This user is an Online Ambassador on the English Wikipedia
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2009 August

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


Deletion of File:21 Club Gekko and Fox.jpg

The photo is no longer being used in my article. I will probably have the article removed until I can get more better references and images that can be used in the article. I apologize, I did not mean to use a vandalized photo. I am new to wiki and now know not to use edited photos. Also, do you think it is a good idea to add the article to Gordon Gekko page? (SRELYP 07:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC))

  • Did you actually read my contribution to the AfD discussion? I said a few words - not your pretentious waffle. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 07:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
    Um, I'm not sure that's called for. He seems to be a confused newbie per his talk page, that's all. Tim Song (talk) 08:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
    Photo is deleted. Thank you for your help. SRELYP 08:30, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Telecoms Resilience

Many thanks for helping out and wikifying. There is much to come on this subject, just working it out at the moment and will download shortly. Any further help in tidying up would be fantastic. Paul

Coiled Tubing

I have removed the references to the Flatpak product and links to the website and restored the coiled tubing umbilical page. Without the direct links or reference to a product name I don't see how this can constitute spam or advertising. Coiled tubing umbilicals are an emergent technology which is beginning to have a large impact on the practices in the oil and gas industry. This should be covered by Wikipedia. --Gcassie (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Wiki of Kosal

Good morning Mr Haworth, Did you had a look on the points, I have mentioned?

Please don't misunderstand me. I am new in Wiki. The map should have part of Anugul district particularly the Athamallik area. As I said earlier the Sambalpuri region article should be separated in to two part as "Proposed Kosal state" and other ones (Sambalpuri and western Orissa). In case you don't want to do that, please replace Sambalpuri region as Proposed Kosal state (western Orissa). Then we can try to edit it. (Skarmee (talk) 10:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

It has 10 districts and part of Anugul district. I agree with you. WODC site is also confusing. Sambalpuri is a term loosely used for the proposed Kosal state. I think part of the article can be transferred to Sambalpur. Most of the proposed state in India has separate page except Kosal. I have created a page called Kosal state movement. I need to have a clear picture about it. (Skarmee (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

  • If you want me to look at an article, create a wikilink! Kosal state movement is too much of an essay rather than an encyclopedia article. It lacks references. But above all there is no justification for a separate article. Why, why, why are you so reluctant to improve the Western Orissa article? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 12:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand your concern. I will improve the Western Orissa article. Could you please make it to Western Orissa (Proposed Kosal state)? Have a look on Kosal state movementand give me some suggestions. -- (Skarmee (talk) 12:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)) Do not merge my Kosal state movement article to western Orissa. -- (Skarmee (talk) 12:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

(Skarmee (talk) 13:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

  • I do not understand why you are not putting the title as Modern Dakhin Kosal or Proposed Kosal state? All other region of India have separate page for the aspirant states.

(Skarmee (talk) 13:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

  • Earlier you wrote an article "Proposed Kosal state" seems fine. Could you please change the name western Orissa to proposed Kosal state.

(Skarmee (talk) 15:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC))

Western Orissa

For Sambalpuri region, the title western Orissa is fine. Please do not redirect Kosal to Western orissa. I want to have a separate page for it.

Wiki of Kosal

Hello Mr Haworth, Earlier I have sent you a mail regarding the wiki of Kosal. It is not similar with that of Sambalpuri region. Sambalpuri region is only Sambalpur district. Sambalpur is a district of Kosal. Earlier this region was known as Dakhin Kosal. I hope you will not redirect the profile of Kosal to Sambalpuri region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skarmee (talkcontribs) 11:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Your geo converter

Note to self - action. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Luther spells

[title width guide]

US Constitution in foreign

[Finnish and Georgian exist]

Many of these translations do not exist in Word, and several were done before word processing began. The Swedish translation, for example, dates from 1921. The image is a PDF file which was made from a paper copy which was made from a microfiche of the original. I can put the PDF file on the Swedish Wikisource. The rarity and inaccessibility of such translations are part of what give Wikipedia its value. -Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadcaster101 (talkcontribs) 05:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and delete the pdf of the Vietnamese translation. I am going to have to learn how to do this, but it is clearly going to take a while. Broadcaster101 (talk) 06:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Re Swedish: in case you have not noticed, it has been moved to Commons:File:Constitution swedish 001.pdf. I am not sure which is more appropriate Commons or Wikisource but it does not matter: it will only ever be linked to, not embedded. OK, if the scan is really the only digital version that exists anywhere in the world, then we might as well have it.
Re Vietnamese. I only have deletion rights on the English Wikipedia: you must find the equivalent of {{db-author}} and apply the tag yourself see below. In this case the PDF is text-based so it took me a matter of seconds to convert it to an article. You will find it here. What you now need to do is:
RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 12:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Even I would have difficulty finding the equivalent of {{db-author}}. I have posted a request here. Let's see if anything happens. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 12:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

May I erase the Vietnamese page by deleting its content and then leaving a message which explains the deletion? Broadcaster101 (talk) 22:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

My request at the Wikiproject has had no effect so you may as well try it your way. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I deleted all but a few lines of the article. here The edit summary explains the reason. Is the original pdf file of the Vietnamese translation gone, or is it still somewhere in Wikisource or Wikipedia? I want to make sure all versions of the translation are deleted. Broadcaster101 (talk) 04:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It would have been good if you had provided a link when you did this edit - even external link format would have been better than nothing. Why do you ask "is … gone"? A glance at your contributions shows that it is still there. You could try uploading an empty PDF but that is as useless as was your blanking of the sandbox, ie. the original version is still visible via the history. I recommend that you send an e-mail to permissions-vi AT wikimedia DOT org with copy to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org (see WP:CONSENT) requesting deletion. Your consciencence can then be clear. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 09:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Worcestershire/by type

Hiya. You deleted this after moving it (properly) into projectspace. In the future, could you please mark the page as patrolled first? Otherwise it remains in the NPP log, and has to be recreated in order to get it removed. Thanks! → ROUX  02:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

  • How was I to know it needed to be marked patrolled? I use an RSS feed and normally never see the "mark as patrolled" link. Bring more pressure on the developers to: a) fix the bug that leaves deleted-but-unpatrolled titles in the list and b) let me see the "mark as patrolled" link - if I saw it, I would probably click it. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Deprod of The Write Environment

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from The Write Environment, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -Falcon8765 (talk) 07:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Episcopal bishop

You're right, it's like writing "royal king". I noticed the problem when I had finished writing the article, but I left it as it was since that's how I found the redlink on List of Episcopal bishops, which is similarly (and confusingly) named. Coemgenus 15:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


...on Ricky Underwood. Seems like almost all the other major characters have articles, whether or not that's a good thing, they don't have character summaries in the List of... article so in the meantime, perhaps unprotecting might be worthwhile. –xenotalk 18:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


Hi, seeing as you have dealt with Hertfordshire1234, you might want to say hello to Oakwell12341234 (talk · contribs), who has created an article at Earl of Hampshire, which apart from being a copy of another article, has a rather puported descendant and heir.... igh. (Away for four days and the first thing I see at new pages is another Dashwood article :)) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Template Oscoor

Are you aware that {{oscoor}} is not working? Please see Template talk:Oscoor#External link failed. Should I have put {{editprotected}} into that talk? --Redrose64 (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes. Look at [spam filter blocked!] - the resource is hosted on Box 16, HDD #4. The relevant people are aware (though they are taking their time to fix it). Also, I am urging myself to move the resource to the toolserver (see above). — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

What is this "" - it's not part of the error message I'm getting, and doesn't seem to be the name of a Wikipedia article or user? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

  • It is what we call a URL as in Because some other sites on have been guilty of spamming, it is blocked so I cannot create a proper link. You must copy it into your brower's address box and hit enter. As at this moment, I get a page with 20 or so green ticks and one red cross - and guess which symbol coresponds to my website! — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:56, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

{{oscoor}} is now working, thanks. I do know what a URL is, it's just that no URL that I've encountered before looks like that. I'm used to them beginning www. failing that, http: (as in or - because some browsers, such as Netscape Navigator, will automatically insert a http://www. if you enter something that doesn't already begin either http: or www. Further, I've never encountered a top-level domain resembling - I'm more used to com,, org,, gov - having now checked List of Internet top-level domains, I see that .cc is "Cocos (Keeling) Islands (Australian territory: do not confuse with Cocos islands in Guam)" so I'm not really surprised that I've never come across it before. Now that you've explained it, I can get to with no error: Box 16, HDD #4 appears to show as OK. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:08, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Beg pardon

I did not leave a mess behind me out of carelessness, but out of lack of knowledge of how to delete, redirect, or whatever. I did ask my coworker to clean up. In time, as my skills increase, I will be able to deal with these problems myself.

Georgejdorner (talk) 20:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Engine disabling procedure

You are correct on the deletion of Engine disabling procedure. My fault. I did not pay attention that it was from .gov Still might be an A7 or PROD material. Restored. Thanks for the heads up. -- Alexf(talk) 17:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I never said re-instate it! Don't you think it is terrible that on both sides of the Atlantic, governments are ignoring all green ideas and providing incentives for people to scrap vehicles? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Pin Prick Attacks

Hello I too fretted about the name to be given to the above article when I created it. Although I believe the content of the article is definitely notable enough for an article on Wikipedia as the urban legend is very well known and numerous books and websites make mention of it, as well as official statements put out by law enforcement agencies and medical foundations, the naming of the article proved problematic. In the end I decided to take the title of the article from the name given by which is widely recognised as a credible source for the verification of Urban Legends. For more information please go to --Edchilvers (talk) 16:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

  • But you did not fret about the capitalisation and pluralisation! I willing to let pin prick attack stay but please attend to the orphan and refimprove tags. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Meh: User Tony1/Noun plus -ing

Thanks, RH, much obliged—What an incompetent typist I'm becoming. I guess you picked it up on the newly created articles list. If so, please continue your good work there. It's frighteningly dynamic and we need all the admins we can get to police the very non-notable articles I see popping up all the time! Tony (talk) 10:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

And more thanks for the latest of my glitches. I promise I'll take care from now on, although I rarely create/move articles. Tony (talk) 10:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of being/operating a sock? Tony (talk) 07:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Certainly not. Merely noting an interesting co-incidence - see here. Incidentally, I asked the validator about your talk page. valign="left" is, I believe in your handwriting. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Err, sry, I'm really dumb about some computer things. Makes me feel like I've got blinkers on, because I become good at the ones I know how to use. I even took out a patent for a computer application once (with a programmer): how on earth did that happen? Tony (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

79 - test

[ignore this section]

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Madden NFL 2010

You should consider to unlock Madden NFL 2010 and make it a redirect to Madden NFL 10. --bender235 (talk) 19:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


Can't believe I made that archiving error. Thanks so much for the fast patchwork! ThuranX (talk) 02:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Gareth Potts

Hi RHaworth. I'm here to talk to you about the article I created called Gareth Potts. I don't know how to quote sources on parts of the article? hence the reason why your questioning noterity? Gareth Potts has appeared on sky sports many times playing in professional world pool championships, winning 3. He also has a website, of which I stated where I got my information about him from on the sources section of the article. Please re-consider your decision to delete the page I created. Also, could you help make it look better by using your vast wikipedia knowledge to "quote sources/references"? Thanks, Wordyrappinghood91. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordyrappinghood91 (talkcontribs) 17:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

  • The word is "notability", not "notoriety" and certainly not "noterity"! Do you seriously think I am going to try and find references for you? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I do apologise, I did not mean "find references for me", I meant like when you use a sentance in your articles, and quote what you said at the end of it? E.g. "He lost the final to Jim Bloggs"...there is normally a quotation mark at the end, and you can usually click on it and it would take you to the website where it verifies it? I just don't know how to do it thats all. So please re-consider your decision. Thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordyrappinghood91 (talkcontribs) 17:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Please read Help:Footnotes. In fact we do try to judge articles on the notability of their subjects, not on the formatting, so just add links in any sensible manner. But naked links are not sensible - clothe them - see this note. Also, one link per line please. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

David Millard

In 2008, you page protected David Millard, and I am wondering if it would be OK to make that a redirect to David R. Millard.--Blargh29 (talk) 14:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, Thank you. JustbeBPMF (talk) 19:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Moving to userpage that being deletion

Chinese version Wikipedia is now discussing about your moving ???pull out the river??? to my userpage /sandbox few hours ago. [1] JustbeBPMF (talk) 21:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi -- I am new to Wiki. Please advise if I am doing anything inappropriate.

"Kasikorn Bank" is the incorrect spelling. The correct spelling is "KASIKORNBANK". Please see our official corporate web site.

Moreover, the entry "Kasikorn Bank" also contained many errors that I have corrected. What I am trying to do is to make KASIKORNBANK the main entry and have "Kasikorn Bank" redirected to KASIKORNBANK. Artwich (talk) 19:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

  • It is bad enough that you are promoting your own company but that you should SHOUT about it as well is intolerable! In any case you are inconsistent: in this edit you cannot decide on which capitalisation to use. Now if you will be happy with a title of Kasikornbank, I shall be happy to move it for you. If you insist on shouting KASIKORNBANK, then seek support at Talk:Kasikorn Bank and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Thailand and find another admin willing to do the move. Alternatively, how about the zippier KBank - I would accept that - and you can move it yourself. (I was amused to see that this page is also inconsistent, using KBank and KBANK on consecutive lines! Did you write it?)
Incidentally what earthly purpose was this edit supposed to serve? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, let me just clarify this -- I am not trying to promote the company in Wikipedia. I am just trying to correct the inaccurate information and provide comprehensive information on this entry in Wiki. I have already corrected several obvious mistakes in the original entry that I found last week.

Secondly, regarding the name, "Kasikorn Bank" is not the correct name of the company. KASIKORNBANK is how it is spelled and written. I have no intention of shouting anything. If everybody at Wikipedia agrees that capitalization of the name is rude and not acceptable (which I don't agree with), then I guess Kasikornbank is not too far off. KBank is the short version of the name, which corresponds to KBANK -- the stock trading code assigned by the Stock Exchange of Thailand. You can also verify the naming information in the company's official documents submitted to the Stock Exchange of Thailand at

You are correct in pointing out the inconsistencies. I obviously made the mistake on this edit. But no, I did not write this page. In any case, I am sure everyone is trying his/her best to be consistent and will gladly correct any mistake if it is pointed out.

So if it is agreeable with you, I will change the entry to Kasikornbank. Artwich (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

It would have been sufficient to say "please move the article to Kasikornbank". You needed to ask me because the system and the rules do not permit you to do the move. I have done it.
The link I gave above to was meant to take you to a page in English but it only works properly if you a have a certain cookie set. Please tell your web person that this is very poor design. When they have created an URN which takes you unconditionally to the English portal, please add that link to the article here. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Incidentally, if you understand Chinese, the cryptic message immediately above relates to 拔河. Which would be the better literal translation of these characters: "pull out the river" or "pull into the river"? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. Re the language problem, it is a limitation the current software package in use, which is currently being worked on. Re the Chinese characters, sorry I have no knowledge on this matter. Artwich (talk) 15:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

42 volts

Not a hoax [2]. DGG ( talk ) 20:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Lyon bus lines

Hello, Please I don't understand why you like to break my job, The templates ae finished and I'm translating the page, and this location permis other people who participate in the portal:Lyon to translate. in few days it will be finished so please stop to change my page. Lulu97417 (talk) 11:23, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I have not "broken your job". Why cannot you translate it in your sandbox and invite others to go there to assist with the translation? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Fable 3

Can you unlock the page: Fable 3. The video game has been announced today. Here are few previews IGN and Eurogamer. Thanks. -- SkyWalker (talk) 09:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure if i understand you right. According to various announcement it is Fable III [3]. Would that clear up?. --SkyWalker (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes. So why should we bother to unblock Fable 3 (with an Arabic digit) when the title is Fable III (with a Roman number - which should have become obsolete a thousand years ago). — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 10:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Well most of them would prefer typing "Fable 3" which is quite simple rather than typing "Fable I - I - I" which is quite a feat for many :P. No i highly doubt Roman numerals will go obsolete. It has got a sweet taste on it. Btw i was wondering do you happen to be Peter Jackson brother?. :) --SkyWalker (talk) 10:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


"wtf is an end-to-end video solution??", this is what you ask. Ok, so this is what my company does. End to end solution, starting from creating an online video, analyzing its engagement and constantly improving it for the customer. There are hundreds of end to end solution in every possible field. Now also in online video world. In every company i worked for we opened a wiki page and maintained it to provide information about the company. What's so different here? I love Wikipedia, it's my best resource and i want to use it to provide details about EyeView as well. Please re-open the page. Thank you! Yossi Talk 12:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

  • It was pure spam. Wait for someone with no COI to write about the company. Incidentally which are these other companies? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 13:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Article on Sachin Duggal

I represent the PR team at Nivio (this years World Economic Forum Technology Pioneer 2009) and we also look after the PR for Sachin Duggal - one of the two founders.

We are not sure why you have deleted the page - Sachin is globally recognised entrepreneur this is because

- You can google Sachin Duggal and see the multitude of newspaper articles - He has been on TV - He fights aggressively for children's right to education - He speaks at forums such as the World Economic Forum where he is was one of the Youngest Attendees in the World

Could you therefore please advise how we get his article back up. -- Sidd Dharma (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

  • The best way to get the article back up is simply to wait - once he becomes notable, someone with no COI will write an article here. We definitely do not like PR teams trying to push the people they represent into Wikipedia. I also take a dim view of people so idle that they simply copy their own web page and think they have created a Wikipedia article. And re "you can Google" above - read this. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Genie in the House episode list

Thanks for sorting this out - I was debating with myself whether to mark the new page db-test or wait to see if the author was trying to construct a fork and help him do it right. Your solution was neat. My fumbled redirecting (sorry about leaving an E on "episodes") has left one more messy redirect - List of Episodes of ''Genie in the House''. I was trying to put italics in the title, which doesn't work and causes complications - I can't make a link to it, but you will see it on this page looking like List of Episodes of "Genie in the House". Nothing links in to that, but it's a double redirect now and if that were sorted it would still cause complications if the epsode list is ever forked off, so I think it would be best if you would delete it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

  • a) I don't see why it would cause complications. b) you could have got rid of it yourself as a "dirtypo", ie. you could have tagged it {{db-redirtypo}}. But I have zapped it. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
    • I don't know why it caused complications, but the wikimarkup for italic didn't work in the title, the single quotes showed up as single quotes, and I couldn't make a link to it in my message above. Anyway, thanks. JohnCD (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Valerie Landau

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Valerie Landau has been removed. It was removed by Techhistory with the following edit summary '(Added references and formated External Links)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Techhistory before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to take part in the article's current AfD. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Murat Halstead

has an NYT obit, and is therfore notable. A rather long obit, in fact. I added the information--did you forget this time to check google before tagging for speedy? DGG ( talk ) 17:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Biological functionalism/Functionalism

Hi, can you please tell me why you changed the title of my article? Cheers! -- Higginson21 (talk) 10:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, nothing is different about biological functionalism that means it needs capitals. I never made a claim that negated that fact. Thanks!Higginson21 (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I would say that consistently spelling it with capitals is a negation of that fact. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say that your claim is baseless. The fact that I used capitals does not mean I think it should have capitals. It merely displays that it was what I decided to do.Higginson21 (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks for improving my article by changing the capitalisation throughout. However, I disagree with the change in the title. Isn't it a rule of English that key words in a title are capitalised? As you have said, the name of the theory does not need to be capitalised in the article, but shouldn't it be capitalised in the title?Higginson21 (talk) 14:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

We are not talking about rules in English - we are talking about rules in Wikipedia! If we were designing Wikipedia afresh, we would probably remove the forced capitalisation of the first character of titles, so that this one would read as biological functionalism. Search our manual of style and point me to where it says that the f should be capitalised. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 17:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

  • The aggression in your response was utterly unnecessary. Surely one who creates an article on a subject that he/she is interested in is allowed to question a change without being attacked. I didn't say that you were wrong or I was right; I merely queried the reasoning behind the change. A simple explanation would have been suffice, rather than such antagonism as "point to me where it says the f should be capitalised." Since reviewing wikipedia's policy, I see that you are correct about the titling, but that still does not create the need for you to write such a seething response. I think that your corrections/messages should be much more to the point and not directed as a personal attack to the other editor. This is shown by the comment in question, and also by the accusation that biological functionalism is "neologism." Even the slightest research would have shown that to be false. Again, I am perfectly happy to concede that my article was flawed - it needed improved referencing - but such an assumptive tag goes against the objective purpose of wikipedia. You have been overly presumptuous and pugnacious in your corrections.Higginson21 (talk) 10:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I am very sorry if you felt my response was aggressive. One reason may be that I felt your question was unnecessary. Your article contains seven double-barelled terms all of which are uncapitalised both in your text and in the article titles. You had already stated "nothing is different about biological functionalism that means it needs capitals". So why pursue the matter? — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 13:38, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your response. I understand where you may have seen my question as unnecessary. I was simply questioning the policy, but I now see that I probably should have figured it out myself. The incorrect capitalisation was my fault, and I should have seen it. I'm glad we were able to resolve this. Thanks! Higginson21 (talk) 14:13, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Romanian honorific

I don't disagree with your view, as the name is to complicated: 'Honorific sign "Vulture of Romania"'. But things go like this: the other military and civil awards bear their type in the title (Order of the Star of Romania, Order of the Garter, Order of Michael the Brave, and so on). This civilian awards (like the Vulture of Romania) are not "Orders" but "Honorific signs", because are not awarded for any special achievements, except for the stay in a certain position (parliamentarian, military or public services); and therefore my dilemma. -- ES Vic (talk) 12:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I see no dilemma. We need a short, unambiguous title. Then in the first sentence of the article you state "The Vulture of Romania is an honorific sign awarded to …" — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Racism in the early rock music prod removed

I'm not sure what to do with this article, and I don't know if the bot is going to notify you or not, so... consider yourself notified! :-) Melchoir (talk) 07:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

  • PROD removed from Crimeface, by User:Jclemens, with summary '(Asserts multiple awards. Looks legit:'
  • PROD removed from Krishna Stott, by User:Jclemens, with summary '(Decline prod, notability is asserted. Feel free to AfD, but I think there's going to be enough material here to keep either this or Crimeface)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Also Alev Croutier. It's probably unprecedented, but this is a notable autobio! Fences&Windows 02:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Please contact editors of AFDs

RE: Frank Mangano

Please contact creators of AFDs, although it is not required, it is courteous, thank you. Ikip (talk) 01:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

More Rock Music Racism

I note your interest in the misguided project to create original research/hoax articles on racism in 1950s rock music. I suspect that Rock Music Racism was created as another such article, but it is now a redirect to Rock and roll#Race. I wasn't sure where else to mention this, though. Cnilep (talk) 21:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this; it's a much better solution than deletion. Nyttend (talk) 23:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Rock music racism was redirected within seven minutes. Thus it did not show up on my RSS feed and I missed it. I have posted this list to keep track of them. There probably is a need for more on this subject but, sadly, none of these kids seems able to manage it. See this note re one suggestion. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much to help me with my first articles in Wikipedia. I made many changes to be sure the articles are ok and provides value and accurance information to other users. Gracias! --Ramon Delgado Lorenzo (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy declined: Harun Ahmed Mohamed

Hello RHaworth, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Harun Ahmed Mohamed - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 14:12, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

  • You cannot be serious. Is playing for the Somali National team at age 13 credible? Also Harun009 (talk · contribs · email) is obviously a sock puppet of a blocked user. Do we really have to waste time at AfD with this? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Sorry that I didn't complete that AfD properly: I was using the Twinkle tool, so I thought that did the whole procedure. Further to the doubt about the 13 year old international, evidence of the editor's trustworthiness can be found if you have access to the club history that he was claiming for himself on the now deleted version of the article. Kevin McE (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, the reason why I declined it was because you marked it as "nn-autobio", which I interpreted as non notable autobiography, not blatant hoax (which I deleted it as after I googled it). Also, do you have any evidence for Harun009 being a sockpuppet? While I'm not familiar with the area, I do work at Sockpuppet investigations quite frequently. NW (Talk) 14:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Evidence of sock puppetry? Have you noticed the similarity of the user names? Have you looked at their edit histories? That is credible enough for me. What further evidence would you require? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:54, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


I refer you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Redirection of article pending AfD close concerning your redirect of Racism in early rock music before Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racism in early rock music was closed. Anarchangel (talk) 17:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

NM, my bad, sorry. Misread your simple error as perfidy. Anarchangel (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

It´s been moved

Note: I've returned everything to it's original state (before your remarks) until I figure out how to create a disambiguation page.HarveyPrototype (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Telecoms resilience. Many thanks for helping out. Its all a bit new to me. Paul Wayman —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Political Economy of the Sign

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! --Chris Johnson (talk) 05:06, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

  • I will give you a few hours to: a) start the sign form article so we know what the hell these essays are about and b) provide evidence of the book's notability. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 05:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

1) I know almost nothing about postmodernism and Baudrillard, and 2) I desperately need to go to bed. I have no problem with it going to AFD; I think we need input from people knowledgeable about the subject. Many of the 1460 Google Scholar and 666 Google Books results are significantly more than passing citations, and several of the books I looked at ([4], [5], [6], [7]) had in-depth, multi-page discussion of this book specifically (rather than in the context of Baudrillard's work in general). From my understanding of the passages I've skimmed, this book seems to be an influential attempt at combining Marxism and semiotics and represents some sort of significant transition between Baudrillard's early and later thought. I'm not that worried about the book's notability. I'm more worried about whether it's sufficiently significant and distinct from the rest of Baudrillard's work to support a separate article. (Many of the references treat it together with either The Mirror of Production or his "early work" in general.) I honestly don't know. Anyway, I'll work some more on trying to make sense of the references either tonight or tomorrow night.--Chris Johnson (talk) 09:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

  • The main thing that irritates me is the lack of context. There is just no clue to what these essays are about. I know it is a mis-use of AfD but it often works - I shall probably send it to AfD to advertise its presence. This should cause someone to improve it. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 17:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Unprotection Request

Can you please remove the creation protection on Amalgam Digital. There is a page at WP:AFC that I believe has established notability. Maybe you would like to compare versions or decide for your self.. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amalgam Digital. Thanks for your time SparksBoy (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Unprotected. They have never been to AfD. It does seem to be a matter of inability to write a decent article. I would like to see at least one better reference that actually reviews the company. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 03:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I will work on that SparksBoy (talk) 19:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Misconduct by RHaworth

RHaworth, you have recently left quite an rude and and irrespectful message for the fellow wiki-editor who has never been accused of any misconduct. Please before leaving such message consult with the user's contribution and his/her contributions. Hereby, I would like to take your notice that if the following is noticed again or noticed to ANY OTHER fellow wikipedian, your misconduct will be drawn to the attention of the relevant wiki-administration. I hope that this message will break the "gaps-in-large" for a betterment of cooperation among the fellow-wikipedians. Jim Fitzgerald post 17:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Please provide an explicit link to the allegedly rude message. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 17:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Find the following (as of unfinished edit conflict )

RHaworth, you have recently left a quite rude and irrespectful message for a fellow wiki-editor's talk page who has never before been accused of any misconduct. Please before leaving such kind of messages consult with the user's contribution and his/her contributions datas or him/herself. Hereby, I would like to take you to the notice that if the following is noticed again or noticed to ANY OTHER fellow wikipedian done by you, your misconduct will be drawn to the attention of the relevant wiki-administration. I hope that this message will break the "gaps-in-large" for a betterment of cooperation among the fellow-wikipedians, and finds you in a resonable and contructive behaviour in Wiki. Jim Fitzgerald post 17:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

RHaworth, please find this message as a second warning against unconstrcutive and disruptive messages that you happen to leave on Jim Fitzgerald post 17:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC) talk page. Please refrain from accusing your fellow wikipedians of any misconduct unless you first comply with the Wikipedia:Etiquette Wiki rules. Jim Fitzgerald post 17:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe that any of his talk page edits (that I have reviewed, including your talk page) even hint at "attacks/nonconstructive/disruptive/rude" I see it as corrective criticism, and quite frankly there is nothing wrong with that. Being an uninvolved party in this, I believe that Fitzgerald may need to think about what is rude/nonconstructive. On the other hand I also believe that RHaworth didn't need to leave that message on fitzgerald's talk page, however it was civil. SparksBoy (talk) 19:23, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Why did I not need to leave the message? I felt that having registered the pressing need for Talk:Battle of Jenin to be archived and having started the job, Jim should finish it. What is wrong with telling him that? OK, I fully admit that I could have worded the request more gently. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 20:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry for taking your good faith message so negatively. But you might have left the message on Article's talk page. Jim Fitzgerald post 12:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the apology. The message on the article's talk page - why on earth? There it would have been seen by more people and I had no desire to embarass you! The message was about general principles of archiving a talk page and had no specific relevance to one article. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 14:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Botched page archive

Hi RHaworth! I noticed that you archived the page Talk:Battle of Jenin and moved the entire page history to the archive page. Can you please restore the page? I (or a bot) will archive it if necessary. For more information on archiving, please see Help:Archiving a talk page. —Ynhockey (Talk) 22:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Archiving was long overdue. The archiving was not botched but done in accordance with this method. If you can raise a consensus on the talk page for a move back, I shall do it. Alternatively, if you find another admin to do the move, I shall not interfere. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 23:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree with RHaworth, the archiving was indeed long overdue. Thanks for your help in that. Jim Fitzgerald post 08:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
  • And do you have any feelings on the use of the move method versus the cut and paste method? — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 14:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


Hi RHaworth. Just wondering if you had checked the history and the talk page—I had previously declined a speedy on this one. Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 13:30, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes, especially the talk page. I felt that other speedy criteria could be invoked: empty - little more than a repetition of the title; no context - was it about a (non-notable) fictional creature or a (neologism) extinct creature. Apologies for disagreeing with you. Re-instate if you wish and we can drag it through AfD but a better approach might be to encourage Alejandrof1217 to produce a better version. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 14:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the explanation. Yes, upon reflection, I agree with you that a better approach would be to encourage the author to produce another version, at least one that better establishes context. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 15:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
    • ...although this does not make me particularly hopeful... Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 15:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Writism article

Hi. Re the article Writism that user:Hairhorn nominated for deletion yesterday and you subsequently seconded. I noticed today that the article creator had deleted the tags without addressing the issues. I thus re-instated the tags (not ideal but given the complete failure to even acknowledge the points raised the most obvious course of action). Perhaps unsurprisingly the tags were summarily deleted again. So, the article currently has no warning tags and doesn't appear to have made it onto any of the AFD discussions either. I'm keen to make sure that this article doesn't slip through the cracks as it falls down on numerous inclusion criteria, but being more familiar with the CSD process rather than the AFD process, I'm at a bit of loss as to the correct way to proceed...danno 18:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

  • It is in fact an offence to replace a PROD tag. It will be good training for you to take the article to AfD. It is not difficult: just remember that three edits are needed. Study these three edits and do likewise. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] ([[::User talk:RHaworth|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/RHaworth|contribs]]) 18:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. Fingers crossed that I haven't managed to completely mess it up! danno 19:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Yuck

Wow. I fixed the colors and closed the div. It was four years ago, so I can't remember what kind of template I used or where I may have copied this style, but I certainly don't use it these days. Hopefully it wasn't used on others pages. - Trevor MacInnis contribs 04:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles

Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:

  • PROD removed from Roger woods, by User:Artierobin, with summary '(I've added more references to various sites and a newspaper artical that refer to his work from around the world and to sites that sell his work worldwide,I still need to get ref link working)'
  • PROD removed from Dion Fischer, by User:Mephiston999, with summary '(no edit summary)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you - SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)