Jump to content

User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2011 Jan 06

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:RHaworth

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ebieberich (talk | contribs) at 19:36, 17 December 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

Up to:
   

LeadMaster Australia Pty. Ltd.

You have deleted our corporate page without discussing your concerns with us first. The page represented significant effort on our behalf and we tried hard to abide by the rules surrounding self promotion.

Perhaps you would like to consider pages such as Salesforce.com, Microsoft, Microsoft Dynamics, Netsuite, Oracle Corporation, SugarCRM, Zoho Office Suite or any other of the numerous corporate pages and then contact us and provide the courtesy of explaining your concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom.e.mackey (talk • contribs) 06:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

What a strange idea that we should contact the subject of an article before deleting it! This is an encyclopedia not a business directory.
Your use above of ugly naked URLs [now corrected] instead of wikilinks confirms to me that your sole interest is to promote your company. Please leave it to people who are interested in building an encyclopedia. When your company becomes notable someone with no COI will write about it here. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 10:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Just so we are clear please advise how you got to be in a position of influence with rights to unilaterally delete contributions to the site? On whose authority are you acting? Or perhaps your contributions (pun) are purely altruistic and you are acting as a good Samaritan for the general Wikipedia audience? Also - I note that you avoided the question on comparable sites. Please explain how your actions in this instance are consistent. If you take our site down you need to take the sites referenced above down as well. It does seem you have a history of inappropriate deletions (take a look down this page to a post that interestingly you have chosen not to respond to). — tom (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

In the case of LeadMaster Australia Pty. Ltd., I was acting under the instruction of the Holy See since the article had been tagged for speedy deletion by The-Pope (talk · contribs)! Seriously though, I am a Wikipedia admin. We are the people who do the deletions when deletions need to be done. We act under the authority of the consensus of Wikipedia editors. This is an important point - admins have a strong influence on policy naturally but we are not the sole creators of policy. I got to be an admin by going through the requests for adminship process - which is, I believe, a lot harder nowadays.
Please note it is absolutely not "your site"! The site is en.wikipedia.org. It is not even "your article" - see WP:OWN.
Your request to take down the articles you list is, frankly, ridiculous. May I introduce you to the concept of "notability". I think even you would admit that Microsoft is more notable than your company. Each article is separately judged as to where on the notability spectrum it lies and dealt with appropriately. (See this recent discussion started by a similar request and note the statement of fundamental principle "there is no reason to assume that all foo companies are equally notable".) Since you had made absolutely no attempt to demonstrate the notability of your company, The-Pope and I both felt that it should be deleted. Your redress is to go through the deletion review process but before you do so, prepare a draft which does actually contain links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 00:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
For a dispassionate view of the appropriateness of my deletions, have a look at my deletion log, count the percentage of blue links and compare me with NawlinWiki or any other admin. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 02:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of page - Kelli Stephens

Hi, The page that I was in the process of creating was deleted. This was a bio page on the first female race car driver, to compete a full national campaign in the Australian Saloon car series, and one of only a handful of females competing in a full national series, in circuit racing in Australia.

Can you please allow me to recreate the page, and finish it. XR8Chic (talk) 08:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs

[Title width guide]

++++ delete above here if no further edits - already in archive

Alangu Mastiff

Hello RHaworth. It would be better to explain briefly why Alangu Mastiff redirects to Bully Kutta. It seems to be a local name for the same breed [1]. The redirect as it is now makes no sense to an uninformed reader. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:16, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

  • So why did you not do this edit to inform the uninformed reader? My sentence could be expanded - I read that Alangu Mastiff is the name used in India because the Indians dislike the names Pakistani Mastiff and Sindhi Mastiff. That could be restated more diplomatically. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 11:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't sure, dogs aren't my specialty. I was puzzled by Napoleon's comments (there was some logic behind his explanations, even despite his claims that "this is an Indian website and therefore it is biased"), so I prefered to wait for another opinion. Where do you read about the alleged dislike? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Your use of Speedy Deletion

This is just to point out to you that the DRV for the article you refused to undelete, Litton Industries bombing, found 7-0 unanimously that it "seems like the deleting admin has no idea what A10 is for and how it is supposed to work". So I'm going to go ahead and notify you that you may want to refresh yourself on the exact circumstances when Speedy Deletion can be used, and when you are required to follow the same nomination for deletion process as everybody else. LikeJudasOfOld (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The link to the discussion, which I've just closed, is here. Please review that feedback as clarification of when A10 usage is endorsed by the community. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 07:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

ceo

I think ceo deserves to be restored. They're a popular band; just google "ceo white magic" and you'll find a ton of reviews from the likes of Pitchfork, BBC, etc. exeunt (talk) 06:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

London Wikimedia Fundraiser

Good evening! This is a friendly message from Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, inviting you to the London Wikimedia Fundraising party on 19th December 2010, in approximately one week. This party is being held at an artistic London venue with room for approximately 300 people, and is being funded by Ed Saperia, a non-Wikipedian who has a reputation for holding exclusive events all over London. This year, he wants to help Wikipedia, and is subsidising a charity event for us. We're keen to get as many Wikimedians coming as possible, and we already have approximately 200 guests, including members of the press, and some mystery guests! More details can be found at http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/London - expect an Eigenharp, a mulled wine hot tub, a free hog roast, a haybale amphitheatre and more. If you're interested in coming - and we'd love to have you - please go to the ten.wikipedia page and follow the link to the Facebook event. Signing up on Facebook will add you to the party guestlist. Entry fee is a heavily subsidised £5 and entry is restricted to over 18s. It promises to be a 10th birthday party to remember! If you have any questions, please email me at chasemewiki at gmail.com.

Hope we'll see you there, (and apologies for the talk page spam) - Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

General methodology and Undocumented functions

??? Sorry, what is it - "essay hung on neologism"? Where did you find neologism? There are links to special books! Just look! Thanks Hamard Evitiatini (talk) 12:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC) ??? Isn't clear, that Undocumented functions and Undocumented features are not the same! Undocumented features found in computer SOFTWARE releases, but undocumented functions found in any artifacts of technological culture. It's simple. Please, unblock my article. Thanks Hamard Evitiatini (talk) 13:04, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Recreate Heidelberg High School JROTC

Hey I was wondering if you could recreate my article so I can change it. And I ment to put wreath I just dont use the word that often. Seriousmanatknight (talk) 20:51, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

  • It is highly unlikely that your corps will ever be deemed notable enough for Wikipedia. You can try re-submitting via AfC but do not expect much joy. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 22:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of user:Arbatchelor

You deleted a page wholesale from another user without warning. She is working on how to create verifiable third-party descriptions of an organization that is NOT her own (it was only on her own page b/c she's new to Wikipedia and didn't know about the sandbox when practicing doing code), and that we believe does meet Wikipedia's notability standards for musicians, albeit in smaller scale than other groups. There was nothing wrong with the creation of a page for that organization--Wikipedia has pages about many local choruses from around the world, and none of those other choirs use their proceeds to support local NGOs as part of their reason to exist. If you want to discuss whether it makes more sense as a stub vs full entry, or to push my student to seek out other third party sources before publishing it as a full-flown entry, why not first flag it and/or start a talk page? The whole scale deletion was over-the-top, and you should at least restore her personal page to her to allow her to learn to do it right. Cubanabop (talk) 20:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

iRadek Software

You have indicated your intent to delete the entry Iradek software from Wikipedia. What is the course of action that you prescribe for having that entry retained? The company in question is notable as they have created something new and that has not been previously recorded in the history of human kind. This typically warrants entry into the Wikipedia. Please advise. Regards, Abner Jenkins — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.173.57 (talk) 22:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

  • What pray, has "not been previously recorded in the history of human kind"? Ridiculous language like that will help speed up the deletion of the article. Assuming it gets deleted, you raise the matter at deletion review. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 22:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Golaem page deletion

Cloderic (talk) 08:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC) While I understand you concerns regarding the relevance of the Golaem article in an encyclopedia, some other company in the very same market having roughly the same size are present on wikipedia (Kynapse, AiLive...). Wikipedia provides interested users in such technology a good entry point for further web researches, and people already reach our website (roughly 25% of our traffic) from wikipedia articles where we're cited (Crowd Simulation, List of game AI middleware). The article I wrote was citing some sources (I intended to add more independent press articles) and was well-linked to relevent topic pages.

Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference

I added the Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference as external link instead of internal wiki link, which directs the reader to a deleted page. You tagged my action [an edit to Ceramide] as vandalism and I respectfully disagree. According to the wiki rules vandalism is:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Vandalism cannot and will not be tolerated. Common types of vandalism are the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, and the insertion of nonsense into articles. Even if misguided or ill-considered, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism

I would understand if it is not possible to link to a userpage, but this happened in good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia. Let me elaborate on this a little bit more so you may understand the scope of this page and my perspective on this. I have contacted several of my colleagues and leading experts in the lipid research field to have a look at the conference page. Comments were uniformly: perfect and glad to see encyclopedic information on a pure educational conference that is around for 45 years (which can certainly not be assumed for most of the wiki pages on media celebrities claiming an encyclopedic status. Sorry for being blunt here). I familiarized myself with the wiki rules and can certainly understand your concerns. However, I think that some of your responses or tags are somewhat insulting. Please keep in mind that this conference page has nothing to sell or self-advertise. It is an established educational conference and the wiki page allows students and post-docs to learn about it and link to other pages on subjects presented in the conference. They will be encouraged to edit other wiki pages and correct or improve their scientific content. Thank you for your understanding. Ebieberich (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

  • OK, OK, it was not vandalism. I unreservedly withdraw the edit summary. But I think it is nit-picking to discuss an edit summary when the edit itself (after a second edit) was uncontroversial. Why on earth do you think it is not possible to link to a user page? I am very dubious about the notability of the Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference but I have moved your draft to User:Ebieberich/sandbox. You must provide evidence of notability. Having done that, submit it via AfC. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 22:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring the article in my sandbox. I was wondering if you still have the later page with external links to universities that mention the Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference in their department websites. I guess I would need this for notability. It also had edits of my colleagues who just started to use this page. What I find in my sandbox is the previous version without these links and edits. Thank you. Ebieberich (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC).

Would you please remove the tag "vandalism" from the edit summary. I figured that edits have to be proposed on "My talk" first before the article can be altered. However, from your response I thought it was obvious that the link to the conference page was introduced in good faith and not intended to vandalize the actual article on ceramide or sphingolipids (besides, the three major conferences on these topics are mentioned, not just the one the article is about). Honestly, I am just doing my job in trying to create a webpage on a lipid conference. I do this with approval of many lipid experts who have seen the article and found it worth to be submitted to Wikipedia. After discussion with you and OrangeMike, I agree that AFC is a good way to have it reviewed by someone else and that's what I am going to do. I am not sure yet where to declare my conflict of interest, but you may be able to help me with that. However, I really don't like my institute getting a message on "vandalism", in particular in this obvious case. Please remove the "vandalism" tag and reverse any IP blocks.Ebieberich (talk) 23:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking care of this. I can explain myself later on this issue. If I am not mistaken I think you have edited the article on the Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference webpage. Shall I now resubmit it via AFC or is it already under review and I better wait what happens. Thank you for your help. Ebieberich (talk) 03:16, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

  • "I think you have edited" - for goodness sake! Have I or haven't I? Learn to read edit histories. I edited your draft for Southeastern Regional Lipid Conference. That does not constitute review. When you have added evidence of notability, you should submit the article to AfC. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 11:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I hope you have read John's unique comments. Before you spend any more time on the article, give me links to three organisations comparable to your own who have articles here. (This is not a waste of time. You clearly have not studied other articles sufficiently. Following the style of other articles would help you improve the chances of your article at AfC.) Also, in the course of finding these articles, you might like to follow this advice. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 12:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I have to admit that it was hard to find a good standard for a conference page, but there are many examples of very heterogeneous pages, mostly without third party reference. Since you asked for 3 examples: Microbial population biology, International Conference on Systems Biology, and very surprisingly, a page that is just a list of webpages for the conference List of systems biology conferences. What is the encyclopedic value of this? I was more successful to find a good standard by visiting organization webpages, for example that of the American Society for Neurochemistry. I have changed the SERLC webpage accordingly, just mentioned the educational value as a fact without praising this or promoting the conference. As evidence (third party), I have listed third party websites that cover SERLC and mention the graduate student awardees. What do think, is it AFC-ready? Thank you for your continuous effort. Ebieberich (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC).

Well, at least you are fair and kept the standard as I can see. I guess someone will hate me now. Ebieberich (talk) 19:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


Deletion of Residential Tenancies Authority page

Hi I had seen your message that the content I had put on was in violation of copyright. In the time that it took me to track down alternate content you had deleted the page, which either means I was slow finding the content or you were super speedy at deleting... I have alternate content which is not the same as that on our website, so can I now please recreate the page with better content. Pretty pleeease? Denise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denisesw (talk • contribs) 01:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Have I protected the page? So why do you bother to ask? "Track down alternate content" = find other copyrighted material? I know it is an outrageous suggestion but have you considered the possibility of writing the article in your own words? — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 01:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Doom10 page.

A7 is just your opinion. Until I find a wikimod who understands what the page is about or expand on it, can you undelete it and move it to my help or sandbox area? Redsandro (talk) 17:57, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Oliver Bevan

Hello. You have deleted the four images I uploaded for the article I am writing on Oliver Bevan because Wikipedia does "not allow non-commercial only licencing". I'm not entirely sure what that means (though it sounds sensible); however, I had contacted the artist and told him I am writing a Wikipedia page on his art, and asked if I could use the images. He consented, so I would be very grateful if you can let me know how I should mark these images for use in the article? I'm still learning about writing for Wikipedia so any help would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, Jpardey01 (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/Archive_to_2011_Jan_06&oldid=402903877"