User talk:RHaworth/2014 Oct 11

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

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

Why was the new version of deleted instead of restoring the original version. Hello RHaworth, The version of Abuja Declaration (1989) before the one you deleted contained the accurate Abuja Declaration but was edited after people found the important information in it. The edit was made to hide the original info of the Declaration. I would appreciate it if you could: .1 Even though the current version is not accurate, please clarify why you deleted the current version. I see copyright infringement as the reason for deletion but I believe the external site you quoted copied the article from Wikipedia and not vice-versa. .2 I would appreciate if the version before the deleted one is restored. Thanks Aijosh (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• At last! On the fourth time of trying, I get a very well worded and properly signed request. (OK, you did not get the link quite right - but you tried.) Now that you have gone to that trouble, I feel guilty that I don't feel willing to help you further. But the next step, I fear is for an admin to go through 43 deleted edits stretching back four years to see which are copyvios. Do please, raise the matter at deletion review (DRV). Also at WikiProject Africa or one of its sub-departments. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:17, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

OK. I think you are mistaking me for someone else. In any case, I'm sorry if anyone had previously frustrated you as regards the topic. As a tech-savvy person, I'm also having issues understanding how this whole process works. I will raise the issue as you have advised but please can you see if you could find time to check it out before I do. The version I'm referring to is the last edit before or the one you deleted stating it was a Hoax, per WP:CSD#G3 (The reference you cited isn't the same as the deleted article which contains 1989. They are two different declarations). I see you are the first to make a deletion that is why I'm contacting you. Let me know if you can do this. I'll appreciate it. Thanks for your time. PS:How come the deleted content keeps getting deleted? I still see a deletion dated yesterday Aijosh (talk) 08:32, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• See previous 1 and previous 2. But I agree very different handwriting from yours. The article keeps getting deleted because people keep creating it! I have emailed you two states. I will leave the DRV people to do any further "checking out". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok. I see. I also got some copies of some of the deleted reviews in my mail. I was hoping I would find the live links to the references in the mail so that I can verify if it is really a hoax but they don't seem to be included. If this is possible, I'll appreciate them. If not, I'll continue as advised. Thanks Aijosh (talk) 18:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• I don't know whether it is possible or nor - your request is incomprehensible. Go to DRV - they may even restore the page so you can see the 46 deleted edits. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm too much of a trouble but I just decided to bring this to your notice in case you haven't noticed it yet. (Although, I'm guessing you already have). While acting as per your instructions, I happened to find out that Abuja Declaration (2001) and Abuja Declaration (1989) (which you deleted) have both been existing on Wikipedia and I'm guessing for a long while. See Abuja Declaration and its revision history. I'm not yet familiar with all the rules here on Wikipedia but is it standard policy to delete one article because it carries a similar title as another? If no, please restore page and advice on proper method for resolving the vandalism issue. If yes, why did you select earlier 1989 instead of later 2001 Thanks — Aijosh (talk) 08:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• Of course there is no rule to delete because of similar names - that is why we disambiguate - in this case using (1989) and (2001). Hence there was absolutely no reason to delete Abuja Declaration (2001). OK, restore has been requested and I have done it. I have an absolutely underwhelming interest in this subject so I will leave it to the DRV discussion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:30, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks Aijosh (talk) 08:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I just did one here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maat Morrison and it got formatted odd for some reason. — Wgolf (talk) 22:14, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• Use Twinkle for AfD nominations - it appears as XFD in your twinkle pull-down. It will look for previous discussions and automatically create "(2nd nomination)", etc. when appropriate. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

A article that has been around since 2010 that I don't know what to say! Rahim Mombeini, found him under shortest bios. First off some clean up for sure (born in 1334 and NOBODY has noticed all these years???), he does sound notable though so I don't know what tags to use. — Wgolf (talk) 23:50, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

The source provided in that article does not actually mention Mombeini. I have A7d it because it does not offer a satisfactory claim to significance.--Launchballer 08:29, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• 1334 is probably AH which works out to a credible CE year of about 1956. Article now given decent burial. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know that it was a discussion, if so; the artist is now signed to a major label, which where the artist (subject) now meets

Simply being signed to a major label is not enough to meet

WP:MUSICBIO. To meet it, Morrison must have released two or more albums under that label.--Launchballer 08:25, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Next time do what I have done. You would need to request deletion of the redirects left in mainspace. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

What about

• Please learn to create links when you talk about articles. In this case your action should have been to decide which of four versions (there was a sandbox also) to keep and tag the others with {{db|duplicate of [[…]]}}. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:31, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	I especially liked talk) 12:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you. Wikipedia is, of necessity a rather dour place. I do my best to lighten the tone. Pity that Thewhitebox (see above) picked up no clues to that effect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• This is not uncommon in editors with French-Austrian-Jewish-Christian-Mexican backgrounds who have expertise in alcoholism and interpersonal power plays. I can think of no such editors who understand your sense of humour! I do think it might be wise for you to be more cautious, though, because the number who do understand remains very very small and may even be getting smaller. I am sure your replies are mainly aimed at the people asking the questions, not people like myself who may benefit in other ways. --
  talk) 21:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

• Please learn to provide links to articles and that naked URLs are obscene. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:45, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • In future, please be more careful before making such blunt accusations of incompetence. It is very insulting, especially when they are so thoroughly unfounded. Or do you honestly mean to tell me that
    WP:G4 tag, is invalidated by the simple introduction of a comma into the title? Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Please point me to these alleged "accusations of incompetence". Not sure how I missed the 2nd nomination without a comma. If I had seen it, I would probably have refused to restore. But now it has been restored, I propose to let the new AfD discussion run its course. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

To whom it may concern, regarding the deletion of "10:03, 29 September 2014 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page File:Ned lagin self portrait 2011.png (F7: Invalid fair-use rationale)" on Ned Lagin: the owner and creator of that image (ned lagin) asked me to include that image in the wikipedia page for "ned lagin". this was documented when i uploaded the image using your upload wizard. Your uploading wizard is so complicated as far as what should or should not be selected that it is quite possible that in uploading the image, and inappropriate radio button was selected. i would greatly appreciate any advice that you may have regarding the correct radio button that should be selected for this image. In the meantime, please restore the image, as you have removed an image which has permission to be included in the "Ned Lagin" article. I-) ihor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihorwi (talk • contribs) 13:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• I have a name and it is not "whom it may concern". The image was an insult to Wikipedia: a pathetic thumbnail in the wrong format - should be JPG. Go back to Ned Lagin, get him to supply a decent sized (not less than 800px high) JPG, to release it under {{
  cc-by-sa-4.0}} and upload it to the Commons. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Unprotected. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Cheers! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Can I ask that you undo your deletion of User:4letheia/Palam Kalyanasundaram and User talk:4letheia/Palam Kalyanasundaram and consider a noindex tag instead. These contain copies of significant research done on the original page talkpage to establish why there should, despite the best efforts of many well meaning social media sharers and occasional newspaper mentions, never be a page on this subject in wikipedia. I appreciate that the main page names have now been salted, but there remain many possible variations which might pop up and require to be nominated for deletion. -- 4letheia (talk) 14:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• I have never heard that argument before. Feel free to raise the matter at deletion review but I suspect the answer is going to be "no". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I second 4letheia's request. Those two pages were not abandoned articles-for-creation; they were archives. They contain irreplaceable research that may be needed again to debunk the claims that are made about this man. If you are unwilling to have this material on Wikipedia, even in userspace, could I request that the contents be emailed to me or to 4letheia for our future reference? --MelanieN (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

• I will put that more strongly: please raise the matter at deletion review - the answer will be an help in the unlikely event that similar circumstances arise again. Text emailed to 4letheia. MelanieN, I don't know how you expect me to email you - read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

If you have emailed the text to 4letheia, I am satisfied. Thank you. --MelanieN (talk) 20:51, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Snake Davis. Just wondering why my image keeps being removed from this article? I took the image of the performer, so I can't quite figure out what I am doing wrong on the copyright issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dashwortley (talk • contribs)

• If you really did take this image, upload it to the Commons at the original resolution with the EXIF metadata still in place. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:01, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear sir i am not getting why my content get deleted. Can you tell me if i will send you all details or send it request page it will be consider or not. The profile is real i will give you references for same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhamlatolni (talk • contribs) 20:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no
  COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:01, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, can you sent me a copies of the deleted page of the TIME Malaysia wikipedia you may sent it to <redacted> i am curious of its origin and information thank you, akm_zen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.22.89 (talk) 05:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

• I think you are trying to ask for an article rather than an whole wikipedia. But I cannot help you unless you provide a link to the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:53, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Please reopen the

• Please learn how to create links. By an interesting coincidence, at the moment your message arrived I was writing about another notable clash between church and state. Are you the author of the article at vosizneias.com to which you refer above? It is in the same style which reminds me of Isaac Bashevis Singer - written originally in Yiddish and then translated into English. With the difference that Singer always had a lady friend to help him with the translation.

My first advice is submit an article about Yehoshua to the Yiddish Wikipedia. However poor it is, it will probably be accepted eagerly. As to something in English, your submission was deleted because it was hopelessly short. Also, in a total of about twenty words, ten of them were incomprehensible to goyim and no attempt was made to link to definitions.

Google searches are not very promising but if you are confident that you can demonstrate his notability: study existing bios in category:Jews and Judaism in New York City for an idea of what is needed and develop you article in user:Alefbuys/sandbox until is viable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Mr. Haworth: I am sorry to bother you, as I know (based on your prefatory comments above) that you may be experiencing bouts of "grumpiness. In an effort to avoid inciting any additional grumpiness, I have done my best to be brief: My name is Ryan Zehl, and I'm the subject of the Wikipedia page that you recently removed:

While I realize that the page did mention my business, its purpose was not to promote that business. The page was intended to provide a summary of my background and notable (newsworthy) achievements as a lawyer and had been active for sometime (at least 2 years, I believe). It appears that you deleted it under Rule G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion. I researched the Rule and discovered that it discourages automatic deletion when "a subject is notable and the content can be replaced with text that complied with a neutral point of view: "If a subject is notable and the content can be replaced with text that complies with neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion." I personally didn't view the page as being promotional (and I can assure you I never intended it to come across that way), but it seems that you disagreed. Regardless, I would greatly appreciate if you would allow me to correct and rewrite any text or references that you believe violate Rule G11 or any other of Wiki's guidelines. I just need to know what, in your opinion, violated the Guidelines, so that I can ensure that my rewrite is in compliance.

I apologize again for any inconvenience I may have caused you and hope that you will allow me the opportunity to regain my (much cherished) Wikipedia page. Thank you, Ryan Zehl, 98.198.140.16 (talk) 05:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• Are lawyers still being paid by the word? If the above is brevity, I would hate to read you in long-winded mode. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no
  COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I love this response so much doktorb _words^deeds 09:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of File:Transperth train transfer.svg & File:Transperth train and bus transfer.svg. Although these technically qualified for speedy deletion, they are related to

• What about File:Transperth bus transfer.svg? All three restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear RHaworth, Just to let you know that I have finally had my account unblocked and I will seek to contribute as best I can moving forward. Could you please advise of how I might be able to find/receive copies of my unblock appeal as well as the original offending article that was formerly located here. I would like copies of these for future reference and/or use elsewhere? Faithfully, Geoffrey. GRobertsPanda (talk) 10:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• Text of your article emailed. You blanked the unblock appeal but it is still visible in the history of user talk: GRobertsPanda. Do not even think about writing about your company in any form on Wikipedia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear RHaworth, Thank you for pandering to me, however I can assure you that my intention is not to be a spammer as Wgolf initially thought. The unblock appeal that I refer to is one that I lodged using the UTRS system and that was accepted by Yunshui. When I logged on this morning, my IP address had been blocked and I could not even edit my own talk page. Not quite the welcome I had been expecting; and obviously I was pleased that Yunshui overturned the ruling (it had all escalated very quickly so I was pretty distraught at the loss of time yesterday).

Subsequently I blanked the unblock appeal earlier today having had my block overturned - I am entitled to do that, aren't I? If you could lay your hands on the appeal that I refer to, you will learn a little about me and my interests and hopefully see that I am not a spammer nor vandal nor advertiser, infringer of copyright or anything else deemed inappropriate by you more seasoned Wiki folk.

What I am is a chap who is very short on time, yet who wishes to make a meaningful and interesting contribution. Anyway, taking on board everything that you have written, please consider that Recruitment Panda Ltd is not my company. I am not a shareholder. I am however admittedly an affiliate party, yet I will be retiring my affiliation with them in a few months, thus ending any COI that you may presently perceive.

Having said all that, I do believe that Recruitment Panda Ltd are notable for a number of reasons which I intend to bring to the fore given appropriate time and opportunity. Could I please therefore request your patience and ask you for any guidelines that you could offer me, whilst I draft and re-draft in preparation for publishing? e.g. Did I save and publish when I could have kept a draft safe somehow until I'd had chance to research, review and edit?

What I seek to create is an article that bares similarities with organisations such as

Once I have achieved that there are a plethora of topics familiar to me that I can see myself (and my partner) having fun enhancing, such as those touched on in the aforementioned appeal. What say you? Respectfully, Geoffrey GRobertsPanda (talk) 13:29, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• I had understood from the language of your UTRS email that you no longer intended to write about RecruitmentPanda. Your message above seems to indicate that this is not the case. I would strongly recommend that you reconsider, especially given the highly promotional nature of your previous attempt. You said in your email that you intended to edit articles about health and social care; I suggest you do that instead, since further attempts to write about RecruitmentPanda will almost certainly get you blocked again. There's nothing wrong with
  requesting an article about the company, but please don't try to do it yourself. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Yunshui, I have absolutely no intention of doing so if it is against the rules due to my present COI. Again a copy of my UTRS email would be appreciated. Can I take it that once my COI ends this will be a different matter (obviously on the assumption that it is properly composed from a neutral point of view)?

Noticing your advice just now, I've actually just finished composing an article which I would be grateful to you if you would review. It is on the subject of Admiral Nursing and can be found here.

Wgolf RHaworth, please also take a look. If I could secure my first successful contribution on day two then I would really feel as if I have swam the channel here. I hope you can see that I have gotten to grips with the markup and required style of writing etc. Regards , GRobertsPanda (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• If you sent an actual email to UTRS, then look in the "sent mail" folder of your email client. In any case I do not have access to the UTRS messages. I cannot see what more I can do for you except watch your contributions like an hawk and stomp on you heavily if you attempt to write anything about pandas. You still have some way to go on learning markup: we do not start with an heading and we do not use bold in headings. We do not put external links in the article body. We provide more wikilinks. We do not give naked URLs. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

You deleted

• Take it to deletion review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:26, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

So be it. Huon (talk) 19:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I made a page about Vera Dik for school. My plan was only to have it uploaded for a day so I could show my teacher and could get a good grade. You deleted my page until I could do so. My intention was to upload the page, make screenshots and then delete it. However something came up and I couldn't make screenshots right away. Could I have access to the text for just a little bit and then I'll never bother you.

Kind Regards, Veradik (yes the page was about me sorry for that) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veradik (talk • contribs) 18:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe the deleted contents of

talk) 18:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• Absolutely not. Wikipeida is
  not a free host for stuff like that. I don't see why it needs to be in wiki format but if it must be so, install the wiki software on your school's internal network and post it there. If you promise not to repost it to Wikipedia, I am happy to let you see the text - read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Creating a simple page for the purpose of learning how to edit Wikipedia (which I presume was the purpose of the task set by the teacher) is both (1) within the scope of permissible user page usage, and (2) a great deal simpler than installing mediawiki (for which the student may not have appropriate user rights anyway). The purpose of learning how to edit Wikipedia can be assumed to be subsequently making further edits to Wikipedia on other (non-COI, and notable) topics. I am surprised at your response. --

talk) 18:38, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

• Veradik, if you are following this thread, please tell us exactly what your teacher's brief was.

Demiurge, I take the view that user pages are for people who edit Wikipedia. After emailing you the content, I went soft and posted it to the web here. I think it was well outside the scope of permissible user page usage. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for deletions of User:Sharma Amit Pathankot & User:124.253.33.108 under db-g11, today – thank you very much! – Paine  09:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear RHaworth, As I work toward reloading the CINVU page, it is important for me to identify the individuals best equipped to review the page. Please have a look at my text. Although I know that you have many commitments and responsibilities, considering that my requested review is not due until middle of October, I hope time will allow for you to assist me. I have also enclosed Dr. Javanmard's permission letter. Of course, if for any reason you are not willing or simply not able to help me, I will understand. — Payam22 (talk) 14:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

• Again, you are pretty incomprehensible. "Look at my text" - what text? "Review not due till middle of October" - review of what, when was that deadline set and by whom? "Enclosed Javanmard's letter" - where? I can only repeat my previous advice - if you really can show that the organisation is notable: study existing articles here on similar topics, write a new article in your own words and give it decent references. Preferably put it in the draft: namespace. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I may repeat myself again and again that CINVU page went under speedy deletion because of copyvio not grounds of notability. I have already talked about notability of CINVU. By "text" I mean the CINVU article. I think you have already downloaded it. By till the middle of October, I simply mean that I am not in such a hurry but I appreciate it if you can manage review of my article, by that time. I forgot to enclose Dr. Javanmard's letter, sorry. The letter gives me permission to take material from CINVU or INVU site. I think it resolves the copyvio issue. There is also the resolutions of COMSTECH about establishment of CINVU. CINVU is mentioned on page 5, No. 15. Again thank you for your consideration and understanding. — Payam22 (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

• I see, so File:COMSTECH.pdf is in fact your new draft of the CINVU article. Please explain what perverted logic caused you to upload it to the Commons as a PDF. If you think it is ready, please upload it to draft:COMSTECH Inter Islamic Network on Virtual Universities so that it can be seen by people best equipped to review it. If it contains copyright material, legitimise the use of that material as explained here, not by uploading another PDF to the Commone. This PDF is also totally inappropriate for the Commons. Run it through a spell checker, upload it to the CINVU website and link to it from your article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate your patience. I will do my best to fix the problems.Payam22 (talk) 07:42, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

DearRHaworth I uploaded my article to draft:COMSTECH Inter Islamic Network on Virtual Universities. Also I mailed the article, my permission letter and donation letter to: permissions-commonswikimedia.org and permissions-enwikimedia.org. Since I am new to this area, I appreciate any help and guidance. Thank you.Payam22 (talk) 16:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• Please read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice.Payam22 (talk) 08:08, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Sir, With all due respect, I believe because of the confusion with my account an err may have been made regarding draft:Seven the General when I first attempted to make an article I truly did not understand the format or guidelines here on wikipedia. Subsequently I was initially blocked, since being updated on exactly how wikipedia works I have only followed the rules of submission and improving of articles. I understand you must get plenty of requests of this sort but if you would take a quick look at my talk page you will see where the issue was resolved. Respectfully, GjonPreni (talk) 16:14, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

• I would much prefer you to have the decency to wait until someone with no
  COI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. But since it is only a draft, I have reluctantly restored it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry to be pedantic but the user page for

• What a terrible sin: doing the right deed for the wrong reason. The user page was deleted because it was a copy of
  U5. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:49, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth. I'll keep this short and sweet for you.

• The version of Fragger that I deleted was a pathetic 159 byte sub-stub. I would have let you see it if you had email enabled. If you write a decent, properly referenced article, it may well stick. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou for your swift reply and for all the hard work you do here to keep the cogs moving @RHaworth:. Unfortunately in regard to your response, I do not fully understand what you are proposing. Are you suggesting I go ahead write a "decent, properly referenced article" article in the mainspace article Fragger? Because at the moment I am unable to. I am also unsure as to why I would even need to view the "pathetic 159 byte sub-stub". One last thing: please ping me in your reply as otherwise I will probably not remember to come back.-- Coin945 (talk) 14:24, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

• I offer email as a matter of routine to assure you that I have nothing up my sleeve. Yes, of course I am proposing that you should go ahead and write a "decent, properly referenced article" article at the mainspace title Fragger? Why was that difficult to understand? One last thing, if you cannot manage to watch this page for 24 hours, then you don't deserve to see my response. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The whole issue is that the "pathetic 159 byte sub-stub" has been salted so I am unable to write a new, better, comprehensive etc. article at Fragger. That is the whole reason I am asking you to undelete it.-- Coin945 (talk) 14:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry. If you had added a few words to explain why you were unable to, I would have responded better and earlier. So create the article at draft:Fragger. If it is accepted, unsalting will be uncontroversial. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:12, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. :)--Coin945 (talk) 16:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I created the draft here: Draft:Fragger. According to the person I spoke to at Wikipedia: Articles for undeletion, were the one who deleted the latest iteration of Fragger and/or salted the article. For this reason I was advised to consult you regarding the article's unsalting. What do you think?--Coin945 (talk) 14:37, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• Just as a matter of interest, by what medium did you speak to a person at Wikipedia: Articles for undeletion because a) that is a dead project and b) there is nothing in your contribs history? Just wait. If and when a regular reviewer thinks the draft is OK for mainspace, they will come to me and I will probably move it for them. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe it was

• Don't be impatient. I want a second opinion before I unprotect and using the draft system is a good way of getting that second opinion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:49, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Just figure I'd clarify my previous comment: What I meant was i worked as a reviewer at afc, helping to clear otu the massive backlog (very hard work). I haven't had any other articles go thorugh the process before.

Could you please review WP:Articles for deletion/Color of Change for speedy keep? -- Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

• Why? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It seems disruptive to me. But, if you don't want to, no problem. I suppose there's little harm in letting folks pile on the nominator. -- Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry to bother, you have deleted Anime Fandom and only then I knew about the rules and criteria of creating website pages. Could I have a copy of my deleted page tho, to create a draft and keep on improving it till it meets the requirements. And if you have got any other advice to give me I'll be happy to hear it! Thanks a lot, and have a marvelous day. — Elshobokshy (talk) 12:46, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

• Emailed. Suggestions: learn wikimarkup - we do not use <br/> to create bulleted lists. Create as
  significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent secondary sources. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:09, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I Am New In Here. My Article Has Been Deleted. Can You Help Me Please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Age0948 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

• Where Is It Written That We Start Every Word Of A Sentence With A capital letter? We provide reasons in the deletion log but people ignore them. Please re-word your question to indicate that you have seen the reason given in the deletion log. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a

Hello there. May I ask the two older versions of File:Megadeth - Peace Sells.ogg to be deleted? Appreciate the help.--Retrohead (talk) 18:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

• If I had my way, I would delete all three versions - just horrible noise. But why do you want the old versions deleted? What harm are they doing? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thought I should report to the admins if a non-free upload fills some of the criteria for speedy deletion, in this case

Hello RHaworth. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Josh Hill (MMA), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "A claimed rank of #1 is a credible assertion of importance. Needs to go to AfD." Thank you. GedUK  11:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I would like you to unprotect

• Done. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:26, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The seal of Solomon in three dimensions - A fractal pattern for massive parallel architecture programs. Obviously you did not read my article in order to ver[if]y A11 assumption: "and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant." The credibilty expressing the importance and signification of my proposition is explained in the last part of the article. But understanding my article needs abilities in maths and software engineering. More over your speed as deleting my works shows obviously you did not examinate this article. — Chris2refuge (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• You could give me a clue to what words in the last part of the article even expressed the importance and signification of your proposition. Still less did they demonstrate its notability. Even you would admit that this is
  COI will write about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:30, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Recreation of the article with modification. Dear Sir, I am sorry that unintentionally Jai Paul Singh Dahiya IAS (Retd) was created seeking help of copy and paste options. As it related to basic information regarding a retired officer which remains same in all the cases. Please guide me if it could be recreated by using my own words but the particulars remaining the same Regards (Neelamsinghdahiya (talk) 19:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC))

You might want to start at

talk) 20:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• Restored and reduced to a sensible size. You should link to the review quotes, not include them in the article and the massive bibliography and other lists are not need at all - put them on your own website and link to it. But you should include a specimen of his work - providing it is released under {{
  cc-by-sa-3.0}}. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth. About deleted article Alekseev, Boyarchukov and partners. See User talk:Alekseev,Boyarchukov and partners. Pete AU aka -- Shirt58 (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear RHaworth, I would like to ask you to reconsider your deletion of my recent post about my father, the American artist Michael Lenson. I thank you in advance for your consideration of my request. There was no copyright infraction in the post, which contained some of the same material that I have also included on http://michaellenson.org, a website that I also own and manage. The material on that website is not copyrighted. So no copyright infraction could have been involved. Furthermore, there is a logical flaw in thinking that if biographical material about one individual is repeated in different locations on the Internet, that some kind of infraction has occurred. If two websites mention that Thomas Jefferson lived in Virginia, for example, it doesn't follow that one of them must have copied that fact from another website; that fact is simply part of Jefferson's biography, not someone's property. There are certain verifiable facts about my father's life, and they appear in many places - in catalogues of exhibitions, in reference books, on websites. Those facts do not belong to anyone.

Again, I hope you will reconsider. I also wish that you had communicated your concerns about the post and not immediately deleted it. But what's done is done, and I hope that you might help me get a listing in place for my father. Thank you, and best regards, Barry Lenson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C:5080:107:7D1B:CAFF:D69A:374C (talk) 18:38, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

• Message double-posted, no link to article, unsigned and from an IP address. Consider yourself very lucky that I am bothering to reply. It was not just the copyvio aspect that caused me to tag Michael Lenson for deletion - I did not delete it. It was the utter slovenliness of the submission. I gave my reasons here but forgot to mention the worst fault: total lack of independent evidence. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Could you tell under which speedy deletion criterion this was deleted? The log message says F1, but F1 does not cover files in other file formats. --

• Oh dear, the same sin twice in a week: doing the right deed for the wrong reason. The JPG had been replaced by File:Meralco Bolts logo.svg. What deletion reason should I have given? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi there RHaworth, I'll try to keep this short and compact but it is actually a long story going way back when I had my first encounter with

Suddenly, just now Drmies did blank Rak-Tai's talk page, unfortunately feeling the need to use their standard belittling word in the edit summary, in spite of their complete refusal to do so just 1 hour ago. Unfortunately, another problem editor,

WP:TALKNO as they have nothing to do with this whole issue, they do not give any new insight in this problem whatsoever, and are only there with that specific message to annoy me. - Takeaway (talk) 22:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

RHaworth, if I were anything like Takeaway I'd accuse them of calling me insane, and I'd spend a million words proving it over the next five years (apparently this goes back to 2009). Holy moly, perhaps

WP:NOTHERE applies here--feel free to have a look at what they posted on my talk page. And yes, I blanked that talk page since Takeaway here threatened to blank it two days from now; I thought I'd prevent another shit storm. And people wonder why editors quit. (Takeaway, go ahead and report this at ANI.) Drmies (talk) 23:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Drmies, why should I be bothered to bring up this glitch of yours at ANI? It was already a complete waste of time that it took me half a day to finally get it through to you that personal attacks should not be left to stand on a page. If only you would have done it sooner, and without feeling the need to use belittling wordings in the edit summary, but apparently you just couldn't bring yourself to do what plainly had to be done without resorting to "silly" things like sneering. It doesn't become an administrator and one wonders with administrators such as Drmies, why editors like me have still not quit. I wish you interesting administrating! - Takeaway (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

• talk) 12:17, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• Wikicology. That phrase was stuck in my head since the ANI on your behaviour. I will rephrase it: "Wikicology, another editor who has a problem with me". Please research things before jumping in. I have explained all this before. I did report it. Nothing happened. Rak-Tai, despite warnings, kept reverting. After 3 years of harassment I grew sick of it. He was already warned 1 1/2 years ago by another admin to stop doing. Read all about it for yourself in the links I provided above to Nick's page. I do not need to repeat all that again. And FYI: in all these years only run-ins with 3 or 4 editors: Rak-Tai's was the only major clash. - Takeaway (talk)

And yes, stubborn Rak-Tai has just reposted his personal attack yet again, stating "my page" in the edit summary, and also mistaking Drmies' obliquely phrased remark to stop posting personal attacks, and apparently also Wikicology's unwarranted input, as encouragement to continue doing so as shown here. It's a pity that when Drmies blanked the talkpage, they also blanked their initial admonishment to Rak-Tai to stop posting personal attacks on their user page. - Takeaway (talk) 13:53, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Phew... The issue with Rak-Tai has finally been taken care of (see User talk:Floquenbeam#Thank you) and hopefully this will finally end Rak-Tai's personal attacks after all these years. Floquenbeam has blanked their user page and added an official warning to their talk page, and Drmies has now also added a stronger message to their talk page. - Takeaway (talk) 16:59, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• I accept your apology. Drmies (talk) 17:54, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Yawn... Takeaway (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• Takeaway, why did you chose to put this discussion on this page? Have I had any previous involvement of any sort with you or Rak-Tai? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• No you didn't. I don't know any admins, never had any need to all these years on WP. And ANI seemed way too much for something like this. For some reason I remembered your name and that you were an admin. I just had nowhere else to turn to, to have this issue resolved as Drmies threatened to block me if I removed the personal attack but flat-out refused to remove it for me. And this wouldn't have turned into a discussion if Drmies and Wikicology hadn't followed me here. - Takeaway (talk) 22:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Why did you remove my edit to Kimura as also being a band?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GMAXX666 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• Disambiguation pages such as Kimura are limited to blue-linked items. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

The aforementioned article received a speedy deletion from you. Two editors, myself and

• The other articles in Category:New York State Public High School Athletic Association sections are all borderline. But why should a red stain bother you? Obviously you are going to create such a good article that no-one in their right mind would think of deleting it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Yo yo yo. I just had my first run-in with Asin lanja today. I notice that you administered their last block. This edit of theirs first caught my eye, where they introduce an image randomly into the article. The file name is gibberish, the caption is gibberish, and even the description at Commons is gibberish. No indication of how/why/if this photo should be in the Drishyam article. Here is another image placed at the top of the article--a probable copyright violation. And the end result of these four edits appears to be deliberate formatting errors. Not sure if the user is a vandal or if they are completely incompetent, but they seem to just be mashing keys and disrupting articles in the process. Anyhow, heads-up! I gave them a final warning for vandalism because I noticed they'd been contacted about disruptive editing before. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:59, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

• Probably just complete incompetence. Matter has been solved for you with an indef block. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Can you please move

• Done. You cannot be serious. Where is the evidence that he now meets MUSICBIO? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I am just trying to help. Karlhard (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I did see the article before it was deleted. I think Karlhard is being broad with the terms "hit" and "national chart";

WP:MUSICBIO#C2 states that an artist is notable if it has had a hit on a national chart. I doubt he'll have another hit again as he has left Young Money Entertainment, therefore I recommend restoring and sending back to AfD per WP:Using deletion as cleanup.--Launchballer 15:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry if I may be wrong, but it does meet

WP:MUSICBIO. Karlhard (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I made a approx. anon. quotation to one of your advice lines at on my talk page here. I'll add attribution if you like --I wan';t sure you'd want me to. DGG ( talk ) 19:39, 10 October 2014 (UTC)