Jump to content

User talk:RHaworth/2011 Nov 19: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
←Blanked the page
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User talk:RHaworth/Archive index}}

== Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs ==

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

== Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh ==

: ''for previous, unenlightening discussion see [[User talk:RHaworth/2011 Nov 04#Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh]]''

Hi, I went thru the entire discussion, I agree with you guys for not using Honorific, but here the matter is of identification, this is what he is known by more than 4 crore followers i.e. '''Saint Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Ji Insan''' and as sited by Vikas articles of some more Saints starting with word Guru or Saint, and He has given you the links of the certificates of '''Guinness World Record''', aren't they enough, what else you want than?
The matter here is not just of concusses, but also of what the reality is.
Please come with your doubts, may be I can also help to solve this matter.
Being a wiki user my purpose is to put the most accurate and the best possible information to the world. I will also suggest to please Move name to
'''Saint Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Ji Insan''' or say you don't trust the certificate from '''Guinness World Record'''. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Prem.rakheja|Prem.rakheja]] ([[User talk:Prem.rakheja|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Prem.rakheja|contribs]]) 19:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

* It is not a matter of "trusting the certificate", it is simply that GWR has a different attitude to honorifices from Wikipedia. Further discussion at [[Talk:Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

== WP:AFC ==

Sry, but why did you delete [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Book car rentals and taxis online in India, from anywhere in the world]]? Such articles were only declined as advertisement and that was it. At AFC we delete only articles which are copyvios or are attack pages... <small style="font:bold 12px Courier New;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap"><font color="#000">[[User talk:Mabdul|mabdul]]</font></small> 11:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
* Blatant advertising and vandalism/hoax are grounds for speedy deletion in every namespace. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 11:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Since I'm no admin, I only saw: A7, maybe add next time hoax to your reason next time. <small style="font:bold 12px Courier New;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap"><font color="#000">[[User talk:Mabdul|mabdul]]</font></small> 11:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
* Where, pray, did you see "A7"? The deletion log clearly states G11. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 11:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Meh, G11, doesn't matter: still no hoax tagging. <small style="font:bold 12px Courier New;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap"><font color="#000">[[User talk:Mabdul|mabdul]]</font></small> 17:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
* Why should there be an hoax tag? It was not an hoax. Please get it into your head: <u>all</u> of the G series of speedy deletion criteria apply in every namespace. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

== the bombshellettes ==

Hi there,
I wrote the page [[the bombshellettes]] and as you can probably tell, am totally new to this whole wikipedia thing! is there any chance you can send me the stuff I wrote as I don;t have a copy) and tell what I did wrong so I can edit and re-do? thanks so much, really appreciate it :)
Rosie <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pennsylvania65000|Pennsylvania65000]] ([[User talk:Pennsylvania65000|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pennsylvania65000|contribs]]) 12:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
* I don't need to send you anything - see the edit history of [[User:Pennsylvania65000]]! The article was deleted because of a total absence of links to [[WP:BAND|significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 14:37, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

== Atmosphir ==
I am requesting undeletion of [[Atmosphir]]. &mdash; (via e-mail)
* I have e-mailed you the states of the article at its two deletions. Feel free to submit a new draft via [[user:RHaworth/moans#AfC|AfC]]. If the article is accepted, unprotection of the title will be uncontroversial. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 17:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

== Moving Pages ==

Why didn't you just mark them as stubs? &mdash; [[User:Curb Chain|Curb Chain]] ([[User talk:Curb Chain|talk]]) 17:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
* Presumably you are referring to your bibliography of &hellip; titles. Answer: because they are so derisorily short that they do not even qualify to called stubs. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Considering they are notable topics, I see no reason to delete these pages.[[User:Curb Chain|Curb Chain]] ([[User talk:Curb Chain|talk]]) 03:27, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
* Because they are notable topics, I did not delete them. Because they had no content, they had no right in the (article) namespace. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 09:45, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

You were amused by the statement "fleshed out". That's not the half of it. Before Curb Chain started playing with it, the content of the page looked more like its current incarnation [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls/Bibliography of sociology|in WikiProject space]]. I had to get an administrator to help me restore the lost content. [[User:RockMagnetist|RockMagnetist]] ([[User talk:RockMagnetist|talk]]) 02:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

== Cough Syrup redirect ==

Hi there, I recently requested a move (G6: [[Cough Syrup (song)]] to [[Cough Syrup]]), with the intention of keeping the generic "[[Cough syrup]]" term as a redirect to [[Cough medicine]], which itself would have a hatnote updated to reflect the move. My understanding is that this is acceptable per [[Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(capitalization)#Page_names_that_only_differ_by_capitalization|WP:CAPS]], and that the move would create a situation similar to, say, "[[Morning glories]]"/"[[Morning Glories]]" - where the former redirects to the [[Morning glory]] species of plants, and the latter is an article on a comic book series.

I see that you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cough_Syrup&diff=458961844&oldid=458882846 redirected] "Cough Syrup" to the "Cough syrup" redirect and so I am seeking your feedback as to whether my understanding of the naming conventions is incorrect, if my request was submitted in the wrong place/manner, if my communication was/is unclear or if there is some other factor I might have overlooked. Thank you for your help. <small><span style="background-color:#ffffff;border: 1px solid;">[[User:Gongshow|'''<span style="color:#000000; background-color:#ffffff">&nbsp;Gongshow&nbsp;</span>''']]</span></small><sup>[[User talk:Gongshow|''Talk'']]</sup> 23:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

* It is my understanding that if you have [[some title]] then [[Some Title]] must redirect to it - we have {{tl|R from other capitalisation}} specifically for that purpose. Or in this case [[Cough syrup]] and [[cough Syrup]] must both redirect in the same way. If nothing else, it is to save confusing Wikipedia clones which use non-case-sensitive titles. There is an hat note in [[cough medicine]] pointing to the song article - that is necessary and sufficient. We usually only create a disambiguation page when there are three or more things to disambiguate. And yes, I would prefer to see [[Morning Glories]] as a redirect to [[morning glory]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
** Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. Cheers, <small><span style="background-color:#ffffff;border: 1px solid;">[[User:Gongshow|'''<span style="color:#000000; background-color:#ffffff">&nbsp;Gongshow&nbsp;</span>''']]</span></small><sup>[[User talk:Gongshow|''Talk'']]</sup> 20:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

== question about deleted page ==

Hello Mr. Haworth, I would like to know why the page about [[Road of Hope in Color (Ruta de Esperanza en Color)]] was deleted. Thanks in advance for your response.
Regards,
[[Special:Contributions/190.121.94.165|190.121.94.165]] ([[User talk:190.121.94.165|talk]]) 04:47, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Milimar
* I do not talk to IP addresses and especially not to an IP address that is not capable of reading a move log entry. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

== About [[Talk:Nootsara Tomkom]] ==

Hi RHaworth. The usual - I've re-started a talk page you deleted, without asking you first. <small>Cue yet another [[Wikipedia:Perennial proposals|Perennial proposal]]: "that trusted users should granted a [[Wikipedia:User access levels|permission]] to re-start deleted pages, because lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, blah blah blah."</small> --[[User:Shirt58|Shirt58]] ([[User talk:Shirt58|talk]]) 11:14, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
* Why just tell me about the talk page - what about the article? Next time, don't even bother to tell me. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
::{{like}}--[[User:Shirt58|Shirt58]] ([[User talk:Shirt58|talk]]) 13:48, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

== Deletion of images ==
Deletion of Images for not complying with your completely unreasonable demands. OK buddy, I'll take different screen shots and put them there. They will look exactly the same, but they are released under the license, just like the previous ones, but now they conform to your bureaucracy. There will be no warning of licenses on the website, ever, I prefer to use the space for say, presenting the company. They are my images and I can do as I please. I released other images under the same license that appear on the website, and nobody ever complained, except for now, or they did, but they went away, because they, like you are wrong. Regardless of where the images are, and if the website states noting of licensing, because they are here now, they are what I say they are, and that is images under the creative commons 3.0 license. I will take new screen shots, call them the same thing, and put them back, and though they appear the be the same images, they are not, and are what I decide they will be. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Canadiansteve|Canadiansteve]] ([[User talk:Canadiansteve|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Canadiansteve|contribs]]) 21:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Survey suppression==
RHaworth, I suppressed that survey because:
#It claimed WMF or Movement-wide authority to add legitimacy, which it did not have;
#It claimed complete anonymity, which it did not have;
#It had not been cleared by counsel;
#It was being run by a third-party not bound by the privacy policies, and the survey format being used would mean that ''anyone filling it out would have their IP address logged outside of any applicable privacy or data protection policies''.
30 seconds spent investigating my contributions would have revealed to you that I had also rolled back every ''other'' instance of the survey. It would also reveal the numerous messages I had sent to the survey's source, which made clear (both individually and collectively) the reasons for my revert. Instead of reading these, or indeed constructively objecting to my rollback, you chose to restore the survey, thus objecting in such a way as to draw further attention to the survey and put the personal data of both you and your [http://toolserver.org/~mzmcbride/watcher/?db=enwiki_p&titles=User:RHaworth&measure=centijimbos 417 talkpage watchers] at risk.

As an administrator, I would expect you to know that the use of the rollback tool does not provide an edit summary. As an administrator, I would expect you to do basic research before reverting edits as "vandalism", particularly edits by a WMF contractor or a long term user. As an administrator, I would expect you to know [[WP:VANDALISM|what vandalism ''actually is'']]. In future, assume good faith, do basic research before assuming that such an edit constitutes "vandalism", and try to act in a way that does not put yourself or others at risk. I accept that I should, in the future, use tools that provide opportunities for an appropriate edit summary. My focus in this case, with its possible implications, was to do things as fast as possible, not as cleanly as possible - something at least partially undermined by your insistence on reverting my suppression in a high-profile manner without taking the time to investigate the circumstances. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 21:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

* Of course I know that rollback does not provide an edit summary. I disapprove of it for that reason. I try to avoid using it. If I was deprived of rollback rights, I would not complain. OK, to call your edit vandalism was exaggeration for effect. I am only partially persuaded by your argument that there was a need for speed. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 22:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

::{{tps}}Excuse me butting in ;) I fully support Okeys' action. The fake survey was little more than vandalism and not only was there a serious risk of compromising users' security (especially admins' as it was only addressed to them), but it makes a mockery of an official WMF survey that is currently taking place, and was blatantly dishonestly designed to convey the impression that it came from the WMF. I applaud Okeys' action, and if I had seen it sooner I would have done the same. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 04:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*RHaworth, if you don't think "a survey that provides the IP data for an undetermined number of administrators outside the privacy policy under false pretenses" is an issue - if you think that exaggerating WMF edits as vandalism "for effect" without checking to see if the edits were important or not is appropriate - <s>then you should not be an administrator. It's as simple as</s>. You are free to put yourself at risk however much you like, but there is no excuse for putting others at risk when the tiniest bit of research and effort on your part would have prevented it. Your job is to serve and safeguard the community, not help their personal information run into third-party hands. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 11:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
**Ollie, will you calm down? You're using a staff account to yell at someone over an issue that could have been resolved much more amicably if you hadn't used your staff account to yell at someone else. I very much doubt that Rcsprinter was trying to impersonate staff or claim any sort of "authority" for his surveys, and it seems he was a little naive with regards to personal information the survey collected. Now ''maybe'' that justified a block, and the block has been made, so your berating everybody who questions it isn't going to help anything. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''HJ&nbsp;Mitchell'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]] 14:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
***I'm sorry if I came off as "berating"; my issue was with how RHaworth tried to deal with the situation. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 14:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
****Note that RHaworth is not questioning the block or the appropriateness of it - he's questioning whether reverting the survey instances was an acceptable action. Can we at least agree that having links to surveys that sniff IPs on prominent talkpages, and reverting staff edits as vandalism, are both silly things to do? [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 14:35, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*****Possibly, could you first clarify that your removal of surveys was a required WMF staff action rather than as an administrator and so this description of RH's action is accurate? --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 14:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
::::::Does it really matter? When you have to put a fire out, you don't go back home first to get changed into the right clothes for the job - you grab the nearest extinguisher and put it out. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 15:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, if RHaworth is to be criticised by a member of staff speaking on behalf of the WMF because they were hampered in completing staff actions then it does matter. If accurately described above, then this is not a simple case of an administrator reverting another editor's mistake. To use your own phrasing, there is no current fire and the criticism is from an official WMF account rather than an alternative account. [[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 15:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*My removal was an action undertaken as a WMF contractor, with my WMF account. It was not in my personal capacity. To be fair to RHaworth, my userpage states that I'll identify those "official" edits, but he has already said he knew full well that wasn't possible with the use of rollback. I can understand him questioning the edits in the absence of immediate confirmation of their "official" status (indeed, I'd hope that in most cases, people will pay attention and point out my mistakes so I can improve) but this does not extend to reverting the edits, identifying them as vandalism, and doing so without taking any time to confirm whether or not the edit was justified. I have now voided the survey data, so the "emergency" is over, but in the time it took me to do so personal data from 36 users, including 24 administrators and an arbitrator, had been logged. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 15:38, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
**Thanks for the clarification. Could you please add to your user page role description to encompass activities such as these that may be considered by many to be part of what Wikipedia administrators do? I am sure you appreciate that confusion between official and non-official actions may crop up again if WMF role accounts are routinely used for vandal fighting or other simple administrative tasks. As you have the opportunity of talking with RHaworth in person next Sunday, you may consider having a friendly discussion to explain the nature of your contract work for the WMF and how you intend to handle future related "fire fighting". --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 15:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
***I can't see this happening again, to be honest, and it's certainly not used for either vandalism or "simple administrative tasks", now or in the past. I'll reverse the burden on my account; when I do qualify a statement as from me personally, it's from me personally. In all other times it's an action in my role of as a contractor. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 15:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
****Sorry, I did not intend the word "simple" to be read offensively, please consider it struck out. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 16:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*****Oh no, that was fine; I was replying more with confusion than annoyance :P. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 16:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*Note that I don't think we're going to get anywhere on this. Right or wrong, the actions have already happened, and won't be fixed by arguing. I advocate we simply drop the subject - I'll make an effort to use more flexible tools in future, and I'm sure RHaworth will ameliorate his behaviour too. [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 15:49, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
******And a note that "you shouldn't be an admin" - not a foundation statement. <small> god I'm a dolt</small> [[User:Okeyes (WMF)|Okeyes (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Okeyes (WMF)|talk]]) 17:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

== Hollywood Connection ==

I noticed that [[Hollywood Connection Dance Convention and Competition]] has been deleted and I would like to write about it. Is that a possibility? I have read the guidelines and understand the expectations. [[User:Sdeere07|Sdeere07]] ([[User talk:Sdeere07|talk]]) 00:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
* Why the curious wording to the question? We do know that it was you who submitted the first version. I suspect that you have a [[WP:COI|COI]] and so we would prefer you not to contribute. But if you insist, if you write an article instead of an advert and provide evidence of notability, then a submission via [[user:RHaworth/moans#AfC|AfC]] will receive consideration. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 09:45, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

== Adaptations of a horned frog ==
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect [[Adaptations of a horned frog]]. Since you had some involvement with the ''Adaptations of a horned frog'' redirect, you might want to participate in [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 November 6#Adaptations of a horned frog|the redirect discussion]] (if you have not already done so). <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 01:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

== Page you deleted is back ==

Last year you deleted a page called [[SAM Group]], by [[User:Caliclima]]; there now seems to be a new page called [[Sustainable Asset Management]] created by the same user which is really an article about the same company. I don't think this now falls under [[WP:CSD#A7 | A7]] since there does seem some indication of why the company is important in the article (they've had some major clients and claim to have a widely-used index), although these claims are not verified (almost all the links are to SAM Group's web site). I'm a relative newbie and I'd appreciate your thoughts, including if there's a better forum for me to raise this question. Thanks. [[User:Statisfactions|Statisfactions]] ([[User talk:Statisfactions|talk]]) 15:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
* This is the proper place to ask my opinion. If you can bear to look at those ugly naked URIs (some of which aren't even proper links), go through them and decide how many are actually independent references providing evidence of notability. If you are not statisfied, your options are: apply a {{tl|prod}} tag or, probably best in this case, go straight to [[WP:AfD|AfD]]. I recommend the use of [[WP:TW|Twinkle]] - it enables you to do an AfD nomination in one edit rather than three. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 15:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
** Thanks for your thoughts, especially for recommending Twinkle. Digging in it looks like [[Dow Jones Sustainability Index]], SAM's main product, actually is legitimately notable and has good journal sources out there for it; by extension SAM probably is as well. The articles are now ugly and super-promotional, but probably deserve to exist, so I'll challenge the unverified material instead of nominating for deletion. [[User:Statisfactions|Statisfactions]] ([[User talk:Statisfactions|talk]]) 18:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
* Agreed. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 21:53, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

== Sam Pepper ==

Hi, I was just wondering why you deleted my page, [[Sam Pepper]] just now.
If I could get a response on how to make it better that would be much appreciated. Thanks
[[User:Isaywhat|Isaywhat]] ([[User talk:Isaywhat|talk]]) 22:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
* You have never touched the [[Sam Pepper]] page but if you had actually looked at it, you would have seen that it is a redirect to [[list of Big Brother 2010 housemates (UK)#Sam]] where, in my view, the guy is more than adequately dealt with. Please also state your connection with {{user|Josiewilliss}}. It is too much of a coincidence that two people should both write about the guy on the same day. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 22:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

If you had read my talk area, where I requested not to have my page deleted, you would of read that I had seen the redirected page.
I also have no idea who this {{user|Josiewilliss}} is. But yes, strange coincidence. &mdash; [[User:Isaywhat|Isaywhat]] ([[User talk:Isaywhat|talk]]) 23:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
* What is "my talk area"? You have not yet edited [[User talk:Isaywhat]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 23:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)


Obviously it did not send. Or I did not set it up. I am new to this, cut me a break.
Although, [http://www.twitter.com/SamPepper Sam Pepper] is a verified memeber of twitter, and if they can recognize him, shouldn't Wikipedia ackowledge him to?
I will continue to edit and 'wikify' my page until it is up to standard and not subject to be deleted. [[User:Isaywhat|Isaywhat]] ([[User talk:Isaywhat|talk]]) 23:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

:Being verified on Twitter is not an achievement. Being verified on Twitter used to be done if someone was being impersonated. This is so that you know that "BarackObama" is the real [[Barack Obama]], but "OFFICIALobama" or whatever isn't. Verified accounts are now being granted to advertising partners at Twitter, so it is possible to pay to be given verified status. Verified status has been given to journalists on Twitter by dint of a business relationship between Twitter and the journalist's employer. This, of course, goes against [[WP:NOTINHERITED]]. <small>I wonder whether we should mention this somewhere in Wikipedia's ever more sprawling policyspace.</small>
:Anyway, RHaworth, I do hope you've been enjoying the ''hilarious'' e-mails from Mr. Pepper's fans. [[User:Fox]] had some too. For 200,000 fans on Twitter, a measly ten emails reminded me rather of the story Jimmy Wales recounts from the neo-Nazi forums: they were all going to flood VfD and only about fifteen of them turned up! {{Smiley}} —[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] ([[User talk:Tom Morris|talk]]) 22:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
::For the convenience of us fun-hating grumps, I have bundled together a convenient essay which can be cited in deletion discussions, namely [[WP:NOFRIENDS]]. —[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] ([[User talk:Tom Morris|talk]]) 12:59, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
::* Pathetic is the word that springs to mind rather than hilarious. I received e-mails from three people and of these lauren hill could not even manage to say what page she was talking about - but circumstantial evidence suggests this guy. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 21:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

== I'd like to help a friend learn from her mistake ==

Hi RHawthorn. A friend of mine, {{user|EDMSolix}} got a speedy deletion from you yesterday.
Before she posted, she did run her posting by me, and given I earned a Excellent Newcomer Award, I feel sorry that maybe I gave her some bad advice.

By the way, she didn't think she published it. She thought she only created it in her sandbox as I told her to do.
I didn't know she would create a bad user name like EDMSolix. She didn't run her user ID choice by me first. But the text, I had influence over what she wrote.

Would it be possible for you to either talk to her directly and gave her some feedback on what she should have done to make the text less promotional? Or, do you want to communicate through me to her.
Because her user ID has been bannned, she obviously asked me to reach out to you for advice.
Thx - Pnchou <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pnchou|Pnchou]] ([[User talk:Pnchou|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pnchou|contribs]]) 04:12, 10 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

* A salutation is not required on messages on this page but if you must give one, please use copy&paste to ensure you get my name right. True, the submission in question was not in the (article) namespace but blatant advertising is grounds for deletion everywhere in Wikipedia. There is a subtle difference in Wikispeak between "blocked" - possibly allowed back under certain certain circumstances and "banned" - not wanted back under any circumstances. I this case, "blocked" is the applicable term. You ask me to talk directly:
: EDMSolix, kindly have the decency to <u>wait</u> until someone with no [[WP:COI|COI]] thinks that [[Solix Technologies]] are notable and writes about them here. If there are other non-spammy subjects that you wish to write about, feel free to create a new account and start contributing. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 16:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth - Sorry for the misspelling and thx for your speedy reply. Just to complete my understanding, pls clarify:

1. How/when could my friend earn the right to request her offending user ID be "unblocked"? Must she request that you personally or any volunteer to unblock her?
2. More importantly, if she wants to try and contribute to a new, non-spammy article, is the ONLY way for her to do so is to create a new User ID? Would there be any repercussions from the fact her offending User ID was attached to her email address? Hence, when she creates a new, non-offending User ID, must she use a new email address?
3. EDMSolix wanted to write about Solix, and she came to me beforehand. I studied [[IBM]] and [[Intel]] as examples before I gave her the bad advice that resulted in her writing about Solix. Bottom line is, can you cite examples of notable, non-public, company pages that we should have studied and modeled after?

Thx for making the time to teach us to learn from our mistake. &hellip; Cheers - PNChou <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pnchou|Pnchou]] ([[User talk:Pnchou|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pnchou|contribs]]) 17:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

* 1. I see no reason why the name [[user:EDMSolix|EDMSolix]] should ever be unblocked - it violates our policy against corporate names. 2. Your friend must create a <u>new account</u> with a new name that gives no hint that it belongs to more than one person. Is that too difficult to understand? If she finds she is currently blocked from creating a new account, that block will expire in a day or two or she can find a different IP address to register from. She may use the same e-mail address - we cannot see e-mail addresses. It will probably be obvious anyway that it is the new account of EDMSolix! 3. I repeat: your friend has a declared COI and should <u>not</u> be writing about Solix. If she insists on doing so then the IBM and Intel articles are perfectly good examples. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 18:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

* I have just been checking up. I think you are being disingenuous. Please explain the relationship between your friend and {{user|Measuredvictory}} who created [[Solix Technologies Inc.]], [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Solix Technologies Inc.]] and [[Solix Technologies]]. Given these precedents, any attempt at creating a new article will need to be made via [[user:RHaworth/moans#DRV|deletion review]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 18:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

== RE: requesting undeletion of Atmosphir ==

Hi RHawthorn,
I have received your instructions for creating a new draft for submission for [[Atmosphir]]. Since this is my first time doing any kind of contributions to Wikipedia, it will take me a little time to learn how to work my way around Wikipedia and how to write a good draft. I will post more updates and/or questions as necessary. Best,
Nazmus Shakib Khandaker
<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|signed]] comment added by [[User:NazmusKhandaker|Nazmus Shakib Khandaker]] ([[User talk:NazmusKhandaker|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nazmus|contribs]]) 10:49 AM, 10 November 2011 (Central Time (US & Canada))</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

* Oh dear, another person incapable of copy&pasting my user name. So where did I post "instructions for creating a new draft &hellip;". Please remind me. You have not requested sight of the previous versions and since you have not set up the "e-mail this user" facility, I cannot send them anyway. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 17:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

== Media deletion dropdown ==

Hello, Roger. I have attempted to answer your questions at [[User talk:JamesBWatson#Media deletion dropdown]]. How useful my attempt will be is another matter. Incidentally, something (I know not what) prompted me to look at your user page before posting this message. (I rarely bother with user pages.) I totally agree with you that "true Wikipedians are a distinct sub-species of homo sapiens". People who come to write about their band/company/whatever are not from the same universe. [[User:JamesBWatson|JamesBWatson]] ([[User talk:JamesBWatson|talk]]) 21:49, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

== Your message ==

The "ibids" are not my doing, and I will fix them at the end. [[User:James500|James500]] ([[User talk:James500|talk]]) 10:58, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see what difference it makes. [[User:James500|James500]] ([[User talk:James500|talk]]) 11:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

== deletion of Nehemiah Tabernacle, Inc ==

You recently deleted my article on [[Nehemiah Tabernacle, Inc.]] The fact that this is the only church of its kind in Pennsylvania, in my opinion, makes the subject noteworthy for its historic value. The article simply stated the history of the church, it's leadership, beliefs and affiliation, the same information any encyclopedia article would contain. It didn't include specific location, service times, etc., which to my mind would constitute advertising or promotion. The purpose of the article was simply to provide factual information on a church that is unique in the history of Pennsylvania.

Would you consider restoring the article, or at least offer suggestions for an article on this church?[[User:BroWCarey|BroWCarey]] ([[User talk:BroWCarey|talk]]) 22:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

:{{tps}} The article was clearly written not only to publicise the church and increase public awareness of it, but also to publicise the views of the church, including telling us what the church's "doctrinal statement" is, what it "has a special focus on", and so on. In short, it was clearly promotional. As for "offer suggestions for an article on this church", that presupposes that the subject is suitable for an article, i.e. that it satisfies Wikipedia's [[WP:Notability|notability guidelines]]. Nothing I have been able to find indicates that that is so. You may find it helpful to read [[Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations]]. [[User:JamesBWatson|JamesBWatson]] ([[User talk:JamesBWatson|talk]]) 10:12, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

:* I agree with the above. Also you should <u>wait</u> until someone less closely connected to the church thinks it is notable and writes about it. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 21:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

== TideArt ==

So what's the criteria for having an article about a web site? Because right now Wikipedia has hundreds of articles about web sites smaller than [[TideArt]]. If those all need to be deleted then I'll start putting up speedy delete tags. [[User:Elfguy|Elfguy]] ([[User talk:Elfguy|talk]]) 20:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

* For goodness sake, you have been contributing for six years. You should know the answer to your question by now. But in case you missed it, here is the content of [[talk:TideArt]]. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 21:52, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

=== Contested deletion ===

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because Wikipedia has articles about plenty of news sites about many subjects: [[Health News Review]] [[GigaOM]] [[Daily Radar]]. &mdash; [[User:Elfguy|Elfguy]] ([[User talk:Elfguy|talk]]) 00:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
:These web sites have been covered in other sources. You need to provide evidence that TideArt is notable by Wikipedia's criteria. Please see [[WP:N]] and [[WP:WEB]] for more information. <font color="DarkGray">...</font> [[User:discospinster|<font color="DarkOrange">'''disco'''</font><font color="DarkOliveGreen">'''''spinster'''''</font>]] <sub>[[User talk:discospinster|'''<font color="DarkGray">talk</font>''']]</sub> 02:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

== History merger requests ==

Hello RHaworth, I came across a couple copy/paste moves while reviewing at [[WP:AFC|Articles for Creation]]. Could you please history merge [[User:Mgvet/Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons]] into [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons]] and also history merge [[User:Mgvet/American College of Veterinary Surgeons (ACVS)]] into [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/American College of Veterinary Surgeons (ACVS)]]. Thank you, [[User:Alpha Quadrant|<span style="color:#000070; font-family: Times New Roman">'''''Alpha_Quadrant'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Alpha Quadrant|<span style="color:#00680B; font-family: Times New Roman"><sup>''(talk)''</sup></span>]] 22:19, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
* I don't see the point. All the edits have been done by Mgvet - knowing the edit history serves no useful purpose. But I have done the moves to keep you happy. &mdash; [[User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[User talk:RHaworth|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 22:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
**Thanks for moving the pages. Best, [[User:Alpha Quadrant|<span style="color:#000070; font-family: Times New Roman">'''''Alpha_Quadrant'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Alpha Quadrant|<span style="color:#00680B; font-family: Times New Roman"><sup>''(talk)''</sup></span>]] 22:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

==Virgin and Child with Saints (van der Weden)==
Cheers for sorting this out and deleting. [[User:Ceoil|Ceoil]] ([[User talk:Ceoil|talk]])

Revision as of 00:33, 14 November 2011

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/2011_Nov_19&oldid=460527514"