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

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

Could you please restore the category and its subcats? It was emptied out-of-process yesterday byUser:Bogic. I'm reverting the changes. --Paul_012 (talk)18:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

• Restored all my deletions. If there are any restores of deletions done by others, let me know.Bogic (talk ·contribs) has not even been reprimanded for this. Do you think a brief admonitory block might be appropriate? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)23:48, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I think the edits were made in good faith, even if somewhat misguided. I thought of leaving him a note, but wasn't sure what to say. --Paul_012 (talk)14:11, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Roger. I reported several other socks to DoRD if you feel like blocking them.User_talk:DoRD#Sock_accounts.INeverCry22:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I would like to know why you delete my article. I understand that the first time my article got deleted was because I did not cite a reliable source. But this time I am citing from a reliable source, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Also this article is about an invention which technical aspects are being explained here. And can not be changed in second article. But I did amend by using this reliable source. Please explain why you delete thisautomatic pitch turbine. Respectfully: Israel Otiz— Precedingunsigned comment added byWing4700 (talk •contribs)02:38, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

• A link to USPTO is actually the exactopposite of evidence of notability! It says: 'nobody has taken any interest in this idea - the only thing I can quote is the patent number'. Kindly have the decency towait until: a) this idea is actually implemented as hardware, installed and shown to work, b) receives independent mention in reliable sources and, finally, c) someone with noCOI writes about it here. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)09:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello Roger (RHaworth),You deleted my submission forIsaac Fadoyebo because it didn't meet the significance test however I feel your deletion is not merited. Please restore the page.

4. TheBarnaby Phillips article references Isaac Fadoyebo. Furthermore, Barnaby Phillip's documentary about Fadoyebo can also be viewedhere.

5. The most important reason why Fadoyebo's submission in Wikipedia is important is that his personal account of the war is now stored at the Imperial War Museum .

I hope I hear from you soon. Cheers, Oloye79.— Precedingunsigned comment added byOloye79 (talk •contribs)

• Please learn how to: create wikilinks, clothe naked URLs, create numbered lists and not to clutter talk pages with article material. What was your reason 3. ?! I have to admit that the lower casef in the title probably influenced the person who applied the speedy tag and myself. Storage in the Imperial War Museum is actually theleast important reason and scarcely deserves mention. The museum aims to be comprehensive - it will accept any submission relevant to its remit but that simply does not make the submission notable. Conversely, the Golden Eagle award (if you can fix thisbroken link) won by Barnaby Phillips, although indirect is slight evidence of notability.

I have restored your text toUser:Oloye79/sandbox. You must: re-write the text to fix the copyvios and add more references then re-submit viaAfC. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)09:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Please restore the Article:Draft:GeeFunding.This article does not pose any advertisement or promotion.The company hired me to help write and publish this article based on their service. All information contain on theGeeFunding article are genuine.Similar article in the same category from another company located atKickstarter,GoFundMe andIndiegogo.Please restore the article for approval. If you have something you would like us change or remove form the article, please specify.Anticipating your understanding.Best regards,John D. McDanielTel: +1(214) 810-8413— Precedingunsigned comment added byBizking2u (talk •contribs)15:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please go back to the company and say: "I do not have a clue what a Wikipedia article should look like. Companies writing about themselves on Wikipedia is, to put it mildly, strongly deprecated. So please do not find anybody else but kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks your company is notable and writes about it." —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Dear Roger,Please restore the ArticleDraft:AskACatholic.com*.I am new to this but open to constructive criticism and feedback to make any possible future article publishable. When you deleted the draft I had not finished my work (putting in my references).It was my understanding that Draft articles are not live ones.I'm only trying to follow the similar path of another organization whose article was not deleted as mine wasCatholic Answers.We do similar work.Can you at least e-mail what you deleted. I put a lot of time to developing that article.Best regards,Mike Humphreymike.humphrey@rcn.com— Precedingunsigned comment added byMikehump (talk •contribs)20:46, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

• There is a spooky similarity between the edits here by Bizking2u (see above) and yours. Please explain why you posted your message twice. It is also very strange that you compare your article toCatholic Answers. Within the first few lines of your article I read: "We are a new breed …, we do the best we can … and we proclaim …". This tells me that you clearly have not read theCatholic Answers article, or indeed, any other Wikipedia article or you would not be submitting something so far distant from what we expect. Text reluctantly emailed. Do not even think about re-posting it here, instead kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks your website is notable and writes about it here. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Is this best format you can sent it to me? —Mikehump (talk ·contribs) [via email] 2014 Aug 11, 14:10 (UTC)

• So what format would you like? And why? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)21:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Roger,Are you going to allow me to finish the work I started in my Draft:AskACatholic* ?Can you please restore what I started and provide guidance on how to adjust what I have written.The work my group does is no different thanCatholic Answers.Mike Humphreymikehump— Precedingunsigned comment added byMikehump (talk •contribs)14:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• You don't read Wikipedia articles. You don't even try to find a reply when you post on a user talk page. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)14:57, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I see you deletedFile talk:Robinhunicke 240x160 August2009.jpg. Can you place the content that was formerly there atFile talk:Robinhunicke at thatgamecompany photoshoot, August 2009.jpg. There seems to have been a page move without the corresponding talk pages.--TonyTheTiger(T /C /WP:FOUR /WP:CHICAGO /WP:WAWARD)01:44, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• Done. Problem was that the page move was on Commons. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Thx--TonyTheTiger(T /C /WP:FOUR /WP:CHICAGO /WP:WAWARD)13:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi,I have written the article by the name ofSurvey Camp. But no one has reviewed it yet for about two days. Take care of this matter immediately.ThanksUser:Owais khursheed — Precedingundated comment added15:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• What a strange question! You release something direct into article space, just be grateful no-one has tried to delete it. Why should you expect anyone else to edit it? If you want your article reviewed, use theAfC process. So I have moved your article toDraft:Survey camp. Please learn thatnaked URLs are obscene. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)15:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth. Recently this articleJohn J. "Bald Jack" Ryan was created by what looks to be a SPA editor. A discussion on the talk page wound up showing that there are some references out there that could be used but at the moment it is an unsourced mess that (IMO) is a long way away from being a Wikipedia article. The question I have is there a place to go other than AFD to recommend that it be moved to a user sandbox or draft space as you did with the article mentioned in the above thread? If not are there any other alternatives? Thanks for your time.MarnetteD|Talk16:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• The wiki motto is "bebold". It is not done very often but I see no reason why you should not userfy the article yourself. When you have done it, apply a{{db-r2}} tag to the redirect you have created and explain to the author why you have done it. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)17:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: I'm going to revert the suggested boldness... if you think the topic is notable, then fix it in place. There's no need to take it back to draft first. It's not an unsourced mess, and any mess that exists, you can fix. Because, if you know certain items are messy, then, by definition, you (MarnetteD) know what the fixes are for that messiness.

In other situations, I would wholeheartedly support a move back to draft space. This is not one of those situations. --Demiurge1000 (talk)20:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I have not dealt with this before so I appreciate the input. RH, I haven't userfied anything before and I am leery of creating redirects. I am as likely to mess it up as not. D, I am not interested in the subject at all and I don't have the time or desire to work on the article. When I posted my question there were no sources in the article. I notice that there are some now. It is still a long way from encyclopedic and reads like a college thesis paper. But that is just me. Others who are interested in the subject will come along and improve it in time. Thanks again to you both for sharing your thoughts. Cheers.MarnetteD|Talk20:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Expired BLPPROD articles are waiting for review atCategory:BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left.101.62.144.22 (talk)12:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth! I recently had an article tagged for possible self-promotion when I was trying to seek help from other users on how to get my article ready for publishing. The article wasUser:Theharrybell/David Rubenstein (attorney). Is there any way that you can restore this deletion? Also, if you have any suggestions on how to make my article better so that it is not tagged for deletion again, I would greatly appreciate the help. Thank you RHaworth! —Theharrybell (talk)18:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please search this page for the word "kindly". In the unlikely event that you have noCOI, work throughCategory:American lawyers. I am sure that among those 3000+ bios there are some that need improvement. When you have built up a contributions history of more than 100 edits to at least 50 different articles you will be in a much better position to convince suspicious people like me that you have no COI. Also you should have gained an idea of what a Wikipedia lawyer bio should look like. I would be happy to email you some suggested content -read this. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)20:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I want to publish an article about a company I work forXeltek and I saw a previous article that was deleted in 2012because: A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. This is a Global leader company in its industry that has more than 20 years of history so I would like to know how did we fail to indicate the significance of the subject, other companies of the sector such asElnec have an article in Wikipedia. In their page they mention Xeltek as big competitor.We can provide strong secondary sources and information about the company. This is a technology company that manufacturers programmers and works on developing technology,it also publishes valuable information on electrical engineering and programming. I would like to write an informational article about the company, its history and its trademark registered line product.Please let me know how to proceed.Thank you,Pilarxeltek (talk ·contribs)

• This edit is by someone who clearly does not know how to use a Wikipedia talk page. You are the same. You asked your question eight days (almost to the minute!) earlier and I replied to it. Did you attempt to look for my reply? Please answer. You will now find ithere. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)09:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi,I am contacting you as you appear to be the only active admin at the minute according to the logs. With myOTRS hat on, I would be greatful if you could revdel a copyvio present in the page history ofCZ 99 perTicket:2014081210024714 (the last good diff was[1]. If you require any more information, I would be greatful if you couldemail me, as I prefer not to give away too much on-wiki about tickets. Thanks in advance,Mdann52talk to me!11:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Done. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:04, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Whyredirect atalk page of an article that was deleted basically because of vandalism?WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!!15:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, I see that you have not modified things now so thatLondon, Ashford and Dover Railway now redirects toLondon, Chatham and Dover Railway. Why? Do you have any indication (other than 1234asd's vandalistic actions) that any ever referred to the railway by that name?WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!!15:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Oh dear, two goofs in rapid succession: putting the redirect on the talk page andthis edit. So I gave myself a break. Creating the redirect at all was not a goof - I did it before I realised that the page had been created by a vandalism only account. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)16:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

You deleted this page three years ago because of the A7 rule. I intend to show that he now meets the notability guidelines.Mhults7791 (talk)19:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

It is completely unacceptable to dump a sentence and a bunch of empty sections in articlespace and call it an article. As created, what you put down failsWP:A7 conclusively. Use a sandbox, such asUser:Mhults7791/sandbox orUser:Mhults7791/James Blackmon, Jr., in future.--Launchballer20:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Please allow sufficient time for articles under construction to be developed, especially when intentions have been publicly declared.Mhults7791 (talk)03:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• You have been contributing for more than four years. You should have learnt by now that it is suicide to start an article in mainspace. Always start in a userspace draft. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)10:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. I am not familiar with the rules around posting images and was wondering if the following image is absolutely not permissible:File:SoodenHostageVideo.png. I'd like to use a screenshot from the hostage video of a hostage in Iraq that was taken by the kidnappers (seeHarmeet Singh Sooden). However, it seems news media has taken over the copyright. Any suggestions you may have would be appreciated. Thank you,Wikimuntu (talk)00:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please learn to use wikilinks. I agree that copyright almost certainly rests with the hostage takers - and they were probably not bothered about copyright when they released the video and might be difficult to contact to get their retrospective release! But since you are accepting that the copyright of thedemocracynow.org page applies to the image, the position is simple. The democracynow page has a licence of{{cc-by-nc-nd-3.0}} but both the NC and ND clauses are not allowed on Wikimedia sites - we demand{{cc-by-sa-3.0}} or less stringent. You may get some joy if you upload with a fair use claim, especially if you point out the dubious right of democracynow to the copyright. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)10:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• Incidentally, the extremists currently making a nuisance of themselves in Iraq are extremely active on social media, and also a fair number of them are fluent in English due to having been brought up in the UK. So contacting an individual who might plausibly claim to speak on behalf of the copyright owner may not be as difficult as one would think. And they do seem to like publicity. I agree with RHaworth that an attempt at fair use might also work (or not), and that news media don't get to "take over" copyright just because they imagine some content is newsworthy. --Demiurge1000 (talk)17:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comments.Wikimuntu (talk)01:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I redirectedPriceline HK to the Chinese page which contains content there. Why did you delete it with the reason of no content? Look forward to your response. — Joe- Precedingunsigned comment added byWsjwong (talk •contribs)04:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please look atCategory:Wikipedia soft redirects. They all redirects within English language wikis. We simply do not do cross-language redirects. What use is a page in Chinese to users of the English Wikipedia? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)10:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Why wasJuan Baigorri Velar deleted? It was a translation ofes:Juan Baigorri Velar, the Spanish version of the same article.Jasenlee (talk)03:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

• Despite ten years of contributing you still have not learned: to place messages at the bottom of a talk page, how to create wikilinks or that setting up an email address is a good idea. The log tells you the primary deletion reason. The prod had been applied because something important had been lost in translation: all references. The article was created bySaulPerdomo (talk ·contribs) as a "fly-by" exercise - he dumped it and never bothered to see what happened. I will be happy to restore and userfy for anyone who intends to bring it up to standard. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)09:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

After writing the above, I actually went back and read the article! I need to learn a bit of Spanish ready for Wikimania next year so I may read a bit more. Here is agood reference in English. Any new version of the article needs to have a strong note of scepticism at the end. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)09:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion of the article was under A3, which doesn't make any sense. Please restore the content with revision history. Thanks. --C S (talk)21:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Please learn to read a log listing. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)22:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't see any justification other than you citing A3. Please explain your rationale for deletion. Otherwise I will submit this to deletion review with the comment that deleting admin refuses to explain him/herself. Thanks. --C S (talk)00:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

• For goodness sake!! The log iscounter-chronological. Look at the timestamps. What is thelast thing I did to the page? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)00:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

You moved it to a user'ssandbox. Now why on earth would you delete a perfectly good stub by citing A3, and then restore-move it to a user page? I don't see any explanation here or or in the log. --C S (talk)00:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The movement of the page to a sandbox was correct. It is very unlikely to survive an AfD. --Launchballer11:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

• I have now restored the missing edit so you can see the full history.JasonHockeyGuy (talk ·contribs) requested deletion, so I deleted it. OK, strictly speaking A3 did not apply but since it was a clearA7 candidate, I was not going to object. He then changed his mind (seethis exchange). So I restored it per his request. C S, you have done nothing to this article in eight years, why have you woken up and taken an interest now? And do you or Jason have any intention of turning it into a proper article? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Why did you deleteFile:BoomStartup_logo.png?It's the logo for BoomStartup and I am building a page for it in my sandbox.Jr105 (talk)01:32, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

• Pleaseread this. I believe there is a rule that fair use images are only allowed in mainspace so best to wait until the article is accepted and then upload the logo with a fair use rationale - there are thousands of logos already uploaded to show you how to do it. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed the image file which I have uploaded has been deleted. (File:SereneKoongImage.jpg) This picture was captured by me and I genuinely would like to upload it for the artist. If you could please help me with the correct copyright terms to choose so that it does not get deleted again. Many thanks, DaveChrisjoselim (talk)07:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

• Does the copyright of the image belong to Serene Koong rather than the organisers of the awards ceremony? If she does hold the rights, then the answergiven here is as good as any. Alternatively, she may grant permission asexplaind here. In any case the image should be uploaded tothe Commons not here andher web page must be changed to make it clear that the image is available under a Creative Commons licence. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

You recently deleted a wikipedia page onQ&Aid Research Institute on 18 August 2014, 09:23 because of (A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject). I believe that this is not true. The wikipedia page I posted about this company had no bias or promotional material. Everything was properly cited and nothing on that page was false. While this company is new and does not have much attention, it does provide an important community service by providing free information on cancer prevention methods and health management techniques. The company currently has a database for traditional herbal medicine with modern scientific backing and research. this should fall under and "educational institute" and it does have importance and significance.— Precedingunsigned comment added by97.78.44.42 (talk)18:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Kindly have the decency to (1) alwayssign on a talk page with the four tides at the end of every comment. (2) wait until the company becomes notable and someone with noCOI will write about it here. —Wikicology (talk)03:40, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

• Also (3) log in before leaving messages and (4) provide link/s to the page/s about which you are talking. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for deletingWikipedia:Teeth and jaw research! –Paine 23:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

• You are a pain - please explain the idea of putting a non-link in colour instead of providing a simplered link. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Bad habit – I did that in an rcat and was asked to change it. I didn't think it was that big a deal, but I did change the type of emphasis. The above does link now.Joys! –Paine 04:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• There was much talk at Wikimania about not putting newbies off. Certainly using unexplained jargon is one thing to be avoided. EvenWikicology tries to explain jargon. I had no idea what anrcat is. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)18:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Sir I request a protection on the above page. Ip users are reali vandalizing it. Seethis History[2]. I suggest immediate block of this Ip user75.145.18.186 (talk ·contribs). —Wikicology (talk)03:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

• Done. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

You seem to have deletedan afc for world champion in two sports, which had extensive acceptable documentation (which I verified). Fortunately, I check the deletion log from time to time, even though it is much harder to check on the contents after an article has been deleted. Relying on a no longer present editor to ask for restoration is not often effective. I apologized to the after I undeleted and accepted the article as it stood, though I subsequently made a few formatting changes. (to be sure, the editor made the error of not formally re-submitting it after he changed the unacceptable references to acceptable ones, but we can hardly expect newcomers to get our procedures right all the time.) — DGG ( talk)16:03, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

• Please provide links when talking about pages. I have been known to rescueG13 cases but certainly nowhere near as often as you do it. No objection to your actions. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Please dont delete my page.I have my own company and i mademy page very happily. You deleted my page, and if u dleted it. Tell me why— Precedingunsigned comment added byHundalsahej (talk •contribs)00:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

• "My own company" says it all. Kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks your own company is notable and writes about it here. See alsothis message and the replies. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Why did you deletemy content?— Precedingunsigned comment added bySanjibGanguli (talk •contribs)

• Sanjib, what is the point of asking a question at the tea house if you don't look for a reply. I had alreadyreplied there when you left the above message.

Theroadislong, no thanks, I will decide when to delete stuff from this page. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you have just create-protectedPoudar. Please would you consider reverting that? Admirenepal is a prolific sock - far more so than the SPI page indicates - and they almost always return to create that particular article. It acts as an extremely good honey-trap. -Sitush (talk)14:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

• Interesting reason. Done. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)14:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks very much. -Sitush (talk)15:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

SirAshtoncollege98 (talk ·contribs) is aWP:SPA for the above title. And I think216.18.3.203 (talk ·contribs) is a sock of the account.Wikicology (talk)18:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

A cursory google could have helped. How about the fact there's a book[3][4]? The blurbs on the front and back are byMatthew Inman andKate Beaton. From Amazon: "With more than 2 million page views a month, 500,000+ blog subscribers, and 500,000+ Facebook followers, Pusheen is [...]" But you know, whatever, right?DELETED -153.2.247.32 (talk)User:BalthCat — Precedingundated comment added07:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

None of that is an indication of notability - readthis.--Launchballer09:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• You signature is, not to put too fine a point on it, fraudulent. If you are BalthCat, log in and sign properly. Do not claim it when editing from an IP address. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)18:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

WhyPhilippines national under-21 football team was deleted?OccultZone(Talk •Contributions •Log)07:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

@OccultZone: I don't thinkRHaworth (talk ·contribs) deleted the page.Wikicology (talk)09:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikicology: He did. He deleted it and then subsequently restored it.

OccultZone, please be aware that your signature is currently broken - the closing </span> is in the wrong place. I have moved this instance - it should be after Zone and before ''' - but do update it in your preferences.--Launchballer09:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

you are right@Launchballer: I assumed it was not deleted since it has been restored.Wikicology (talk)09:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Fixed signature, thanks. RHaworth just deleted the talk page.[5] Although there seems to be no issues with the new version.OccultZone(Talk •Contributions •Log)11:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

The </span> is the problem. I know I do moan probably unnecessarily about them but I useWP:Syntaxhighlight, and such errors break it.--Launchballer19:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• Wikicology, if you are going to answer on my behalf, do it properly. I am prepared to forgive your link error which wascorrected here. But to say "I don't think RHaworth deleted the page" is unforgivable sloppiness. You should provide a link to thearticle log and say categorically "RHaworth deleted the page twice".

OccultZone, you are just as sloppy - if you link to thetalk page log you can see that I have not "just deleted" it (whether "just" means "recently" or "only" makes no difference) but did it a week ago at the same time as I deleted the article.

As to my actions, I am never sure of the notability criteria for sports people and sports clubs. In fact I should have been suspicious because the page had been blanked. Checking, I see that the deletion nomination was clear vandalism so I was happy to restore. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)18:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:ATH andWP:NCLUB.--Launchballer19:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello RHaworth,Sorry for coming back to this topic a bit later than helpful, but we have a time difference here so I just noticed that the articleCyberGhost VPN has been deleted faster than the speed of light ... ;-)I didn't intend to provoke such a harsh reaction. Otherwise I would have sandboxed the article and discussed it from there. In fact, I had been pretty sure I have avoided as much pitfuls as possible to leave room enough for discussions with other Wikipedians to create an article which serves public interests - that's why I did tag the article with the neutrality flag myself. I obviously failed. But I am also very astonished to be kicked out from Wikipedia, even though I offered all possible forms of discussing the topic (imo).So, how can we open a frutile discussion? I'd be eager to learn, why you decided the way you did, what you think, I/we can do better, what passages need to be re-written and what other changes need to be done. After all, CyberGhost VPN is a software product like many others and does serve a public interest by providing a powerful free anonymization service for everybody. - Ulrich (which is my real name)W1k1p1CG (talk)10:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

The advert you posted was so execrably promotional had it turned up in userspace it would still have been deleted. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with noCOI thinks you are notable and writes about you here.--Launchballer12:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, ever thought about why I never made any attempt to hide my intentions? I actually thought, we are all grown ups and would be able to start a discussion without offending people. To make this one clear: I am not a marketing specialists nor do I want to be confused as one nor am I experienced with Wikipedia. I am just an ordinary german content provider who tried to start an article in a foreign language and actually also asked for help. So did anybody actually read what I wrote or was it just a reflex? However, I carefully read aboutCOI and do understand your point of view - even though I felt misunderstood and offended by the words you used and the harsh reactions. I believe as much as you in what Wikipedia should provide (an objective encyclopedia of everything) - but we might just have different opinions on how to reach that goal ... - Ulrich91.11.66.13 (talk)09:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• "Frutile" what a lovely neologism! I assume it is a combination of fruitless and futile and since you admit that a discussion would be such, then there is no need to start one. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

You assumed wrongly, sorry. It was simply a mistake, based on the German word 'fruchtbar'. I just confused it with the English word 'frutile' because of its somehow similar spelling for me as a German. However, that's nothing I expect you should have known, of course, but, since these are my last words here about this topic (the article on Wikipedia had been given up) allow me to correct this to fruitile as a neologism to fruitful and fertile. Have a nice life. - Ulrich91.11.66.13 (talk)09:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Fruitful and fertile! Brilliantly inverted! —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Omar Faruk was born …— Precedingunsigned comment added byUptodatefaruk (talk •contribs)12:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

wikipedia is not a facebook or my space! kindly have the decency to (1) wait until someone with noCOI write about you here when you are notable. And (2)go back to Omar faruk that you don't have an idea of what wikipedia is mearnt for.Wikicology (talk)14:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• Seethis discussion. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

According toA7 of Criteria for Speedy deletion, would New Zealand'sWellington City Libraries count as an educational institution? --DrWho42 (talk)17:46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• No. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough! I will await further citations before embarking on another article on the subject.--DrWho42 (talk)21:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• I have just realised that your strange question above was possibly meant to say "would Wellington City Libraries count as areliable source?" And to that question my answer would be: only just, in any case you need multiple reliable sources withsignificant coverage andthis page is not exactly significant coverage. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)22:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

It did garner media coverage viaFast Company andThe Atlantics's deputy editorAlexis Madrigal.--DrWho42 (talk)23:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• That is just name dropping - you would need to provide explicit links to the coverage - but don't bother. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

No worries! Here they are:5 intriguing things &Fast Company.--DrWho42 (talk)01:17, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Why You Delete My Article?— Precedingunsigned comment added byKhader El Zein (talk •contribs)19:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• Why You Begin Every Word Of A Sentence With A Capital Letter? Why you use PNG format for your photo instead of JPG? Why you think Wikipedia will accept your fantasy/hoax rubbish? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

My page was real Why You Deleted— Precedingunsigned comment added byKhader El Zein (talk •contribs)20:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• The page was real but the content was fiction. Show me your evidence! But in any case kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)20:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you please remove the ban you placed on creating theFury 325 article? The roller coaster has been announced and there are numerous reliable sources establishing the roller coaster is real and notable. Thank you. --Dom497 (talk)20:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• Submit a new article viaAfC. If it gets accepted then unprotection will be uncontroversial. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)20:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Unprotection won't be controversial at all....I guarantee it. Going through AfC is going to take for ever. Please, trust me on this one. I'm the one that nominated the article for deletion and now I'm saying to allow it to be re-created. Do a Google search of "Fury 325 carowinds". --Dom497 (talk)21:52, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

• OK, there is a permanent backlog on AfC but that does not fit my definition of "for ever" and certainly an AfC decision would be received well before the ride starts operating. But if you can find another admin willing to unprotect, I have no objection and you may point them to this statement. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)22:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm unable to moveFury 325 (Carowinds) to the properFury 325 because the latter is protected from creation. I assume this was done by you after you deleted an article with this name.[6] Kindly conduct this move using your administrator tools. Thanks.--PinkBull00:49, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks for correcting me really appreciate thatSynester.balck (talk)05:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Arev Armenian Folk Ensemble, aka Arev Folk Ensemble. I got the wiki link to the removed article from Ixquick.I want to access it.I don't understand what has happened to Wikipedia, right and left removing articles on subjects I look up. It seems as if every darn character in every darn video game is thought worthy of inclusion, yet a significant music ensemble (which pulls up over 500 hits on Ixquickwhen put in quotes and another 300+ under its alternate name without "Armenian" in it, and 170 for Youtube hits alone) is removed. It is good that there are options to retrieve some articles, or to protest a removal, but that isa lot of extra work for the user! What can be done to stop these deletions perpetrated by people whose basis for doing so is their lack of knowledge or appreciation of many worthy subjects? —Xerlome (talk)18:34, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

• No, it was not a wikilink, it was an external link - please learn the difference. The article scraped throughthis AfD in 2008. But our standards have improved in six years. Since the only reference in the article was to their MySpace page, I had no hesitation deleting it. They are based in Massachusetts so there should be no problem in find references in English - if they are notable. Text emailed. You may care to contactWerldwayd (talk ·contribs) who started the article. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannotkeep such article and that is why it was speedily deleted.WP:What Wikipedia is not answered your question.Wikicology (talk)19:12, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

• Wikicology, that is not a particularly useful comment. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)19:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Please be aware that Werldwayd is a severe inclusionist - seethis exchange. He is, however, reliable for responding to deletion threats (seeWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaap van Reesema), and the AfD strongly suggests that they may meetWP:MUSICBIO#C8, so call me as pedantic as you want but speedy deletion does not apply. In my opinion, sending it back to AfD would be the best option.--Launchballer19:56, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth, I've written an article with references that I think you'll find appropriate. It's all properly formatted and referenced and ready for publication. I'm happy to send it to you so you can check it out properly. Thanks!Pear285 (talk) pear05:37, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

There is no need to litter the header with the protection log. A link to the draft you are writing would be helpful.--Launchballer08:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi RHaworth, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! I just uploaded it ontoDraft:Jamie Curry :).Pear285 pear08:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Launchballer, thanks for putting the Article for creation submission on the Draft page. I clicked to submit it for review. However I got the messageThis may take several weeks, to over a month. The Articles for creation process is severely backlogged. Please be patient. There are 2622 submissions waiting for review. It seems unhelpful to add this to the backlog. Couldn't you just reverse the administrators only limitation on the Jamie Curry article now? CheersPear285 pear09:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Erm, other way round - I certainly didn't put the AfC tag on that page! RHaworth hasn't yet commented here, and I certainly can't reverse his protection of the article - I am not an administrator.--Launchballer13:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• Multiple co-incidences: two articles with NZ connections - seeCool Freaks' Wikipedia Club above; two women with gender-ambiguous names - see Charlie Hedges below and two editors too impatient for the AfC process to work seeFury325 above. As with Dom497, if you are not prepared to wait, find another admin to do the deed. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)15:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, RHaworth. Another administrator,Ale jrb, deletedCharlie Hedges; could you please restore it because she presentsKiss Breakfast and seems notable? Ale jrb isn't active any more. Thank you.--Launchballer14:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

• Text emailed. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)15:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't make sense to deleteG.rongi page when other pages with no reference and no content remain on wikipedia such as Emcee rumaz or K-South pages. I do not understand the principles of wikipedia, I really need explanation. The article on G.rongi was written by a PHD holder who works on kenyan hip hop!The article was well documented. Please reconsider the article or tell me how to improve it. G.rongi is surely more notable than many other artists on wikipedia ( Emcee Rumaz and others.) G.rongi appears in front pages of 2 newspapers last month and has participated in many peace projects duringKenya crisis 2007-2008.— Precedingunsigned comment added byTafakari (talk •contribs)

• Kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)15:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi -NewsWatch was originally deleted because it did not have references. I have added references and updatedthe article. Can you please restore it? Please let me know if there is anything else that needs to be done. Thank you. - Coocat86— Precedingunsigned comment added byCoocat86 (talk •contribs)

• NewsWatch has no deleted edits so what on earth do you want me to do? —RHaworth (talk·contribs)20:38, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
• Hi. TheNewsWatch I am referring to is the one in my sandbox. It was deleted in November 2013 for no references and then put into my sandbox, and now the references have been added and new updates about the television show have been added. I believe this is the exact link to the page I am referring to.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Coocat86/sandbox&oldid=622807933 . If this is not the correct path to get the article published can you please let me know how to? Thank you! Coocat86— Precedingunsigned comment added byCoocat86 (talk •contribs)

Thanks for deletingModule talk:RailGauge/testcases-list1 as asked. But its parent page was intended for deletion too -Module:RailGauge/testcases-list2. It';s just that in module space, one can not put a template on a module (code) page. Same forModule:RailGauge/testcases-list2 andModule:RailGauge/gaugedoc. --DePiep (talk)23:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

• Very sorry. Module: must be the only namespace where a speedy tag on the page itself does not work. If the circumstances arise again, put an hand-written speedy tag on the talk page saying "delete the module itself". —RHaworth (talk·contribs)08:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Not your fault. A hand-written speedy? Sort of defies the purpose I guess. But next time I'll note it somehow, indeed. -DePiep (talk)09:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

• By hand-written speedy, all I meant was {{db|… delete the module itself …}}. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)12:07, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't even know who had tagged it for speedy deletion. Not sure if I had, but you can let me know. Thanks.OccultZone(Talk •Contributions •Log)11:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

• Text emailed. Speedy tag was applied byKobuu (talk ·contribs) with the strange comment in the edit summary: "original author doesn't exist". —RHaworth (talk·contribs)12:07, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Now I remember, I had watchlisted only for reminding about it to any active admin, it was a exipired prod anyway. ThanksOccultZone(Talk •Contributions •Log)12:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey RHaworth, sorry, must have looked really quick and only seen a redlink.Kobuu (talk)13:00, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

[Shouting deleted - hence message may be incomprehensible.]

It was cited to speed tests. The new Prime Spirals beat all the other prime algorithms, and wiki has pages for the slower prime algorithms.8 prime spirals.is where the tests were done and not one real mathematician or computer programming expert question the results since anyone can duplicate them from the open source software.[7][8]So the original article major outside sources to.—Drprinceton (talk)00:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)drprinceton

• Kindly have the decency towait until someone with noCOI thinks your algorithm is notable and writes about it here. You can tryDeletion Review but don't get too hopeful. —RHaworth (talk·contribs)10:13, 27 August 2014 (UTC)