User talk:RHaworth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives[edit]

Speedy deletion User:Jvlarion[edit]

[Note to self - keep watching - Jvlarion (talkcontribs)]

Deletion of MITHILAsmita[edit]

Namaskar (greetings) RHaworth, should not this page be restored and given some time so that multiple sources, external links other than of organisation are also added over time. I had taken major part from organisation's website hence it might look as a promotion, but there were lot many sources on the web and print. These sources would dilute the perceived 'promotional' tone. Ankurjoshi87 (talk) 01:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your organisation is notable and is prepared to write more than a one sentence stub. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but please dont jump to conclusion that it is my organisation. Geographical indications [1] (IPR) were provided to Madhubani art and very few organisations are working for that art. Ankurjoshi87 (talk) 18:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

  • You have passed my simple-minded COI test and I am prepared to believe that you do not have a serious COI. I cannot imagine what earthly purpose the link you provided might serve - please explain. Restored to user:Ankurjoshi87/sandbox - we need sound evidence of notability, not masses of promotional text - probably copyvios. I am allergic to shouting so a better title would probably be MithilAsmita. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Ohh, apologies for not describing about the link. The link to wiki page of Madhubani art and Geographical indications were provided to set the context that my intentions was not to promote the organisation, but to highlight that it was government of India's initiative to preserve traditional art. But very few organisations are coming forward. The name with titles was provided because I thought that organisation was registered in that form and might mean something. Thanks for your inputs will explore posts from other sources too, so that language is not promotional in nature. Few links to page were posted by someone else after I created the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankurjoshi87 (talkcontribs) 03:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Would you please guide, what next is to be done? Thanks Ankurjoshi87 (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Please re-read my previous message. I think it gives a clear indication of what next is to be done. If you disagree, please explain why. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Archives bug[edit]

By the way, I think there may be something adrift with your archives, which show up as a lot of bullet points with no text and no way to access any content. I assume that is not your intention? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Please be more specific - where are you seeing bullet points with no text. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Archives, at the head of this page. Clicking the [show] link reveals four vertical columns of bullet points, with 30 in each except that the top two are missing from the first column. There is no text, and no apparent way to actually get to the archives from there (Safari 5.1.10). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

  • By a spooky co-incidence I was just about to go to the Village Pump to propose the use of {{div col}} for categories when your message arrived. The problem I think lies with the {{div col|4}} tag that I am using to show it 4-up. Opera, Firefox and Chrome are all happy with it. Internet Explorer just shows the list 1-up - but then no proper person uses Internet explorer. But Safari displays the problem you are getting. All these tests running under good old Windows XP. I have put up at a test version at User talk:RHaworth/Archives bug. Feel free to play with it.
Turning to my Asus Transformer Pad TF300T tablet running Android: Opera, Firefox and Chrome are again all happy with it. But the browser that came with the machine, called simply "Browser" shows the problem. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:30, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of article The Louwalan Clan[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if it is possible to have an article I created restored as a draft. The article, The Louwalan clan, was deleted due to 'Unambiguous copyright infringement of this page'. I did not understand why as the blog mentioned is actually my blog which I had noted in the talk section?

The article covers a popular tale in the folklore of the Kalenjin ethnic group, a category that I have been adding content to and I would like to do so as per the guidelines of the community. Please let me know what I may have missed or what would be required in terms of editing. Thank you very much for your assistance.Eren Gatiat (talk) 09:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Go to your blogspot page and add to the bottom of it the same cc-by-sa-4.0 notice as appears at the bottom of every article here. Re-create your article - it needs a bit of tweaking to make the tone more encyclopedic. Place at the top an HTML comment pointing out that it is copied from your blog which has an appropriate licence. Repeat that message in the edit summary and on the talk page. Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Gadicherla V. R. Rao[edit]

Hi RHaworth, I started a wikipedia page for Gadicherla V. R. Rao, a rocket scientist who invented the optimum Bell Nozzle (called Rao Nozzle) during the Apollo Moon landing program. Since then every rocket ever flown in the world uses Rao Nozzle and every university that teaches Aerospace engineering (in particular Rocket Propulsion) teaches Rao Nozzle to its students. This include MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Georgia Tech and others.

When Rao passed away in 2005, his obituary was published in a news paper. A friend of mine has sent me the paper cutting. It contained the photo of Dr. Gadicherla and some details about his life including education, employment, and others. When I used the details to create a page, it was deleted because of the copyright concerns. Later I have tracked down the newspaper "Ventura County Star" in California. Spoke with the editor and obtained his consent to use the photo and details in building a wikipedia page. As the copyright owner of the obituary, he granted the permission through an email which I have sent to Wikipedia couple of weeks back. Now I was to recreate the page. Could you please let me know, how to go about it? Best regards, Kautilya1 (talk) 18:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

  • The article was deleted for lack of notability, not copyvio reasons. So you will need to provide proper evidence of notability. As to using copyright material, read this. Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • RHaworth, you are in error! It is plain to see that G12 was invoked when you deleted the page in question. Further, you may not delete a page for "lack of notability" as a speedy deletion. Such deletion requests should be taken to WP:AFD. Are you aware of this? Kindly have the decency to let us know. Thank you! -- Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The article was deleted for WP:G12 and A7. When I said "lack of notability" above, I really meant "no indication of importance". I am very sorry, in future I shall try and remember the right wording. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

AFCH script[edit]

As you're using the old version of the AFCH script, please take a look at this discussion and the question (poll) raised below it. -- Gryllida (talk) 10:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

My sandbox deleted?[edit]

Why did you delete my sandbox? All remaining pictures were the ones that were not copyrighted. Thus, there was no reason anymore to delete it. Or was there some other rule I was not aware of? Best regards, Jeff5102 (talk) 11:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

  • If I had seen "all remaining pictures are ones that are not copyrighted" or similar wording, I would have removed the speedy tag. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

O, yes, before I forget: could you please mail me an old version? Since some old versions are deleted, I am not sure if I still got all correct links to all tv-stations. Best regards, Jeff5102 (talk) 07:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Abuja Declaration 1989[edit]

I just wanted to find out from your reputable self, why the Abuja Declaration 1989 was deleted? — 41.190.3.96 (talk) 07:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Assuming that you are responsible for this and this, please tell me where you have looked to find my reply? Or perhaps you were expecting it to arrive in your mind by telepathy? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:11, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Sophie Ann Hunter[edit]

Hi there, I noticed you deleted the articles Sophie Hunter (director) and Sophie Hunter (theatre director). An editor is trying to circumvent the deletions by creating an identical page under another name: Sophie Ann Hunter. Could you take care of this one as well? I'm new to Wikipedia and unsure how to go about it. Thank you! Avianax (talk) 18:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

If it does meet A7, which I doubt, slap {{db-a7}} at the top of the article and an administrator will arrive to take care of it. I caution you, however, that the article contains many assertions of notability and thus it would be unlikely to be deleted. Further attempts at deleting the article should be conducted using WP:AFD.--Launchballer 19:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Ahmedzaibaloch1121[edit]

Hello. I noticed that you just deleted a copyvio that I reported, so I thought I'd point you to the editor in question: Ahmedzaibaloch1121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). The account was created on 10 August 2014, and has so far received seven warnings for copyright violations, five relating to text and two related to images (the image you just speedied and one that was speedied as F9 yesterday). They have also had multiple other edits reverted as copyvios without being warned for it. In addition to that they have been blocked twice, once for copyvios and once for disruptive editing, which is "impressive" for a user account that is only just over a month old, and has had two "forced vacations". So would you please take a look at it, and put a stop to it? Or should I report it to WP:ANI? Thomas.W talk 09:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Blocked again. Let me know if you see the same pattern when the new block expires. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Asif Ali Lighari[edit]

Can you review this page? I think its sources does not give information about the person. i guess its sources are fake.--Owais khursheed (talk) 15:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Why do you think it fake? Because it references two works published before the kid was born as though they were his? Certainly a suspiciously large collection of refs for someone aged 21 at the time of publication. Also it is probably an autobio. But the real objection to the article is absence of evidence of notability. But why are you asking me? If you think it is fake - do something about it yourself. But I recommend AfD rather than {{db-hoax}}. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Chimpazi[edit]

why u delete my post User:Chimpazi/fiqh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimpazi (talkcontribs) 05:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Waste Conversion Pyrolysis[edit]

Dear RHawoth, The point is that I have published an article and it was deleted due to plagiarism reasons (Waste Conversion Pyrolysis). We published such articles at some other sources but the authorship belongs to our Company. That's why I got the publication permission [Ticket#2014081410006267]. How can I recover my publication? Thanks in advance! Zhstefanovich (talk) 10:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC) Evgeniya Stefanovich

  • KIndly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your process is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The Knowledge Centre for Agriculture Deletion[edit]

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

Algol 68G[edit]

I am rather bemused to see the ALGOL 68G article gone. This implementation of the ALGOL language is notable because it is the only one still maintained, and deleting it is doing the computer language historian a disservice. Choosing "advertising" as a criterium for deletion is odd, as this interpreter is free and open sourced. It serves a clear purpose in stating where it deviates from historic implementations, and by stating that this particular implementation is an interpreter rather than a compiler, which historic translators were.

Also, there are a lot of computer language articles, some from large companies, that really *are* blatant advertisements. In my opinion, the deletion of this article is an error, and I would like to see it back. — René Vincent Jansen (talk) 21:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Please learn to provide links when you talk about articles. ALGOL 68G was deleted for the simple reason that there was a total absence of independent evidence of notability. I would be happy to let you see the text so that you can create a new article - read this. Or talk to Algol68g (talk · contribs). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Please learn not to be condescending. I did address you in a civil manner, please return the favour. I did not provide links for fear that you are going to delete more. The perceived lack of notability is a subjective judgement on your part. This implementation has been discussed in various fora, e.g. the linkedin ALGOL forum. I provided you with clues as to its notability. If you restore it, I will add references. For the moment, you caused an unresolved reference in the main ALGOL article. Please reflect on the possibility that you are doing the historical computing community a disservice. — René Vincent Jansen (talk) 13:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I am sorry if you consider me condescending and I consider that my reply was completely civil. "For fear that you are going to delete more" - what on earth are you talking about? The only link I wanted you to provide was to ALGOL 68G which you did not do when you posted your first message. You are going to tell me that the following is condescending: my previous message contains this link - you clearly did not follow it. I am indicating that I consider that a well referenced article on this subject might well be viable so it may be worth your while spending a little time recreating it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:02, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I referred to blatant advertisements by software companies (that I still do not want you to delete). This is how I interpreted your mention of not provided links. If you consider a pointer to something nonexistent (because you deleted it) a link to be provided, you got me worried. It seems to say "I delete so much content, I cannot remember it." As your answers are void of content, at least until now, let me repeat my opinion of why ALGOL68G is of satisfactory notability: "This implementation of the ALGOL language is notable because it is the only one still maintained, and deleting it is doing the computer language historian a disservice. Choosing "advertising" as a criterium for deletion is odd, as this interpreter is free and open sourced. It serves a clear purpose in stating where it deviates from historic implementations, and by stating that this particular implementation is an interpreter rather than a compiler, which historic translators were." As for the other term used, "advertising", I think that slightly different rules should apply to free and open source products, as there is no marketing or profit involved. I commend Marcel van der Veer for his effort and I deplore your treatment of this article. Your assumption of me not following this link is incorrect. I do not need the text to be emailed, it was saved by several downstream servers. René Vincent Jansen (talk) 18:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I just checked what WP:G11 says. It says: "Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. If a subject is notable and the content can be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note:An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion." (my emphasis.) G11 is only about spam, as far as I can tell. It seems pretty farfetched to call the now deleted article about Algol-68G spam, the text was a completely neutral description of what Algol68G is. Please restore the page. Lasse Hillerøe Petersen (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Have you checked my logs? I think it is perfectly reasonable of me to say "I delete so much content, I cannot remember it." But why are you guys going on at me? Have I not made it clear that my suggestion is that you should re-create the page? What is stopping you? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Asif Ali Lighari[edit]

Hello, There is no rule in Wikipedia regarding age, the only thing is notability. He is notable as per Wikipedia:Notability (academics), lets see how discuusion goes further 37.143.14.157 (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Voted there. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 14:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Histories of deleted pages[edit]

Hi there, and thanks for your help evaluating my recent speedy deletion nominations. Is there really no way for non-admins to view histories of deleted pages? These speedy deletions are part of a cleanup effort of content that may have been generated by a large network of paid socks or meats. I've focused on the content so far and I was planning on dealing with the conduct issues afterwards, but if the cleanup effort interferes with the conduct investigation (e.g. setting up an SPI) then perhaps I should stop nominating pages for now? -- Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Don't stop. Certainly as far as CheckUser investigations go, all people with CheckUser rights also have admin rights. As to other investigations, you can always ask an admin. But why don't you request admin rights for yourself? Apparently self-nominations stand slightly less chance than others so I will nominate you if you ask. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm flattered, but isn't that a pretty involved process? And aside from acting responsibly is there any unwritten expectation that admins make any sort of time commitment? My participation is extremely erratic (due to off-wiki constraints). --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 21:29, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

  • It is a pretty straightforward process - see WP:RFA and it should all be over in seven days. That is the fun thing about being an admin - there are no performance targets - you do as little or as much as you feel like. (But to get the rights you may have to give the impression that you are going to do a lot!) Look at JamesR's stats - there are hundreds of admins who have never done more than a few admin actions. Look at successful requests for adminship to see how to do it and, possibly more usefully, unsuccessful adminship candidacies to see how not to do it! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I reviewed some past RFAs -- an interesting educational experience -- and it seems clear to me that at least at this point I have neither the requisite experience nor the inclination to be an admin. But going back to what you wrote about CheckUser investigations, I understand that SPI clerks can review deleted page histories but that doesn't help non-admin SPI requesters, who are the ones doing most of the investigation work (searching through edit histories to find evidence to present). --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 05:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I do take your point that it would be useful for investigation. Indeed I have considered proposing that an admin on one wiki should have "read-only" admin rights on all other wikis. Feel free to raise the matter at the Village Pump - the Policy section is probably the right one. But I think you may be told: "apply for adminship - it's no big deal and SPI work is a valid reason for requesting it".

French Urbanism Institute[edit]

I nominated it for speedy; you agreed and deleted it. There's a request from a reliable admin. on my talk p to restore it, so I did--I assume he will fix it as needed. DGG ( talk ) 18:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Suiside Inferno[edit]

A millitupak, yesterday

Suiside Inferno/This page has been locked. only admins have permission to create this page. Hi I created Suiside Inferno page a bunch of times and it was deleted bcuz I was new to Wikipedia and lacked knowledge to edit pages. Now I have references and proof that U need but it says U have a lock on Suiside Inferno page so I can't even edit it. I basically want u to remove the lock and grant me access to recreate or edit the page were I left off from. I have what U ask me for now so my page Suiside Inferno wont be deleted.....Thanks Suiside Inferno 22:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerunimo (talkcontribs)

  • You will fare better if you write proper English. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

What do you mean wait until somebody write about me? 1st off you have my rap name Suiside Inferno locked!! So how can anybody write about me if they can't even create the page if Suiside Inferno can only be created by admins? 2nd You must have not been doing your research on my resources I have been providing? Everybody knows Suiside Inferno. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerunimo (talkcontribs) 00:10, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello?? Did u receive my message? Suiside Inferno 01:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerunimo (talkcontribs)

  • Your childish use of u continues to annoy me. You were unusually lucky to receive a prompt reply to your previous message - normally you must be prepared to wait up to 24 hours for a reply here. I have checked your "resources" - I am unimpressed. The protection of the page will simply not be an impediment if the right author comes along. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Indeed. I have made a couple of trips to AN to request desalting (most infamously for Elvis' Greatest Shit) and have always gone with strong evidence of notability in hand. Never had a problem. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Ritchie, I had a silly idea: we could define the Tupak as a unit of notability for rappers. The threshold for inclusion might be as low as 300 milliTupaks. But however low we set the threshold, Gerunimo is likely to fall below it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, logically 300 milliTupaks could be significant coverage in 3 reliable sources (usually enough to get an AfD not closed as "delete"), 100 could be significant coverage in 1 reliable source (you can squeeze a redirect out of it), 50 is a paragraph in a reliable source amongst a ton of self published stuff (you'd have to work at anything other than delete), 25 is a single mention of your name in The Boise Herald, and 10 is a Facebook page with enough "likes" to have a unique name. All makes perfect sense! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Exactly what I expected. If you search wiki rappers like Kevin Gates and Young Thug. Those Guys have about the same amount of popularity and buzz as I do. TUPAC? no they don't even compare to Tupac, but they have Wikipedia pages about there music. You wouldn't allow me to even finish providing you with resources. I went by other rap names besides Suiside Inferno. Besides I am currently in the process of being signed to Atlantic Records. I will be wrote about here just be patient. :-) (Suiside Inferno 18:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerunimo (talkcontribs)

Hi-hat, hi hat, high hat and high-hat[edit]

Did you miss the {{hangon}} template I was invited to leave? — Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

...Just received your message. Okay, forget it and get back to your trigger finger. — Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

PS "...We simply do not do pages, not even redirects, with multiple variants all together." Please, therefore, speedily delete this. — Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

  • That is a disambiguation page which is supposed to be there! What RHaworth means is we have a redirect for each individual term - i.e. Hi-hat, hi hat, high hat and high-hat. -- Launchballer 13:35, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Shekhar Mudgal[edit]

sir why have you delete my page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekhar mudgal1 (talkcontribs) 07:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

shekhar mudgal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekhar mudgal1 (talkcontribs) 07:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Roger will be along in a minute to say "kindly wait until someone with no conflict of interest thinks you are notable and writes about you", but in the meantime, the page as I caught it appeared to be little more than blatant self promotion with contact details. Given that Wikipedia is incredibly popular and easily accessible around the world, putting contact details including a phone number in plain sight is not what I would consider sensible. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:00, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • No it is not a case for "kindly …" - that is for when there is at least some assertion of notability. The message here is: Wikipedia is not for social networking. Please keep to your facebook page. As Ritchie says, revealing your phone number is a bad idea and your friend Emil will not be too pleased to have his address disclosed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Restoring Talk:Girlrillaz to Talk:Free the Nipple[edit]

Hello. I notice that you deleted Talk:Girlrillaz as part of repairing a cut/paste move of Girlrillaz to Free the Nipple. But I think the Talk page should be restored as the Talk:Free the Nipple, since otherwise the talk history will be lost. (I also remarked about this at User talk:MER-C.) — BarrelProof (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

RodeishaV[edit]

Hi RHaworth, I recently submitted my first article, and I had not quite finished the links. It did unfortunately look like advertising, I think because I had not finished the links. But I may also have used the wrong angle on the story, it may have been more appropriate to simply write the article about the company Insight Consulting, and include courses underneath that. Questions: I would like to try again, with more external links, can I do this without losing my account etc? Is it better to do it from the perspective of the company name Insight Consultancy Solutions Inc.? As in the style of this competitor The Trium Group.

I am writing as someone who has attended the courses and also watched this firm for a long time, and I think they should be up there because they are bringing something new and fresh to the field of management consultancy. FYI I now have about 6 external links of articles by the founder, although they are not necessarily on the courses. My main concern is that I do not want to be deleted as a user because I am doing the wrong thing. I really appreciate wikipedia and what it does. It is a great service. I have a background in journalism, and really find it useful, so do not want to jeopardize your quality at all. Thanks RodeishaV — Preceding unsigned comment added by RodeishaV (talkcontribs) 22:21, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The "article" that was deleted came across as a pretty shameless and adoring paean ("something new and fresh") to the latest management consultancy training huckster, peddling "solutions" (see WP:SOLUTIONS) at high prices. You particularly went wrong by putting in advertisements for her latest book, complete with a pimplink to a free chapter. I am willing to accept that you may be an adoring fan, rather than an employee of the principal of this firm; but it is a close call, based on the tone of the draft that was deleted. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Let us change the mantra slightly: kindly have the decency to wait until someone who knows what a Wikipedia article should look like and who knows from what perspective to write it thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Air Force ranks of the Russian Federation[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Air Force ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation .. Since you had some involvement with the Air Force ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation . redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 11:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Pls Restore Page - MixSingh[edit]

This is About a Famous Music Producer in india, You can check on websites... all references were true !!!! i think you accidentally deleted the page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karanoberois (talkcontribs) 13:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here.

Freshly Squeezed Music[edit]

Hello, I am emailing regarding a page deletion of Freshly Squeezed Music on 5 September I believe. I had previously seen that it was up for deletion and I had worked on it to bring it up to standard and omit any unsubstantiated claims and improve the referencing. For some reason I can't find the finalised copy that I submitted so I was hoping you might be able to supply this for me please? It would also be of use if you could let me know of any further problems with this page so I can correct them. Thank you. — TheSpannerer (talk) 13:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I have not seen your email. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here. Text reluctantly emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Voice Intro Project invitees[edit]

Hi, Please undelete Category:Wikipedia Voice Intro Project invitees; it's a tracking category which may or may not be empty, over time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Mahfouz Marei Mubarak Bin Mahfouz[edit]

Dear Roger, Hope you are well. I'm emailing you now to ask about the Draft talk:Mahfouz Marei Mubarak Bin Mahfouz that has been deleted as well as the original page of Mahfouz Marei Mubarak Bin Mahfouz and the page of The Mahfouz Foundation. I need please an assistance to sort out the problem of those two pages. I have been more that 3 months trying to create those pages but could not and every time they are being deleted without sufficient help and advice to create and make them stable. Please give me a hand and help me to sort this problem out urgently. Thanks in advance for your cooperation and assistance and look forward to your positive feedback asap. Cheers, Ahmad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midoahmad (talkcontribs) 16:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Kindly be advised that this page in the Arabic section is already exist and approved as per this link ar:محفوظ بن مرعي بن محفوظ. Kind regards, Ahmad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midoahmad (talkcontribs) 00:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Repeating your message is more likely to antagonise me than get a quicker response. The presence of an article on another wiki is very little evidence of notability - standards on other wikis tend to be much lower than here. Kindly: learn about wikilinks, stop shouting and have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Nur Khan[edit]

Hello RHaworth,

I understand that the page I submitted for Draft:Nur Khan has been deleted due to Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://nurkhan.com/nur-khan/." Presently, I would like to recreate a page similar to this initial page and I was informed to contact you. I work for a company named Matte Finish who represents Nur Khan. I am in fact the copyright owner and creator of all the written content on the page you suspected to be where we copyrighted from (link: http://nurkhan.com/).

Nonetheless, how can I prove I am the copyright owner of this content? If not and better yet, I have created a similar page where I have edited the content from my own source which you believe to be unambiguous copyright infringement. Please let me know what to do as soon as you can. — Matte finish wiki (talk) 16:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Lets take another break from my mantra … I am not going to restore this. If you want it back, you may raise the matter at deletion review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

A very possible sockpuppet[edit]

A very possible sockpuppet who keeps on replying to a AFD report. I just put one up on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cracy111 which the sockpuppets only think they have been replying to is this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ChnLove, wanted to show that as it seems very odd. Wgolf (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Seems to me like totally normal sock puppetry. We call it vote stuffing. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Its called politics, you know they just all vote often, sorry couldn't resist lol. But yep, it is crazy, there is no way a mail order bride site like that would have all of these people supporting it. Wgolf (talk) 18:20, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

American Rotation Billiards (pool)[edit]

You deleted my page as obviously invented - incorrect. I have no association with the invention or the creation of the game and/or the creator himself or any monetary interest. I play it. I put a lot of work into that today, while simultaneously learning Wiki Markup language. In reference to notability, the #1 Pool player in the World recently stated that it's the greatest pool game he has ever played. It was modified from Rotation (which has a page) a little more than two years ago, and has already increased exponentially in popularity. It even has a National Championship Series. Like I said, the best current players in the world love the game. When there's a sport you love, you'd like to create a Wiki Page - that's what I did. — (Eengner (talk) 21:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC))

  • You fail my simple minded COI test - you have no contribs history. But I am in mellow mood and "made up" was definitely an invalid reason for delerion. I suggest you provide better, independent evidence of notability and re-submit via articles for creation. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reconsideration, I would like my text back so I do not have to start over. I have provided a few notes below: As for my lack of pages and edits, I was unable to use my regular login - i'm guessing it might have timed out. I certainly know that it was registered with an email address from my previous job that I no longer have access to. I just created a new one user talk:eengner. Although I admit, I've never tried to create a page before - it was quite exciting, at least until the "process" ran over me. I really would appreciate my wiki markup back. — (Eengner (talk) 16:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC))

  • Log in cookies last for 30 days but apart from that there is no time out mechanism. Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Roger. I'll try that way. Maybe I can get a good thing going. — (Eengner (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)).

How are you feeling about the page now? I've added a link to it that's inside rotation (pool) since it is a derivative of that original game. I've also added talk detail to the talk page to try to keep it from being deleted again. It looks like it's up for speedy deletion automatically. — (Eengner (talk) 19:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC))

Can you unprotect SHEL?[edit]

Can you unprotect SHEL? We've got an AfC draft Draft:SHEL I'd like to publish. Thanks! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 23:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Come back when an experienced AfC reviewer has looked and decides it is fit to publish. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth -- Sorry, I should have been more clear. I am an experienced AfC reviewer and the currently draft at Draft:SHEL looks ok to me, after a number of edits I made to the page yesterday. Do you spot some further problems I didn't? Thanks! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 13:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Apologies. I have done the move for you and restored the previous so that you can see how little difference there is between the last version that I deleted and the draft that you started on. Was it getting tagged for superficialities such as shouted section headings. Needs categories. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

It had a number of problems, mainly promotional language and way out of MoS. But the subject is notable so there was something to work with. Thanks for your help! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 21:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou[edit]

A big thankyou for tidying up blank categories after me, apologies for this; I suspect there is an automated way for me to tidy things up myself, feel free to educate me, but thankyou once again: the latest is Category:People from Arcadia, New York, created before I realised I had very little to populate it with! … GrahamHardy (talk) 06:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I believe there may be some semi-automatic way of doing bulk category deletions but I don't know it. But the best solution is to not create the categories in the first place. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Whaaat?[edit]

kve er vus cretza sim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moleman100 (talkcontribs) 18:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Redirecting Ki Hong Lee to Ki-hong Lee[edit]

Hi, currently Ki Hong Lee is create-protected so it can't be redirected to Ki-hong Lee. Please consider unprotecting. Siuenti (talk) 08:39, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I saw a request for a move so I have done it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Please Returns COMSTECH Inter Islamic Network on Virtual Universities[edit]

CINVU page should not be deleted for Unambiguous copyright infringement reason. Because "invu.ir" is the old name and address of cinvu.net. INVU.IR webpage now transfers to CINVU.NET webpage. This statement can be easily checked. Therefore there is no copyright violation. CINVU, takes the copyright violations very seriouslyPayam22 (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)