire community why you think that is the case, because I'm damn well interested to hear why. -- Syniq (talk) 14:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Even a stub must make an assertion of notability but in this case you have to work even harder because of the AfD decision. If you want a new article, you must go to deletion review. I have e-mailed you a longer version. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Bob Phillips

My entry Bob Phillips (Writer/Producer/Broadcaster) was recently deleted as a "G3:blatant hoax", which it is not. A collaborative book "Like No Other Business", and a museum, as well as exhibits in others are all things that exist and are verifiable. — Tiermann (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

  • I am not surprised that it was tagged as hoax. Absolutely no evidence that the guy exists, still less the links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources which are needed to make an article stick. Even now apparently the best you can provide is two links which mention him only in passing. If you can create a properly referenced article, feel free to re-submit. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Techophilia

Hi there, You deleted a page which was marked for speedy deletion. But all the data given as such on page are accurate and they depict the information about a student tech group. Please if possible amend the decision or notify about the possible changes that are to be made out there to Techophilia. — Voxedup (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

  • This is Wikipedia not facebook. It is highly unlikely that your small group of students will ever be deemed notable enough. You could try deletion review but I think your chances are very slim indeed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for replying but in any case , this ain't a small group, with more than 300 registered user, you won't call it a small group , would you ? anyways I understand your concern about the facebook v/s wikipedia stuff. Do lemme know how can I have a similar sort of page in near future ? DRV at present would be a slim chance as you said, so what are the possibilities in future and with what amendments Voxedup (talk) 22:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Vox, it's absolutely useless talking to this man. He speedy deletes articles without bothering to read them, and without regard to Wikipedia rules. Just accept defeat and move on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NeutralityPersonified (talk • contribs) 22:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I guess so man :-/ What's the use of having such arbit rules if you can't even consider reviews. Not even replying :( how can a new group support it's wiki page with such a mentallity. I guess this was not wikipedia all about Voxedup (talk) 23:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

For any article you need to establish the following:
  • Importance - has the club won a significant award? has it got some "newsworthyness" outside your University? (see WP:A7)
  • Notability - is it covered by multiple, independent sources for a sustained period of time (see WP:NOTE)
as it stands the subject of this article doesn't meet either criterion, and is unlikely to ever meet either criteria since it is a university club. If, in the future both the importance and notability criteria are satisfied, then by all means, create the article again. Mrmatiko (talk) 06:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

BAGBot: Your bot request RWHbot

Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RWHbot as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 01:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.

Ben Jones (American cartoonist)

Hi there. I've been on holiday recently and didn't see this article nominated for deletion until too late. I am happy to flesh it out with context but I would rather not start from scratch. When you have a moment, can you restore the last rev to my userspace? Many thanks. --Driscoll (talk) 04:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • You would have been just as well starting from scratch. But restored to User:Driscoll/Sandbox/Ben Jones - I was surprised at the amount of editorial attention it had received in such a short time. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Appreciate it nonetheless. Thank you. --Driscoll (talk) 13:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Talk:BAQ Epicor 9

You may want to userfy the associated page with Talk:BAQ Epicor 9 that you deleted as an A1, just in case you didn't see that request. Logan Talk Contributions 13:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Society of Ukrainian Catholic Students "Obnova"

Hi RHaworth. You deleted this page after I'd marked it for speedy deletion (one of my very first), and now it seems to have popped back up again, with essentially the same content and no indication in the article history that it had been deleted - I guess because it's been created again as a new page? I wasn't sure if this was allowed - can you enlighten me? Docben (talk) 21:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • There is indication in the history but it is pretty subtle - a small "View logs for this page" link at top left. See for example Rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock. There is nothing to stop people re-creating articles - that is the fun of new page patrolling! Keep up the tagging. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
    • The article was deleted through negligibility - - namely, through a small number of participants. But this is a decisive importance in the organization? And, was added unit of pilgrimage, which is organized revival. In the pilgrimage involved nearly 1000 pilgrims every year (without the clergy and leaderships of UGCC). I doubt that this organization is not important. — 213.174.2.7 (talk) 08:23, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
  • IP contribution. Ignored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Cropping Geograph images

Hi there, I've noticed you correcting some images I've uploaded to Commons that are based on Geograph images, since you alerted me to this last July. I still don't really understand how it all works, so could you tell me what I need to do exactly? For example, I just uploaded File:The 'Casino' building at Blackpool Pleasure Beach (cropped).jpg. I see that it's in Category:Images from the Geograph British Isles project with broken templates. Could you talk me through what I need to do differently? Thanks, --BelovedFreak 21:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Now fixed. I have never used derivativeFX so I don't know the relative merits of (use derivativeFX then correct its licence tags afterwards) vs. (create a derivative image and upload it by hand). See also this advice to get the highest res image before cropping. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing. I find derivativeFX very handy to use, but looking closely at the diff of how you fixed it, I think it might be less complicated to just do it by hand in future. Hopefully you won't have to be fixing any more for me! :) --BelovedFreak 09:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

China Image Film Festival

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/China Image Film Festival: you might wish to modify your nomination statement. Per WP:V, we do not care if that assertion is true of not, as long as it is verifiable, in that readers can check that the assertion has already been published by a reliable source. It has. The provided EL of CNTV does specifically state: "...Taking on the challenge is the China Image Film Festival, the largest Chinese film festival in Europe". Just saying. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • No. But I will not be distressed if there is an overwhelming keep motion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
    Well... I will myself give the article some attention toward cleanup and expanding sources. If it might end up as a "keep"... it may as well be worth keeping. Best wishes and thanks. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 06:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Divine Truth deletion

Could you please provide the reason on why you deleted Divine Truth as the reason that you cited does not seem correct due to the guideline that states it is notable simply because: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list."

Since the cult has now also had seven minutes of airtime on Australian national TV and a few news articles in prominent Australian papers then I would think that it meets the above guideline?

The following links from Digital Journal and ACA show that it has received significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject? Your clarification would be very much appreciated. — Exazonk (talk) 23:44, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

  • The seven minutes of airtime were not mentioned in the article. That is why it got deleted. I suggest you create a properly referenced article and re-submit via Articles for Creation. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I've resubmitted the article and I'm now waiting for feedback. Exazonk (talk) 08:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Copy of deleted article

Hi, I had a page which was recently deleted. I would like to restore the page to my user space in order to edit it until eventual approval. Can you help? The article was entitled GTS Translation plugin and my user name is davidgrunwald. Thanks, David —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidgrunwald (talk • contribs) 07:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Not very spammy but very short on independent references. I note that you were presenting the paper in Pisa which gives you a COI and my browsers say that AMTA-2010-Postediting.pdf is damaged. Text e-mailed - if twice, apologies WP was being very slow. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Would you be willing to work with me on this so it can be acceptable to Wikipedia? — Davidgrunwald via e-mail

  • You cannot be serious. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your system is notable and writes about it here. Incidentally, why did you come to me with the restoration request. Have we interacted before? DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs) deleted the article and would almost certainly have e-mailed you the text on request. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador sweatshirt

Hi! This is the last call for signing on for a Wikipedia Ambassador hooded sweatshirt (in case you missed the earlier message in one of the program newsletters about it). If you would like one, please email me with your name, mailing address, and (US) sweatshirt size. We have a limited number left, so it will be first-come, first-served. (If more than one size would work for you, note that as well.)

Cheers, Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Future Directed Therapy

Dear Mr. Haworth, I am writing to ask about the deletion of a page I posted. I am new to Wikipedia and would appreciate your guidance. I created a page about Future Directed Therapy. When I came back to look at it though I couldn’t find it and the site indicated that it was deleted because it was a duplicate of a page that had been taken down before. I have never posted anything before and am wondering what I can do to help get the page back. Thanks! Sincerely, Sarah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onyx999 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Moved Still Life of Vincent van Gogh (Holland)

Hello, I see that you removed Holland from "Still Life of Vincent van Gogh (Holland)". I named it that way based upon 1) previous advice from the VA wikiproject group about naming groups of works, 2) because I am going to do an article about other periods, like Paris, 3) it would be a very long article to combine all the still life into one article and 4) each period had very marked differences in the work. I am going to move the article back again (I don't think you can undo a move) for all of those reasons. I appreciate your intention to keep titles brief, it's just in this case there was a reason for the longer name.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

How do we go about deleting the two pages you created in the moves?--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Having been accused of rudeness before, I will merely note that there never has been an article called Still Life of Vincent van Gogh (Holland) and ask you to explain why you quoted that title above. It did occur to me that (Holland) was there for a purpose. Choosing a title is fraught with problems: what is the plural of "still life" - neither "still lives" nor "still lifes" seems right; is it "of" or "by"; do we disambiguate with "(Paris)", ", Paris" or go for still life works created by Vincent van Gogh in Paris? Having the title as a singular seems very ugly to me but Modernist has endorsed it so I will accept still life by Vincent van Gogh (Holland). But I would like to ask modernist why paintings of Amsterdam by Vincent van Gogh is allowed as a plural! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Still life paintings by Vincent van Gogh (Holland) would work too, and would probably be less awkward...Modernist (talk) 10:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Whatever you and Modernist work out is fine with me, my key point was about removal of "Holland", which I know Modernist understands and defer to his wisdom on this. Thank you for being a gentleman, it's appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Domesday Reloaded

Hi Roger; you may have recently seen on the BBC local TV news items on the Domesday Reloaded website. The pages in here are 4 km x 3 km squares, named after their position in the National Grid Ref, but not all positions are valid: the eastings of the desired object are given in metres, rounded down to a whole multiple of 4000 m; similarly, the northings are rounded down to a multiple of 3000 m. For example, my nearest station (Didcot) is at SU525905, which as you know may be written 452500190500, and so this falls within the block whose SW corner is at 452000189000, so the URL is http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/domesday/dblock/GB-452000-189000

It therefore occurs to me that the GeoHack page could include a suitable link. Where would I request a GeoHack enhancement? --Redrose64 (talk) 16:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Bill Vorn

I just realized that my Wikipedia page has been deleted. I have never been contacted about this. This text comes from my website (www.billvorn.com) and is 100% mine. Speaking of copyright, do you know that Amazon sells books made of Wikipedia's pages? — Bill Vorn via e-mail.

  • If a person qualifies for a Wikipedia article, there is no obligation to contact them at any stage about that article, neither when it is created nor if it is deleted. I strongly recommend you to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you. In this case, you may be lucky - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Vorn and try contacting AllyD (talk · contribs). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Video Graphics Association

Regarding deletion of Video Graphics Association (VGA) page on Wikipedia. I am Chintan Varma, a B.Tech petroleum engineering student at PDPU, INDIA. Now, our page was about the club of movie-making and after a few days we were about to add links, some works we have done till now, the achievements. I simply fail to understand the reason this page was deleted. I would also like to ask you if I can create that page again as I will be updating the page with every possible information that I've got about the club... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.196.67.147 (talk) 03:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Please a) pay attention to the simple matter of formatting a message - did you not see the ridiculous page widening you had created? (see here) and b) sign messages with ~~~~. Of course you can re-create the page again. But however much information you add, it stands a very good chance of being deleted again. A student group at one university is very rarely deemed notable for Wikipedia. My best advice is: create your own website; on Wikipedia the most you can expect is one sentence in the Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

bathtubs.co

May I know why my article bathtubs.co got deleted? I think I've provided reasons why it is not a spam. Can I know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinitehate (talk • contribs) 10:35, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

  • OK perhaps it was not spam but certainly it lacked evidence of notability. Perhaps you should start by writing a properly referenced article about Decorative Home Products. If that sticks you can create bathtubs.co as a redirect to it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden Challenge Coin

This article had already been removed, but than restored by someone else (keegan). Why have you now deleted it again????? The following is from the talk page of Keegan. Please restore this article and photo once again! [Totally unnecessary inclusion of this thread now deleted.] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.11.6 (talk • contribs)

  • I do not talk to IP addresses especially one that cannot even provide the correct title of the article under discussion and that includes a discussion instead of linking to it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/Archive_to_2011_May_22&oldid=1172212406"