User talk:RHaworth/2014 Aug 09

Archives

Archives Edit list Up to: 2005 March 2005 June 2005 August 2005 Oct 2005 Nov 2006 Jan 2006 March 2006 May 2006 July 2006 Sept 2006 Nov 2007 Jan 2007 Feb 2007 April 2007 May 2007 July 2007 Oct 2007 Dec 2008 Jan 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 Sept 2008 Oct 2009 Jan 2009 Feb 2009 March 2009 April 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 Oct 2009 Nov 2009 Dec 2010 March 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 Sept 2010 Oct 2010 Dec 2011 Jan 06 2011 Jan 14 2011 Jan 27 2011 Feb 09 2011 Feb 23 2011 Mar 06 2011 Mar 18 2011 Mar 30 2011 Apr 07 2011 May 02 2011 May 22 2011 Jun 08 2011 Jun 26 2011 Jul 26 2011 Aug 18 2011 Sep 06 2011 Sep 28 2011 Oct 17 2011 Nov 04 2011 Nov 19 2012 Jan 29 2012 Feb 26 2012 Mar 10 2012 Mar 31 2012 Apr 14 2012 May 07 2012 Jun 01 2012 Jun 23 2012 Jul 06 2012 Aug 31 2012 Oct 06 2012 Oct 30 JWJ 2012 Dec 05 2012 Dec 27 2013 Jan 22 2013 Feb 05 2013 Mar 06 2013 Mar 26 2013 Apr 15 2013 May 09 2013 Jun 07 2013 Jun 27 2013 Jul 22 2013 Aug 06 2013 Aug 20 2013 Sep 03 2013 Sep 19 2013 Oct 11 2013 Oct 23 2013 Nov 09 2013 Nov 22 2013 Dec 18 2014 Jan 11 2014 Jan 25 2014 Feb 18 2014 Mar 08 2014 Mar 29 2014 Apr 11 2014 Apr 23 2014 May 08 2014 May 22 2014 May 30 2014 Jun 07 2014 Jun 18 2014 Jul 17 2014 Aug 09 2014 Aug 27 2014 Sep 04 2014 Sep 16 2014 Sep 28 2014 Oct 11 2014 Oct 28 2014 Nov 18 2014 Dec 18 2015 Jan 10 2015 Jan 26 2015 Feb 11 2015 Feb 24 2015 Mar 11 2015 Mar 30 2015 Apr 20 2015 May 12 2015 Jun 12 2015 Jul 07 2015 Jul 25 2015 Aug 11 2015 Sep 03 2015 Sep 23 2015 Oct 25 2015 Nov 28 2015 Dec 21 2016 Jan 13 2016 Feb 10 2016 Mar 03 2016 Mar 30 2016 Apr 18 2016 May 16 2016 Jun 02 2016 Jul 09 2016 Aug 11 framework 2016 Sep 02 2016 Oct 05 2016 Nov 02 2016 Nov 27 2016 Dec 18 2017 Jan 10 2017 Jan 31 2017 Feb 23 2017 Mar 15 2017 Apr 20 2017 May 18 2017 Jun 21 2017 Jul 05 2017 Jul 25 2017 Aug 15 2017 Sep 07 2017 Sep 30 2017 Nov 14 2017 Dec 21 2018 Jan 12 2018 Jan 30 2018 Feb 25 2018 Mar 11 2018 Mar 28 2018 Apr 16 2018 May 03 2018 May 22 2018 Jun 14 2018 Jun 28 2018 Jul 19 2018 Aug 03 2018 Aug 20 2018 Sep 07 2018 Oct 01 2018 Oct 24 2018 Nov 16 2018 Dec 02 2018 Dec 26 2019 Jan 27 2019 Feb 18 2019 Mar 06 2019 Mar 17 2019 Mar 30 2019 Apr 14 2019 Apr 27 2019 May 16 2019 Jun 10 2019 Jul 07 2019 Jul 26 2019 Aug 16 2019 Sep 07 2019 Sep 17 2019 Oct 07 2019 Nov 04 2019 Nov 23 2019 Dec 09 2019 Dec 21 2021 Jan 21 2023 Apr 08

Joe Montana (disambiguation)

Hi. At 23:36, 5 May 2014 you deleted the Joe Montana (disambiguation) page. Obviously unnecessary disambiguation page. I am sorry, but for me is not obvious, that Joe Montana is different from Joe Montana (actor). Is there only one Joe Montana? — Diszi (talk) 13:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

• You have answered your own question by providing a red link. Yes, as far as Wikipedia is concerned there is only one Joe Montana. (See de:Joe Montana (Begriffsklärung).) If and when either of Joe Montana (actor) or Joe Montana (musician) becomes notable enough to have an article, then an hat note can be added to Joe Montana. If both of them get articles, then and only then do we create the disambiguation page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:43, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. I understand the logic of this. I can accept it. However, from enwiki I am not able to get the info that Joe Montana (actor) is different from Joe Montana. Now I know from dewiki they are different. I still think it would be useful if this information would be available from enwiki, too. — Diszi (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Not to be pedantic but {{confused}} was specifically set up for such cases.--Launchballer 16:34, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• OK, see if a {{confused}} tag without any link will be accepted. But it would be better if you were to create the Joe Montana (actor) article! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Rick Otton

The Wikipedia user profile for Rick Otton has been deleted. Please provide information on why it was deleted and if there's anything that can be done or changed so the page is put back up. -- Jessicamillerwbh (talk) 00:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• What don't you understand about "G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion"? I could also have deleted it for U5: using Wikipedia as a free host. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here in a proper place. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Luxaviation

Greetings, Luxaviation was recently deleted. however I do not fully understand how this article was vastly different from the majority of other aircraft operators with wikipedia pages. Luxaviation's page was not fully complete at the time, however there were a substantial number of links and references. Luxaviation is now the largest private jet operator in Europe.

Nevertheless, due to the wikipage of luxaviation being delete I am unable to update the actual logo popping up on Google searches. It would be greatly appreciated if you could assist me. Best regards, Nick Reinertz Nreinertz (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• "Substantial number"? There were two links both to the company's website and zero independent references. "Unable to update the actual logo popping up on Google searches" - this is gobbledgook. If you are trying to say that Google still provides a link to the Wikipedia article, then I can tell you that this will disappear within a few weeks. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the company is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Deleted article Clipperz

Greetings, I would like to reinstate the article you apparently deleted: Clipperz . I understand that you felt the article was not proving the site's notableness, I would like to put back up an edited version with links to sources which prove that this is a known company/service; e.g. alexa rank, media articles about them, etc.

I do this because I am a user of their services for several years now and strongly agree with their company philosophy and feel they deserve wider exposure, I am not affiliated with them in any way. Can you please send me the original text? Thanks in advance. Lebanese blond (talk) 13:11, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• Why "apparently"? Clearly, I did delete it. Text restored to User:Lebanese blond/Sandbox. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Lebanese blond (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Shilpi Sharma (disambiguation)

There are two movie actress with the same name Shilpi Sharma and Shillpi Sharma. Although, there is a slight difference in the spelling, when we pronounce this name in any Indian language, they sound exactly the same. Both are models turned actresses. There is confusion amongst which actress is who and which movie they acted and such. Please allow this disambiguation page to make it clear distinction between the two artist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajannamysore (talk • contribs) 13:40, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• When there are only two names to be disambiguated we use the {{about}} tag. I have just fixed the mal-formed tag in Shillpi Sharma. There is no need for the disambiguation page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Dashlane

Hi RHaworth, it looks like you were the last admin to delete Dashlane in February. The title has been SALT'd. There is a draft article awaiting at AfC which, in my opinion, is abundantly sourced with major reviews of the app. I'd like to move it to mainspace, but would be grateful if you could de-SALT the title. Thanks. Sionk (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• Unsalted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Suelong Sae Ma

Hello Sir, I was just curious about this post: Suelong sae ma. From what i know he is an upcoming football player here in thailand who suffered some major injuries the past years and wanted to know more about him.

Not quite sure if i request the page to be activated again (i mean you had your reasons why you deleted it), but i'm doing a project about Thaifootball wich involves player that are half Thai. Could you kindly give me more information? Regards, David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.99.136.138 (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suelong Sae Ma should give you a clue. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Please also salt Suelong sae ma.--Launchballer 21:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, i just found the source that i need it was all in thai but the a friend of mine translated it for me, if you would like to read it as well i think it was on siamsport. If that helps. Thank you for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.99.136.138 (talk) 11:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

The Knowledge Centre for Agriculture Deletion

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

Varsity Inc

Hi there-- I'm a nursing student looking for some information related to high school students and undiagnosed traumatic brain injuries and was wondering if the page for Varsity Inc could be made accessible? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.2.88.178 (talk) 04:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

• With pleasure. The entire content of the page was: "is a gay new show on espn2 fuck yea". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

deletion of WUWM from Wikipedia

To whom it may concern, the nonprofit association World Union of Wholesale Markets (WUWM) entry has at some stage been deleted from Wikipedia. Following the deletion link brings me to you here.

I would like to understand why this entry was deleted. It was created in reference and follow-up to a United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) article which explained what food wholesaling and food markets are (and WUWM collaborated with FAO colleagues at the time with regard to that article). WUWM is the only world entity to bring together nations and cities in support of, and promotion of, food markets. WUWM membership is mostly municipal management of wholesale and retail food markets. WUWM aims to help local and national authorities in their goal to provide a better service to the many millions of traders and consumers buying food from their local market. Local authorities, millions of small market traders, and the representative body for those markets - WUWM clearly do not have the logistical possibility or resources of 'supermarkets' to pay for mega advertising of a 'brand' name. Is that why our entry - and not those entries - are deleted from Wikipedia?

Traditional food markets are the oldest community service to be offered citizens, and are vital to the health not only of local economies and communities but also local food production the world over. There is much ignorance about the true and original meaning of the word 'market' in our world today. Please could you explain why you have taken the position of deleting us from Wikipedia? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.86.71 (talk) 08:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

• Why are you talking to me when your query is addressed to whom it may concern (talk · contribs)? The article was over long and, more importantly, totally lacking in independent references. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

codeBeamer

Hi RHaworth, I just ended up on the page list of revision control software and realized that our page codeBeamer was deleted. I think your action is unfair since you didn't delete any other company from that list. Can you please explain why you decided to delete only and exclusively us but no other company with similiar entry? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EvaIntland (talk • contribs) 11:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

• Curious that you should come to me - the only thing I deleted was a redirect at codeBeamer (software). The substantive article was deleted according to the decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CodeBeamer. I will admit that the calls for deletion in that discussion were not exactly clamorous but kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your product is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Commons transfers

Hello.I see you're interested in working on the files; Therefore, I suggest that you

1. Transfer this file to Commons
2. work on delete these files.Thanks --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

• Out of thousands of files why pick Annales … for my attention. It is a very poor quality image that deserves a decent burial rather than transfer. CAT:CSD is usually enough to keep me busy but I might go to the cst you mention if I am really bored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Fort Saskatchewan/Fort Mall

Hi. You deleted Talk:Fort Saskatchewan/Fort Mall as CSD G8. It had been restored and tagged with a {{Copied}} – see its counterpart at the top of Talk:Fort Saskatchewan – to attribute this merger. Following Fort Mall's deletion at WP:Articles for deletion/Fort Mall, User:Milowent asked the closing admin User:Arbitrarily0 to restore and move it at User talk:Arbitrarily0/Archive/2010/May-June#Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fort Mall. WP:Merge and delete#Move to subpage of talk page describes the situation. Flatscan (talk) 04:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your quick response. Flatscan (talk) 04:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Bibliography of Aeolian Research: A

Hi User:RHaworth. The bibliography article was placed in the public domain by the United States Department of Agriculture, and I linked to the license on the talk page. I was pretty sure that was sufficient to prevent speedy deletion. Am I missing something? Thanks, Lesser Cartographies (talk) 08:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

And while we're here, I'll point out that WP:Listcruft is specifically prohibited from being used as a rationale for speedy deletion. See WP:NOTCSD #14. I'll start up the deletion review. — Lesser Cartographies (talk) 08:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

• I have commented at talk:Bibliography of Aeolian Research but I agree that other opinions should be sought at DRV. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good. Let's see if I can figure out the official notice template, just for gins.... ok, I think that's right. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 09:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bibliography of Aeolian Research A. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 09:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Eh, I spoke too soon. I can see the deletion review request here (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 July 20) but not here (Wikipedia:Deletion review). Can you see which bit of wikimagic I forgot to incant? Thanks. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 09:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Now moot. I expect we got the right result, perhaps for the wrong reasons, and that's not a bad day at the office. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Dead language, spoken in Ermita, Manila

The article Dead language, spoken in Ermita, Manila has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

it is an unused and unreasonably long redirect

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Iketsi (talk) 12:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

ALGOL 68G

Extended content

Hi RHaworth, re: wikify: First I - tongue-in-cheek - apologise for only providing a dead link to the ALGOL 68G page concerned... sadly the page was speedy deleted... :-) Notwithstanding: I am here because I note the page ALGOL 68G is gone... archive.org, and without a AfD << 2014_May_21 - ? - May_22 - ? - May_23 ? >> I reviewed the two criteria required to be meet for a WP:G11 speedy delete: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion There seems to raise a question about what "Unambiguous" means... Let me address the two points in G11, one-by-one. - "Pages that are exclusively promotional, AND would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." IMHO: The article is/was encyclopedic... simply describing features/extensions and deviations. Undoubtedly merely having an ALGOL 68G article on wikipedia could have the consequence of bringing some attention to the topic (indeed any topic). But that does not make the content un-encyclopedic, when the content is/was indeed encyclopedic, all-be-it boring and technical (to most). - "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" IMHO: I can see no page text/content that is/was fails Wikipedia:NPOV... and, even if there was offending content a speedy-deletion has curtailed any chance to fix such NPOV fails. "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." Hmm... IMHO the article is also saved be this third G11 keep criteria... which only would mean the article should now be restored. The "speedy deletion" did cite "08:51, 27 November 2005 Lucky 6.9 (talk · contribs) deleted page ALGOL 68G" from Deletion log: ALGOL 68G. It seems to me the detail the page was previously deleted some 10 years ago is a distraction and even potentially misleading. So... I am suggesting that the page was actually removed in error. Probably the deletion could have passed through the regular AfD process, I am sure that AfD has a Smörgåsbord of other means of rationalising removing articles, especially as ALGOL 68G does not commonly appear in Popular Culture. For the record and background: ALGOL 68G is the most recent implementation and - IMHO - most comprehensive implementation of ALGOL 68. This has given ALGOL 68G a degree of notoriety in various blog circles... e.g. Rosetta_Code, but do bear in mind that I am also a member of some of these blog communities, hence I am not exactly neutral. Aside: I do sometimes ponder if entire chunks of wikipedia knowledge have "fallen off the edge" simply because the actual topic contributors do not log into to Wikipedia within the 1-2 week AfD cycle or the speed-delete cycle. My estimate is such experts topic contributors would only lookup/logon to wikipedia with a frequency of less than once a year. So it is rare that an topic contributor would actually get a timely alerted of an AfD or a "speedy-delete". Ultimately I recommend the ALGOL 68G article should be restored, and kept, and then only deleted if there is an outstanding reason delete it via a reasoned AfD. So:

Please consider a restore of ALGOL 68G. — NevilleDNZ (talk) 03:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

My netbook, even zoomed out at 75%, can't fit the whole post on to my screen. Even at full screen! Be satisfied with what's present at ALGOL 68.--Launchballer 19:59, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

• You talk too much. I had no hesitation in deleting the article because despite it having been around for eight (!) years, no one had found any indepenent evidence that it even exists, still less, that it is notable. I have emailed you the text. If, and only if, you can provide decent refs, re-submit via the AfC process. If it actually gets accepted, ask me or any other admin to restore the old version so that the text gets proper attribution. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)