User talk:RHaworth/2012 Jan 29: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:25, 2 January 2012

This is an archive of past discussions about User:RHaworth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

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

Intentional disambig redirects

Hi. Please do not delete intentional disambiguation redirects. These redirects are created in accordance with our finely balanced policy at WP:INTDABLINK, under which we route disambiguation links through "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects to prevent false positives from appearing on the lists of pages requiring repair, which prevents unnecessary work for disambiguators. Because articles occasionally need to refer readers to the actual disambiguation page instead of a solution on the page, all disambig pages are supposed to have the "Foo (disambiguation)" redirect for this purpose. Also, certain templates such as the template for listing multiple species designations are designed to automatically route through such redirects, and deleting those redirects prevents those templates from functioning properly. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Giz a frinstance. I am not sure what you are talking about. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Certainly. A week ago you deleted "Father Knows Last (disambiguation)", "Father Knows Less (disambiguation)", and "Father Knows Nothing (disambiguation)". These redirects are not covered under R3, and are permitted to exist in accordance with WP:INTDABLINK. I have requested a clarification of R3 to make this clear for future reference, as a few other admins have had the same issue, obviously. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with you totally. I see nothing in the style guides that requires these links to exist and think this edit was pointless. But your edits were fairly harmless so I will not revert them. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Stale draft and IP users, continued

I don't think restoring that stale draft is a good idea either. I'm with you on the deletion.

Sorry for the confusion - I didn't mean you have to talk to IP addresses in every circumstance! Indeed, some messages do not require a reply. What I thought was that "I don't talk to IP addresses" sounds a bit overly arrogant. I think a better wording is "Please register an account or log-in, so that we can have a coherent discussion." It's great to see that the editor came back to respond to you.

Occasionally I do choose not to reply to messages that do not require a response, though not the example you cited - I replied on the IP's talk page, as I usually reply on the commenter's talk page unless requested otherwise. Der yck C. 00:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall try to use a better wording in future. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Santhosh Pandit article

I believe, your deletion of Santhosh Pandit entry was a mistake. It was marked for speedy deletion and had given time till end of this week for people to respond. Please honor that much time for public to raise their concerns about the deletion. Thanks, User:Cibu (talk) 01:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

You are confusing deletion methods: prod and AfD allow a few days discussion; speedy deletion means just that. But as to this guy, I agree the restoration. — RHaworth (talk · contribs)

Deletion of Santhosh Pandit

Hi, I see that you have deleted the article about santosh Pandit as G4. I just want to know whether you have made sure that the page that you got deleted was substantially identical to the one that got deleted by the deletion discussion and thus satisfied G4. The deletion discussion happened in July. Since then, the subject has released a mainstream movie which has been the topic of lots of discussion and debate, and mainstream media have taken note of him and written about him a lot. If you look at the malayalam article about him, you can see references about him and his movie from major Indian newspapers such as Times of India and Deccan Chronicle.

Thus I would like to contend that the notability status of the person has changed since last deletion and hence CSD by A7 or G4 here is invalid. Please undelete the page and let the nominator take it through AfD -- Raziman T V (talk) 05:07, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth. I received a request on my talk page from the above user to undelete the page because you've gone to bed for the night. I decided to go WP:IAR and I've done so, under the provision that you may feel free to redelete the page tomorrow if you still think it's not passing WP:BIO, and it will not be wheel warring (i.e., you don't have to ask me to redo it). However, my look at the page makes it seem notable to me, so Razimantv might consider taking it to WP:DRV. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

No objection. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Donisthorpe Football Club

Morning!, Thanks for deleting my completely legitimate and 100% factual and correct article on Donisthorpe Football Club which i have been told my numerous local people to Donisthorpe that it educated them and informed them that the village had a football team, but you deemed the team not notable enough to be including in 'wikipedia' i have informed these people of this and they wont be using wikipedia again nor will the 30 players and management team of Donisthorpe FC. I was told by a lot of people that 'wikipedia' is full of lies and rubbish, i disagreed and thought id make my first 100% factual article, to my surprised some Jobs worth idiot deleted it, but yet there are numerous crap articles about stuff 'not notable' or factual allowed on this site!!!. I now agree with the people that said 'wikipedia' wasnt to be trusted and wont be using it again, I shall use a more legitimate and trustworthy information source. User:Nexus666777 —Preceding undated comment added 09:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC).

So which more legitimate source/s might they be? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Genuine Encyclepedias and other websites, Im not gonna argue with you over such trivial rubbish, just think it was unfair to delete my article when it was 100% fact and legitimate just becuase the club arent notable to you, not abusive in anyway and people around the area of donisthorpe would have found it informative. Nevermind Nexus666777 (talk) 13:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Castiel

I was looking up information about Castiel and found that you deleted the page. I came to your page to find out if there was anyway to get it back. You said to contact you if anyone wanted to get a page back and this is the only way i knew how to...I'm a bit new to this if you couldn't tell. Is there any way you could bring the information back? Hamtoilet (talk) 03:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

If you are actually talking about Castiel (angel), why don't you say so? There is nothing to bring back: the entire content as created by Ironinferno (talk · contribs) was "Castiel is an angel period. Sources will be updated soon." If you create a proper article, we will be most grateful. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Apparently there is a canonical angel called "Castiel" in angelology. This may be a place to start, as that book is considered a standard work in that field. More than happy to help out, Hamtoilet. See Sachiel for an example of an angel article.--Shirt58 (talk) 09:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Innovse ESM

Hello RHaworth. You deleted my Innovise ESM page recently under a speedy deletion. I understand that the deletion was fair enough and have created a new work in progress page at User:InnoviseEditor/Innovise_ESM. It contains references and is not marketing/promotional focused at all. It simply contains information about the company .

Could please advise or provide honest feedback before I publish it again. I have also requested a change of username after reading wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by InnoviseEditor (talk • contribs) 17:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your company is notable and decides to write about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Article on Eames documentary

I started Eames: the architect and the painter last night, user:Jsfouche 17 minutes later added a PROD template, I responded on the article talk page and on my talk page, and through my edit summary as I deleted the template. You should check before PRODding an article, if it has already been PRODded. "An article may be PRODed only once" is policy. Further, you might have seen the reason I gave for dePRODding.

The film may not reach WP's notability criteria, but it will take discussion to establish that. In the meantime, please remove the out-of-policy PROD. Jd2718 (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Why cannot you remove the prod? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

My removing a second PROD would likely influence any future deletion discussion. And it really is your error to fix. Are you checking any articles to see if they have already been proposed for deletion? Jd2718 (talk) 21:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

~~I don't see why your removing the prod would influence any discussion. To be honest, I do not usually check for previous prods.~~ Not worth arguing - have an AfD with my compliments. But with your contributions history, you should be ashamed to create an article without links to reliable sources. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

If you are primarily involved in deletions, you need to follow policy. Not checking the article's history is a real problem. Jd2718 (talk) 21:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

As to the quality of the stub, you are right, I should have included references, wrote better, wiki-linked, etc. I have created very few articles; it's not what I usually do here. Jd2718 (talk) 21:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Directed panspermia

Hello RHaworth: To continue, here are the comments by DrBogdan as you requested (sorry for the caps, I also find them a bit distracting) (Talk:panspermia, item 41).

Evidently, he finds this an excellent academic effort and worthy of a separate article. His following discussion with BatteryIncluded sidetracked on "forward contamination" which is a different subject concerning mostly this solar system, while directed panspermia aims for deeper space. Of course, if relevant, these gentlemen or others can add a section once the article is published.

On a scientific subject, comments by adminstrators or editors with related interests seem desirable. For this reason I invited comments by DrBogdan and BatteryIncluded, and of course, having been involved in this article, you would be now also familiar.

As to the scientific quality, I am a senior scientist in chemistry and astrobiology, with published research interests including panspermia. All the content in the proposed article is peer-reviewed material published in scientific journals.

I hope this information will help. Regards, AbrahamDavidson (talk) 03:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

There is no need to pollute this page with DrBogdan's ridiculous writing style. I suggested here that you should get into the habit of creating links when you write about Wikipedia pages but clearly you did not bother to read it. OK, so DrBogdan considers it to be excellent academic effort. But one problem is that academic effort is not necessarily what we want in Wikipedia - it may be tending towards violating our original research policy. I am unmoved by your arguments. I made two suggests for alternative approaches on Nov 14, apparently you did not read those either. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth: I always read and consider your comments carefully, and did so with your latest suggestions. I could not find instructions for creating the links that you suggested. Please direct me to such instructions, or I will try using other edit examples. I did not solicit comments from Eeekster because I could not find any record of him being familiar with space science. Considering the original research policy, all of the material in the proposed article has been published before in peer-reviewed journals and there is no original material there. As for a deletion review, it is recommended in the intructions there to settle the issue with the adminstrator first, and I am trying to do so such as not to bother them if possible. Regards, 222.154.145.115 (talk) 02:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC)"AbrahamDavidson"

Be grateful that I am replying. I have a policy of ignoring messages from IP addresses. Why on earth are you asking for instructions on links? Surely this page of yours contains sufficient edit examples. You have my full permission to go to deletion review and you do not even need to notify me that you have done so. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Ravenhearts

Mystery Case Files: Escape from Ravenhearst. Hi, does software (in this case a computer game) fall under CSD-A7? If not, why was the article deleted as such instead of userification to get it up to speed with similar articles about the Mystery Case Files articles? Jarkeld (talk) 20:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, if you want to be pedantic. But it was such an appallingly formatted stub, I could almost have deleted it as a test page. But to keep you happy, I have restored and userfied it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:10, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Being pedantic wasn't my intention and my happiness certainly isn't the issue. If you had deleted it as a test page I wouldn't have mentioned it, but the A7 in combination with no message to the author seemed quite bitey towards someone who joined 24/11 and just created a first article. Jarkeld (talk) 23:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

28 North

This article did not qualify for CSD A3. Not only did it contain content, it identified the subject and had a claim of significance. This should be AFD'd or PRODed.--v/r - T P 00:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok so read it as an A7 deletion instead. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

As I said, it had a claim of significance so it wasn't an A7 either.--v/r - T P 00:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

RHaworth, I've previously poked you about incorrect deletions of band articles. Look, you should not be saying "I deleted it as X, and if X is not acceptable, fine, it was Y"; delete things if and only if that deletion and that rationale is justified. If you can't justify things with the logic you initially used, maybe admit you did it incorrectly. Ironholds (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I have restored and userfied it. Are you both satisfied? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Somewhat. I'd have preferred a PROD but I'm not going to complain.--v/r - T P 01:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Dataflyer

Hello RHaworth. You deleted my Alvila Dataflyer page recently under a speedy deletion. I did not intend to promote the product, I just wanted to describe what it does. The name "Alvila Dataflyer" is an orginal product name, so I mentioned it there. It was not the intention to promote the company name. If the main reason for deletion was name, I can change it. If even part violates the rules, I apologize. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeAlvila (talk • contribs) 11:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

How on earth can you change the company name? What other name does it have? Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your product is notable and writes about it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Lyle Dukes

I would like to know what portions of the Lyle Dukes article are causing you to see it as G11 - I provided external links to newspaper articles to validate the impact that he and his wife are making in the community and the world through their service. He and his wife were previously listed (in Wikipedia) on the Dunbar High School (Washington, D.C.) list of notable alumni (not by me), but since there was no article for him, clicking the link gave a message like "no information found" or something to that effect. This prompted me to start writing an entry for him so that when readers click the link, it would go there instead of the error message. The link has since been removed, but I hope that when this article is approved, I can restore the link.

The link from his article to Mainstream Concepts Inc. can be removed, no problem - I see it as showing one of the many different facets of who he is (entrepreneur), but I can understand if perceived as advertising. Please advise - what changes do I need to make to allow this article to be created? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loribee111 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Main concerns are the entire tone of the article and your contributions history which leads me to assume that you have a COI. I note that the link in the school article was added by an IP address registered to Harvest Life Changers Church. Please abide by any decision made at AfC and preferably wait until someone with no COI writes about this couple. See also this advice about external links. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Ravens-Steelers rivalry

Apparently since your cascading protection of Ravens-Steelers rivalry a couple years ago, the same topic was re-created and kept at Steelers–Ravens rivalry (which I just moved to Ravens–Steelers rivalry per the naming conventions of the rivalry articles (alphabetical order of the team names with an en-dash). I ask that you re-create Ravens-Steelers rivalry as a redirect to Ravens–Steelers rivalry. After redirecting it, if you feel inclined to nominate it for deletion to see if it meets notability again, that would be your choice. I doesn't meets criteria for speedy deletion, however, since this article has been kept for two years on Wikipedia with multiple authors which probably doesn't consist of the same previously deleted material as it did before. — Moe ε 21:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Redirect created. I have no urge to delete anything in this area. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of page 'Mandarin House'

Dear Mr Haworth, Could you please consider restoring the Mandarin House page and instead use the request for deletion function for a discussion instead? The A7 criteria does not apply to educational institutions. See here.

The school is notable as it is an accredited educational institution, is one of the first Chinese language schools in China and is the most well renowned. It has seen well over 15,000 enrolments since establishment in 2004 and was also the host of the largest language abroad conference/workshop to ever be held in China.

If the page gets deleted after after discussion than so be it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duffsta (talk • contribs) 02:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I dispute whether Mandarin House counts as a school as defined by the Wikiproject but I have given you an AfD anyway. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Meruvian

Can help me about why you delete the Meruvian, but why Apache in the wikipedia. and active.. Apache Software Foundation. Meruvian is Indonesia Apache, and we make OpenSource like Apache, with smiliar and same license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fthamura (talk • contribs) 03:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

We try not to let poor English influence our decisions on notability but that was difficult with your submission. Recommendations: get someone fluent in English to help you re-write the article. Provide links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Re-submit via AfC. For example, the article suddenly branches off to discuss the origin of the name without any indication and it is not clear whether "Meruvian is located in North America with personality integration cultural" refers to the theoretical race or the actual company. It appears to be the sixth race mentioned in the root race article but is not named there. So another reference is needed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Ancient tag

Re Science, technology, society and environment education. Hi. In reference to your tagging, you may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Science, technology, society and environment education#Expert_attention. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Why?

Please explain why you deleted User:Pdfpdf/Reunions. Please explain why you did this without notifying me that you were going to do this. Please explain why you did this without notifying me that you had done this. Please restore the page. — Pdfpdf (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I deleted the page because it had been untouched for seven months and I assumed it was a stale draft. There is no rule that says you must be notified. Strictly speaking the article should have been put through the MfD process but since it was so patently unencyclopedic, I did not bother. I have e-mailed you the text. Please find a different place for it because Wikipedia is not a free host. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
- I deleted the page because it had been untouched for seven months and I assumed it was a stale draft. - Your assumption was incorrect.
- There is no rule that says you must be notified. - How strange. What about WP:AGF, or just plain good manners?
- I have e-mailed you the text. - Thank you. (e-mail received.) Cheerio, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

P.S. What led you to the page? Pdfpdf (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I found it during new page patrolling when it was called Adelaide Educational Institution/Reunions. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Subba Rao

I was just in process of converting the speedy tag to a prod when you deleted the article. It clearly should not be here, but as the "tribute" is some eight times as lengthy as the original article I had some trouble in considering it as a mere duplication! Having said that, I will repeat that the article merits deletion in one way or another. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Please get into the habit of providing a link to the article you are discussing, thus: CHIEF JUSTICE K.SUBBA RAO A TRIBUTE IN MEMORIAM. 45 kbytes of solid text unrelieved by paragraph or section breaks, suggests to me a copyvio. But in any case A10 seemed a perfectly good reason for deletion irrespective of its greater length. If Rvasudevpillai (talk · contribs) actually has any original thoughts on the subject, they can add them, properly formatted to the Koka Subba Rao article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually...

I wanted to delete my page but somehow forgot to change the title. So it looked like I was contesting against the intentional proposal of deletion of my talk page. It was an honest mistake, though. I am going to make a new deletion tag, and this time, the talk page will be deleted. SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

User talk:68.71.46.138

While straight-out deletion shouldn't be done, this guy really needs selective deletion of everything he does.Jasper Deng (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Gracias

TY.TCO (talk) 01:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Ross Allen

Hi, I wondered whether we might be able to add a Ross Allen (footballer) article now. He's currently the top scorer in the UK non league system with 39 goals in 20 games, plus various speculation has linked him with a move to a number of football league clubs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pm137 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, please explain your relationship to Desertodov (talk · contribs) who created the Ross Allen article. I am unwilling to deal with people who write things such as appear on Desertodov's user page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:17, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know Desertodov, I created the Guernsey F.C. page, of which Ross Allen is one of their players. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pm137 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Create a decent article with proper references instead of the pathetic stub you created. Submit it via AfC but do not expect much joy because, at the end of the day, he is just an amateur. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:57, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Magic spell

Wikipedia:Magic spell to deal with "unpatrollable" pages, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Magic spell to deal with "unpatrollable" pages and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Magic spell to deal with "unpatrollable" pages during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Sigh*

Well, it wasn't a test page, but I apparently only used it once, so no great loss. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Gillian Andrassy

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gillian Andrassy. 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. George Ho (talk) 20:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Course mentor needed

Hi Rhaworth, I'm an instructor of English composition looking for an online ambassador to assist my Writing & Rhetoric II class this coming (Winter quarter). I'm specifically interested in someone who would be willing to respond to short proposals written by students for planned edits/article creations. There's a cap of twenty students in the class, so if I found two willing ambassadors each would be responsible for responding to 10 proposals. Would you be interested? Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewvetter (talk • contribs) 02:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be happy to assist. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Request

Hai , I am writing about one social group of rajakambalam community of india with lot of references , please undo sandbox . I am new to this Wikipedia , but eager to write more. Shall you do ? -- Rajanaicker — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajanaicker (talk • contribs) 16:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, I do not understand your request. I see nothing connected with you that requires admin action. Do you actually understand how to recover deleted text via the edit history? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

In re deleting Terence Sellers

Dear RHaworth: You stated in the deletion of my page that I infringed copyright from the Fales Library site, where my archives are listed. For your information, the Library took the biographical material off my Wikipedia page, and copied it right onto their site. It was not the other way around, as you assumed.

I am going to reinstate the page as per Fales Library authority. It might be interesting to contact people before you write that something has been stolen. Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/fales/sellers.html

Regards, Terence Sellers — http://www.terencesellers.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.196.90 (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I disagree wth your view of which way it was copied: at a quick glance, the last state by StanStanmeister (talk · contribs) (which I have e-mailed to that user name) is different from the Fales Library version. But in any case, your complaint should be directed to the Fales Library, not to us. As far as we are concerned, the article was copied from the Fales Library page with full permission - a declaration was made on the article talk page and see User:Kelsievans for more information. So, strictly speaking, I was wrong to give copyvio as a reason for deletion.

But the other deletion reason is more important - lack of evidence of notability - the article has been deleted twice for that reason. If a new bio is submitted, it must provide links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources or it will simply get deleted again. I would also warn you that writing about oneself is strongly deprecated.

If you must have a bio here, get someone to write it for you. Kelsievans has not edited for a year and has not set up e-mail here but you could proably contact her via the Fales Library. If you are going to use the Fales Library text, as well as a declaration on the talk page here, I would like to see an explicit statement on the Fales Library page saying "the biographical note is licenced under the GFDL / CC licences".

The Terence Sellers page is currently protected. A new version should be created in user:StanStanmeister/sandbox or User:Kelsievans/sandbox (or any userspace page) and then ask me or PMDrive1061 (talk · contribs) (who did the protection) or any other admin to unprotect it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:20, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Mr. Haworth for your comments and the email you sent. I am going to rectify the situation. However I did originally author that page, and it was taken up by Fales for my biography page on their site. I am sure I probably edited it subsequently. Anyhow, perhaps they will help me here. I suspect others here have first written about themselves, and gotten others to chime in, and perhaps I will show up here again, all nicely verified. In any event thank you again for the advice. Best regards Terence Sellers (75.106.88.140 (talk) 05:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC))