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.

Hi there.. my name is Drew. I am very new to wiki. Every time I try to post something there seems to be a problem, so I must be doing something wrong. I am a big fan of Lewis Harrison and decided to put up a wiki for him. He has helped me change my life. It seems that I messed something up again, and the page is now scheduled for deletion. How can I fix the page so that is jives with wiki rules, and does not get deleted. It took DAYS for me to put all that info together. Please help!—Precedingunsigned comment added byPhiMedia (talk •contribs)08:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Regenerative Thought Programming ALSO Deleted. Once again I have done SO MUCH research on Lewis's RTP theory. The page is full of sources and references. PLEASE HELP... I really have no idea what I'm doing wrong. Thanks. PhiMedia—Precedingunsigned comment added byPhiMedia (talk •contribs)08:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• Simple matters: a) "every time" - don't exaggerate - I can only count two times, b) any page which "jives" is likely to be deleted as nonsense, c) we clearly have a problem of terminology -Regenerative Thought Programming – RTP contains absolutely no sources or references. My advice is: 1) build up asolid track record of edits to articles of undisputable notability - this the only way that you will convince me that you are not Lewis Harrison or someone associated with him, 2) come back and create these articles with links toreliable sources that demonstrate that the subjects are notable. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)08:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Reply: With all due respect... the guy has written over 20 books. I only has one natural healing coach, and it was Lewis. What else am I supposed to write about? Everything else I am into is wiki'ed to death. I was searching through and was actualy surprised that Lewis was not already on wiki (most authors are). I still really have no idea what is wrong with the page.... I was as straight forward, and named as many people that he worked with that I could think of. I figured out fans of his teaching, writing would see the page an add and edit it. (I thought that is how wiki worked). *2*

So what you are saying is that in order for me to write a page about one of my fav authors and a man you taught me almost everything I know in one way or another... is to become a full time wiki addict and edit a bunch of pages? Sorry that just does not make sence to me.—Precedingunsigned comment added byPhiMedia (talk •contribs)00:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

From one point of view my advice that you should become a wiki addict was rather pointless - yours is patently anSPA. We should simply accept that and have treated your submissions appropriately. Re *2* above: yes that is exactly how wiki works. Seems Harrison don't have as many fans as you thought.

Just out of interest: how come you were in Egypt to takeImage:Lewis+Harrison.jpg and presumably you learned aboutRTP directly from Harrison since it don't seem to be published anywhere. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply: Did you actualy read the post? Lewis Harrison is a "life coach" and "business / spiritual mentor". After reading his books, I contacted him and payed him for many of his services. I don't know what is so hard to figure our about that. How is that so odd? And for the record, two people made edits to his page today. I sure if the page was to remain you would see my work added to, changed, improved on. That's why I put the page up. Period. If you are so sure that I am Lewis, or whatever your issue is... I have NO PROBLEM stepping out from behind my computer to make a long distance call to you my friend. I got your number off your website, I will give you a ring and we can clear this up if you wish. Just say the word.

As for the picture from Egypt, Lewis sent it to me in an email. I thought it was cool... and had never seen it on any of his sites or books and thought it was a nice picture to share with wiki. Is there something wrong with that TOO? danggg—Precedingunsigned comment added by140.239.230.15 (talk)20:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

And as for the RPT's... Lewis has taught that to 1,000's of people in his manyLearning Annex classes he teaches in New York City.—Precedingunsigned comment added by140.239.230.15 (talk)20:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Kindly log in before doing any edits. I have already hinted that I am dropping any assertions thatPhiMedia is Lewis Harrison. We can concentrate on the question of his notability. The AfD has been open for four days but no-one has managed to create a single external link that might demonstrate his notability. Of course there is something wrong with the picture: "Lewis sent it to me in an email" is an admission that you are not the copyright holder. Get a GFDL release from Harrison and apply an homest tag. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)22:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Your point is that you dislike the upbeat tone of the Wiki. Unless there is a way to express the achievements of a person without sounding positive then how does one do so. I am more than happy to discuss other ways.—Precedingunsigned comment added byMiroj (talk •contribs)05:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I can think of dozens of Australians who deserve a Wiki and yet more Europeans. I don't ever see them waving a flag or taking about themselves. Someone has to come along and make those editorial comments as recognition.

Defining recognition as spam is something I find surprising. A) you need to be a car owner and b) you need to be a forum member. Then you pray and hope someone can solve your customisation problem. If you dont know Chip Foose then you are SOOL.

You need time for the forums to find this "spam" so they can contribute what they know. As already noted. Mbenznl has been in magazines several times. —Miroj (talk)05:33, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

• There is a world of difference between encyclopedic tone and the way you write. Do you work in advertising by any chance. "You need time for the forums ...". What forums? Why should we wait? If there are no reliable sources already there, then he ain't notable. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)05:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I dont work for an academic press and I don't write for a living. I support the case for people who have been reliable, consistent, humble and beyond the norm. I dont think many Wiki-names can fill those shoes. At some point in time you have the credibility. I dont think that having a global share of the Mercedes aftermarket and being a one man show is trivial. It is a massive achievement. It is a massive achievement in any field of endeavour. It would be like Bill Gates writing the software himself and selling it door-to-door and getting a substantial uptake in 30+ countries. You can't do that with BS. You can't do that with a bad idea.

Dare I say it, if you owned a Benz you would know what I am talking about. He is more all less one of those people who shuns publicity and would feel no worse off if it were deleted. There are probably two more atricles come out in the next two months on him. There are thousands (not hundreds) of photos of his work. I shudder when I think thatLara Bingle got a page ... truly sends a shiver down me.Miroj (talk)06:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there any chance someone would like to illuminate the subject of internet famous versus tabloid infamous. I think it bears more discussion than first suggested.Miroj (talk)08:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Article has been rephrased and rewritten. Does it offer a better standard or content ?Miroj (talk)23:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Now why on earth do you pick onLara Bingle? But in fact it is an excellent example of whyMBenzNL needs to go. Lara's article has a dozen links to reliable sources. All you have managed is one link to an article in Nederlands marked 'Advertorial'. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)00:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

All you are doing is recycling Public Relations junk. A machine setup to fill newspapers and apparently, fill Wikipedia. I have come to my own conclusions about all of this. Needless to say that holding on to trash media in favour of technical mastery has spoken volumes. Sycophantic to say the least. Now if MBENZNL could send his story to dozens of media outlets then you would gobble it up like drinking camels at an oasis. The world has many artisans. How many do you think are on here by comparison.Miroj (talk)23:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Nicely done. The article was deleted without posting a notice in my talk page. That concludes the correctness of Wikipedia procedure. Obviously one rule for everyone else.Miroj (talk)01:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Why should you expect any notice? You had waffled endlessly in the AfD discussion. You could see it was heading to a 'delete' result. Why should anyone waste any time leaving an extra message. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• • A bit like asking why should anyone brake for lawyers. It's just a common courtesy and no, it was not obvious. Only what was obvious is that the large portion of comments came from people with a very limited idea of media culture. I happen to know very little myself but I know more than those commenting. Wikipedia is destined to become the bridesmaid in information culture. Though I do find your comments are well thought out.Miroj (talk)07:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

hi im new to wiki edit can u please help the article i did will not be delted ? i dont know what wrong wite it.its the tredoku article and im not sure this is the right place to write about can u help me edit the tredoku page please thanks the web page is on now. you can also search amazon and see that the book is real and for salecan u remove it from AFD please ?

I have finally been able to find the time to put something together on the watercolor artist Roland Lee. I've got it inmy sandbox. The bio and some of is fairly complete and accurate. I still need to add a bunch of citations and refrences, but I'm wondering if it is complete enough for me to post it as its own page so that I can get the author to take a look at (and hopefully approve) it. I would also like to see if he would be willing to contribute some thumbnail or low-resolution images of some of his more prominent works (especially those cited in the info box) that could be used in the article. Would you mind taking a look at it for me and letting me know whether or not it would be in bad form to put it up as is? Thanks.jmaes123 (talk)07:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Roger, you asked me the following question a few months ago:

Incidentally, if you are into artists of Utah, have you any idea whythis statue should have beenattributed to Neil Hadlock when it was actually done byMark deGraffenried? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

So, I've been looking into this, and it turns out that Neil Hadlock is the owner of a bronze foundry here in Utah. He most probably cast the statue that Mark deGraffenried sculpted, and this might explain why it was attributed to him.

I hope that helps! -jmaes123 (talk)03:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

• It does help. The name of Neil Hadlock is set in stone one the base of the statue in Hull. It will give me great pleasure to tell the appropriate person in Hull to change it! —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
• That's hilarious!jmaes123 (talk)05:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Couldn't figure out how to merge thetwo pages after that stupid mistake! -Sosha (talk)13:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Would it be possible to open up the ChondroCelect ® page again please. I do not believe that blocking pages' content after short notification times does really help to have articles fit into wikipedia standards... Why not democrately editing content that one dissaproves rather than taking an entire page off?—Precedingunsigned comment added by81.246.79.190 (talk)07:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• Anon request - no response needed. — (Talk |contribs)08:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Very useful reply mr H! Thanks for contributing to the openness and accessibility of Wikipedia to newcomers...— Precedingunsigned comment added by81.246.79.190 (talk •contribs)

• Even newcomers are expected to contribute to the openness by logging in before doing any edits. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)11:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I understand your point, but can't loose the impression that harsh interventions as those you perform are not the solution. I now see that my IP address has been banned from wikipedia, which means no person having access through my network is welcome to contribute anymore... You might have an other opinion on some of the pages edited from here and I agree that working through a double account is not wikipedia friendly (now that I start to know the site I start to understand the system), but I am deeply dissapointed to now be banned indefinitely from the platform for such minor infractions. I have in no case committed crimes on this site. Would you please be so kind to indicate me which procedure is to be followed in order to regain access to the site?—Precedingunsigned comment added by81.246.79.190 (talk)13:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• You IP address has not even been blocked - seethe log entry - let alone banned. If it was blocked, you would not be able to edit this page. If you are receiving a message which tells you that you are blocked, the message probably also tell you how to get the block lifted. Read it carefully. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

You sure on this one? I deleted it myself previously as a copyvio, but this is someone with records on a major label. The content sucks, sure, but it's gotta start somewhere.Friday(talk)01:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• I will pretend I deleted it ak'sidentally. I just hate anything that looks like self-promotion. You could make a start by providing a link to the alleged entry in All Music Guide. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)01:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • OK. The content still sucks, and self-promotion is still a concern, but hey, one step at a time, right?Friday(talk)01:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I was in the process of removing the tag. I believe the bot incorrectly tagged PD information; please see the talk page.chrylis (talk)01:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• Of course it is PD. But seeUser talk:BoringHistoryGuy. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)01:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification; I kept thinking Commons, not Source. Also, please remove the talk page if you haven't already (I think it's gone).chrylis (talk)01:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

It was a typo in the header. I used{{afc t}} instead of{{afc top}}. I did not notice it was a copy however deletion under vandalism wascompletely inappropriate. I feel the AFC was created in good faith. A redirect would have been fine and I have recreated the page.^{Talk orC}13:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• If it was created in good faith, please give me: a) some evidence for theexistence of a "Slovakian Space Team", b) some evidence for the existence of theSlovakian Farthing in which their budget is designated and c) an explanation of whyhttp://www.svoboda.sk/ which isclaimed here to be their website is dead. Do I really need to take it to RfC? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)14:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No, hopefully you and I are mature enough to figure this out.Here is the original contribution. Without a header and the correct formatting it made for a real mess. I was guessing based on the first sentence that the IP was going for Slovakian space team and based on their other edits that seems true. However I think a better wording would beSlovakian space agency (even though I am not sure one exists) as team seems to make people think of the actual astronauts. I foundthis which gives a little summary andthis which seems to to show that Slovenia has joined the European Space Agency. I seenothing on that website although the wordSvoboda is suspect. If you are really board you can readthis powerpoint which seems to show that there is no budget or strong commitment from Slovenia which seems to contradict the IPs other edits. I put a note on the IPs talk page to come here and comment. I g7'd the redirect page. I did not revert any of the other edits they did.^{Talk orC}16:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Please undelete "SOLAR - School Outdoor Leadership Adventure Recreation".

Willi H2O (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)W i l l i - G u t m a n n.....SOLAR Webmaster and steering committee member...WilliH2O@Gmail.ComWilli H2O (talk)01:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

"Hey Buddy. First, there was no need to paste your article here. I know what it said."

One issue with your article is that you fail to explain why your organization is notable. The more important issue is that you have a blatantCOI. You are also idle - you have not bothered to learn about wikilinks.

You should leave it to others to write about your group. You can raise the matter atdeletion review but do not expect much joy. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

What are you guys (wikipedia admin) talking about with sockpuppets and all ?????????Who what or Is this entity "internet tough guy" "internet very tough guy" and why is he somehow associated with me ??Please remove any references of me to him ---

This is borderline slander/libel with innuendo, guessing, and false perceptions--STOP !

Willi H2O (talk)15:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Why are you asking me - where did I make those accusations? I have askedJuJube on your behalf. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing,Ak'sent, has been listed fordeletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ak'sent. Thank you.Do you want toopt out of receiving this notice?

Happy Editing! —72.75.117.122 (talk ·contribs)_{00:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)}

For moving/correcting the reserves--Work permit (talk)16:55, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

You shot my fox! I was just drafting an AfD. They've set up awebsite and all - notice the bit about the endangered aborigines. Regards,JohnCD (talk)17:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• I missed that but I have just pointed out two other pages toBeeblbrox. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)17:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• It was probably the late night wearing on that made me make a connection. He was talking about an article that got deleted that he wanted restored, and then the Internet tough guys showed up. My apologies.JuJube (talk)20:23, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Apology accepted - ThanksWilli H2O (talk)03:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've userfied theJonathan Wickers autobiography into the user's userspace asUser:Jwickers/Jonathan Wickers and have removed the prod tag from it. :-)fr33kman (talk)20:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Sorry that I didn't notify you when I removed your speedy tag fromGreg Nelson (producer)‎, I still had it on my TODO-list to investigate notability for myself—assuming that what he wrote on his page is true, that he significantly contributed to those Grammy-Award-Winning titles, he is probably notable. I guess I'll do so right away. :)
Cheers,Amalthea^Talk12:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, before you go around deleting articles, why don't you take a look at WHY that article ahs been created. We reached a consensus on theInternational recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia talk page, under the Change Map section, that the article needs to be split up. That's why I created an article actually dedicated to the Recognition, as opposed to Reactions Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence. Can you please revert your deletes and moves? If you're unwilling to do that, can you at least leave it for a few days until the requested move goes through that will actually separate the original article into two? Feel free to ask me any questions, but really, check out that talk page. Deleting without warning, uncool.Yarilo2 (talk)05:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• Is it too difficult for you to point me directly to the consensus thus:Talk:International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia#Change map?
• It is exceedingly strange; I will admit to deletingInternational Reaction to the Independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia but it does not appear in the deletion log! However this would appear to have been a straight copy&paste of the other article so little has been lost. Note also that the title should beInternational reaction to the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia (lower case 'r' and 'i').
• I suggest you work on the new article in your own user space (eg.User:Yarilo2/sandbox) until it is significantly different from the existing article. When you launch it make sure that the edit summary explains what is happening and start with a short talk page that links back to the consensus. Do not just copy and paste the talk page.
• Be aware thatControversy over Abkhazian and South Ossetian independence also exists and should be merged in.
• Note that to give an article a new title you usemove, not copy&paste (as you did when creatingInternational Reaction to the Independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia). But clearly, if an article is being split then using copy&paste for one leg of the split is unavoidable.

—RHaworth (Talk |contribs)06:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

1) I thought about it, but decided you might be confused as to why the consensus would be there, so I thought writing it out might be better.

2) Strange, yes.

3) The article was considerably different - different picture, shorter quotes, etc. I'm talking aboutInternational Recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia‎, not the one that was a copy-paste.

4) The renaming of the original article into Reactions is precisely so that we can incorporate the controversies article.

5) If I could move I would, but I can't (I think it's semiprotected), which is why I requested a move. Still, it doesn't give you a right to assumebad faith, and delete my article without either a speedy deletion, or a notification, or any looking into of any sort. I am sorry that this was my first move attempt with a semi-protect, but your actions were definitely lacking in communication and etiquette. -Yarilo2 (talk)06:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• No lasting harm has been done. Pretend like it never happened and start over. This time, don't use the word "move" in an edit summary when creating an article.Phlegm Rooster (talk)06:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Too many similar titles - I am getting confused - and confusing myself because of my moves! But I have now worked out what you mean:this edit. It is there; available to you; you could have found it easily by looking at your contributions. So why are you complaining so much? Feel free to re post it, making sure that: a) it has a significantly different title (International reaction to the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is just about OK), b) the edit summary explains what is happening and c) start with a short talk page that links back to the consensus to split. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)06:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I just noticed your redirect, why did you choose the Hottinger version (without u) to be predominant?De728631 (talk)14:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• The two entries inHottinger before you came along both spelled it without the u
• You spelled itthus here
• Wikipedia is not for genealogies - if someone else proposes deletion of your stuff on those grounds, then what is left will be in the right place!

—RHaworth (Talk |contribs)14:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I've done some work on this page which is currently an AfD (and which you nominated for deletion). Nonsense though the science behind the topic almost certainly is, it does have some interesting history and might be saveable. Have a look at the reworked page and see if you think there's the basis for an article there - certainly not advertising now. ThanksBrammarb (talk)20:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

"Please note that on the left hand margin (under my css file) of theBarak Obama article is list including "Bosanski Brezhoneg Български Català". This is the "list of Wikipedia articles of Barack Obama in other languages". We do not need a separate article.---RHaworth 18:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. ;-)

Yartett (talk)18:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

hi there, I noticed that you had prodded Jaago foundation. I didn't want to remove your prod because you may be right, but I think this foundation is possibly notable but not in its current form - Jaago foundation is worldwide and most notable for its film making for Aids. The Jaago foundation is a Bill and Melinda Gates related org. Here is a Reuters article on them.http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS176915+31-Jan-2008+PRN20080131 Not notable in its current form, but maybe in another form then?Jenafalt (talk)20:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me. Much appreciated,Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ)13:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Roger,

I noticed that you blockedShauna from recreation because it was an attack page. I was hoping to create an article in that namespace about the feminine given name "Shauna". Would you mind unblocking this namespace so that I can create such an article?

Neelix (talk)14:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

• Done. How come you have never applied for admin rights? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

[CitesWP:CORP,WP:MUSIC andWP:RS.] Music charts were submitted. Mass Record Pool, who are located in Boston Mass. They have no affiliation with the label. Illinois Record Pool is an world reknowed record pool servicing the entire world. The label has no affiliation with them.• Gene93k said without warrant, or obviously never verifying anything that the label published those charts theirselves. Those charts came straight from these entities web site and can be easily searched online and anyone who takes this initiative can easily determine that HHN is not affiliated with them in any way. And according toWP:RS.• Gene93k should have explained why those references were rejected.• GhostDog21 (talk) 21:40:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, not wanting to start an edit war over something like this, but you made Numerator(fraction) a redirect based on the idea that we already have a Numerator article. I reverted this, but then you unreverted. I find this particularly bothersome because you did not transfer any of the information inNumerator(fraction) over toNumerator when the former had much more information than the latter and the latter was about a different use of the word numerator. -Mrchapel0203 (talk)00:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• Conversely, since it you who wants a separate article, you failed to remove the duplication fromnumerator. Indeed, why do we need numerator and denominator articles at all: would it not be better for both to redirect tofraction (mathematics)? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)00:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for commenting here, I just saw your talk page edit.Mrchapel0203 (talk)00:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

HHN Records is notable, and I did prove that with independent Sources. I don't work for the label. I did it as a favor to them. I asked them if I could build a wikipedia page for them. How come this is the case now? This wasn't the case for the page to be terminated before. Then it was said the article lacked a secondary source, I posted links to other sources that were not from the label, but it was still terminated. Nobody even botherd to do their research. Also, I did not leave a message on your voice mail.GhostDog21 (talk04:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI I havenominated this article for deletion.samj (talk)07:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your time in deleting the wiki I attempted to post using myspace ( a similar business ) as an example for writing my wiki entry.

I say thank you because I took the time to study what I SHOULD have done and how I should have done it and believe I understand what I did wrong to cause deletion. (Sorry) :-(

Could you please email me a copy (my email is registered) so that all the time I invested in writing isn't wasted and so that I can attempt to edit/adjust what was writen (along with verifiable links) to justify a second attempt?

Cheers!Forum SA (talk)08:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

• Article was/isForum SA08:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

• E-mail don't work - have you ticked "Enable e-mail from other users" in your preferences? *1* But the problem is not with the text, it is with the subject and who is writing about it. You have a blatantCOI and there was no attempt to establish notability. Justwait - when the site becomes notable, someone else with no COI will write it up here. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I'm trying to post information about a unique service calledPayoneer, but it has been deleted, again, this time by you.Can you help me figure out what I'm doing wrong? I used 3rd party information and the text I offered was bare-bones - not what I would consider advertising.Thanks,Racingmom (talk)12:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)racingmom

• I think my comment starting at *1* immediately above covers your query adequately. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I am wondering why you change Noise Equivalent Bandwidth tonoise equivalent bandwidth? Is that just convention?

Thanks,Davedaviddoria (talk)22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

• You spelled it with lower case within the article so why on earth do you think that it should take capitals in the article name? It is not just convention; it is the Wikipedia standard. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I am a serious editor of wiki, but my pages are being messed up by anonymous persons, who just put boxes and worse alter articles here and there without any argumentation. This is very annoying and a big let down for serious editors. Why don’t wiki require users to register themselves before being granted permissions to alter articles and take part in discussions? --Malin Randstrom (talk)07:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• The question of user rights has been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere - but don't ask me where! Any page can be given semi-protection. Please be specific and we can consider whether any need protection. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)05:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The room is the Queens' Bedroom:[1]. Named for the queens (meaning multiple) of the Netherlands, Greece, Norway, and Great Britain -- who all stayed in the room.Jax (talk)06:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, your dreadful American wikifriend wants to know whatyou think of this so far.∞☼Geaugagrrl^(T)/_(C)06:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I moved this to main space to hopefully stop the bot from removing the coat of arms. *grrr* Few more cities to add and it will be done. It is also posted to WP Wales.∞☼Geaugagrrl^(T)/_(C)07:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, I was wondering why you unspeedied the article? It is clearlyUn-Notable, because it has only 2 hits on Google - none of which directly relate to "Barnafeochaig" and the article has noinline citations,external links, and other articles linking to it. Maybe it should go through Afd instead? --Superflewis (talk)08:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

∞☼Geaugagrrl^(T)/_(C) has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread theWikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!

Spread the good cheer and comraderie by adding {{subst:WikiPint}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hey, just wanted to say WOW - I accidentally tagged that webwarehouse page as A7 unremarkable, even though it should have been G11 for blatant advertising, and you had deleted it before I could even fix my mistake! So wow! :) Thanks!Pip (talk)12:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I see you've got rid of this one previously... He certainly is not the one who sits in the Lords. Is this one speedyable?Kernel Saunters (talk)13:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• This new article is different, so to be on the safe side I have given him a new AfD. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)17:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I didnt realize that about galleries as I have seen them on a number of pages. Please take a look at the current state of theTolantongo page, as I have found time to write a proper article. Probably could use a few more pics.Thelmadatter (talk)19:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Roger, thank you for your help with my article. it does look a bit tidier now. Could you possibly tell me how to get a picture of Ernest's medal card (source of evidence) onto the article page please. I have tried to do this twice, but seem unable to do so. -westhydeian.—Precedingunsigned comment added byWesthydeian (talk •contribs)09:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, I don't understand. You haveuploaded four images and used them in articles. Just do the same again! To originate the image, it is better to use a scanner but a camera on its macro setting will probably do the job. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)17:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Again, apologies about that Roger. Iam still trying to find my feet with this system, i'm not that advanced in "I.T." as yet. Will try harder!!westhydeian—Precedingunsigned comment added byWesthydeian (talk •contribs)18:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I see you changed the name of this article, . In Korea there are several mountains with this name although they have not been added to the English Wikipedia yet. They are however available on the Korean Wikipedia. When titling the article I was matching the way it was done on those pages (See here). I can explain in more detail why it should have the title it did if you like. Otherwise, if you are prepared to take my word for it, I would just like to change it back.Waygugin (talk)06:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• The Wikipedia motto is "bebold". Just move it back yourself! But make sure you explain in the edit summary and the talk page why you are doing so. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)06:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I get the be bold bit. However, I prefer to ask people before I revert their edits. I am not a big fan of edit wars.Waygugin (talk)04:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

An editor has asked for adeletion review ofKent Walls. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Suntag13:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Roger. How are you doing?

You haveHHN Records blocked for recreation. I'd like to create the proper article for the company. I askedGhostDog21 for all the infomation about HHN Records, and he e-mailed everything he had on the company to me. I'm well aware of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines about creating an article on a start up a record label, that GhostDog21 wasn't, and I have noCOI with the company. If possible, could you please unblock it so that I could create the proper article?BubbleGum Gang Leader (Talk |contribs) 14:55:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• I have a strong suspicion that you are simply a sock puppet. However we are enjoined toAGF so: a) write the text of your proposed article and post it on your own website, b) find anestablished Wikipedian (and obviously one with an interest in the music business) and ask them to, c) raise the matter atdeletion review. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)21:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting that spam/nonsense article. You may want to go through and delete all ofUser:Rajarambojji'simages associated with it.— Precedingunsigned comment added byImprobcat (talk •contribs)

Help again please !Some (anonymous) bright spark undid the Redirect, so that BOTH articles are now published. I'm not sure how to continue editing.SJB (talk)13:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• Which redirect for goodness sake? And what is stopping you from re-creating the redirect? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

This redirect. When I tried to undo it I got this message "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits."SJB (talk)09:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• So was it really too difficult for you to simply re-create a redirect to the version with the apostrophe in the right place? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)10:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
• Mea culpa. Thanks anyway.SJB (talk)12:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello!I'm considering writing an article about the event involving this person's death and the murder's aftermath, something along the lines ofThe murder of Tamara Greene. Would you be willing to undelete this article to my userspace so that I can see what was there before and so that I can research and fill in the missing parts that prove her notability?

Thanks!Peace!SWik78(talk •contribs)14:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• The most recently deleted version of the article consisted of: "Tamara Green was a resident of Detroit and a mother. Sadly her life was taken too soon. She was also an dancer and was thought to have attended some city functions in the greater Detroit area as noted in various media." The version deleted in June was a crude copy&paste fromKwame Kilpatrick#The murder of Tamara Greene. The topic seems adequately covered already but if you wanted to splitmurder of Tamara Greene out from theKwame Kilpatrick article, that would probably be acceptable since the article rather long. (It is a sad but true fact that murder victims tend to be non-notable in themselves. That is certainly the case here and compare withSally Anne Bowman.) —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

...orTim McLean. Yeah, it seems as though there wasn't much there to begin with so I'm just going to start from scratch which, actually, is not a bad thing. Thanks for looking into this for me, it's much appreciated.

Peace!SWik78(talk •contribs)15:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• Whaddya mean "start from scratch"? My point is that Tamara Greene is, of herself, not notable - she does not deserve an article. It is only her death and the circumstances surrounding it which are notable. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

By "start from scratch" I mean that I'm not going to expand on what was previously written in the deleted versions of the article rather that I will do some research, compile some references and start a brand new article focusing on the murder and the subsequent political implications forKwame Kilpatrick rather than focusing on the person. I agree with you 100% that the person is not notable (and I never meant to imply that she was) and that only her death and the circumstances surrounding it are notable; I have no intention of focusing the article on her. But I guess I shouldn't be saying that I'm starting from scratch since there is already quite a bit written in the Kilpatrick article. I'll expand on what's already written, add more references and remove it from the Kilpatrick article while leaving only a basic description and a link toMurder of Tamara Greene.SWik78(talk •contribs)15:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Why the heck didja put the deletion tag. I don't see a problem. Use it carefully. Don't tag random things.—Precedingunsigned comment added byNegabandit86 (talk •contribs)15:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I accidently createdFilms set in the 22nd century. Can you delete it for me please?07:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Next time, slap a{{db-author}} tag on it. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)07:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and noted. :)09:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you have a look atCategory talk:Pseudoscience and let me know here if it looks like i will be able to remove category tags from the pages suggested, or if silence = don't do anything, or what? thanks.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk)14:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Total apathy. I care not what you do. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)22:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, side-note, it appears that by the standard ofRefactoring Talk Pages that removal and editing of messages on User Talk pages is actually quite acceptable, and in fact recommended. I think there's too much emphasis on keeping material in User Talk pages such that harsh, mean, and uncomplimentary smudging is admitted and remains in User work environments partly due to bullying by those who present policy as including the untouched or intact condition of discussion therein, later even archived as such.

In fact, once the User has received the message intended for them by the original poster a removal of that message seems completely in order, and what is added to a User's Talk page and archived by them can and should be combed so as to remove uncouth and abrasive speech and tones, and keep Wikipedia a happy place.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk)15:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

• I have protected you user_talk page for a couple of days on the grounds thatWikipedia is not a free host. I gave youthis warning. You seem to have completely ignored it.Your edits over the last five days speak for themselves - you have been simply tinkering with your user pages. If you wish to soliloquise, do so on your own machine. Normally I would leave this message on your user talk page but seeing your attitude to talk pages, I have decided to leave yours in its present pristine state. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)06:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know what you are doing and how you are going about it. I understand that Wikipedia is not a free host. If i did not make that clear before, please accept my apologies. My interest of late has been to come to a better understanding and appreciation of the technical aspects of Wikipedia both with regard to User pages and category pages, both of which with i have been experimenting and attempting to contribute meaningfully. Once i have that more thoroughly understood then i plan to make more specific headway toward namespace as you have already advised. Much obliged! :)-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk)03:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• With that in mind, would you please remove the protection from my User_Talk page so that it will not interfere with myArbcom Request for Clarification that i have recently initiated as part of a refinement of the Pseudoscience category implementation? It seems a counter-productive action on your part if you're trying to get me more involved with the non-Talk and Non-User portions of the project to protect the means by which i will be able to communicate with others about these aspects of Wikipedia. Thanks for your consideration.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk)04:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• Looks like it wasn't protected very long and won't impede any communications, thanks. Please presume Good Faith on my edits as i am a new user here and learning about the mechanisms and social protocols before moving on to namespace edits in an organic and what i presume to be logical manner. I am very conservative and aversive to edit-wars, plus my interests are pretty refined.

• To show you that i will do the same and presume Good Faith on your part, and since i recently read that User pages are for Wiki-related data only, i will blank my User page except for that Profile (whose template i grabbed from another User) and what does relate to Wiki projects. Let me know if this goes some distance to exemplifying both my greenness and my sincerety. :)-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk)14:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

• I have not been ignoring you - I have simply not been near a computer for 22 hours. How long do you need to come to your "thorough understanding"? You have now been here a month. Theprevious version of user:Self-ref was OK. Changing it was, at best neutral. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)15:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

You have deleted this page by error. It was only deleted the first time because of missing references. I was trying to update the page when you deleted it. There's nothing controversial about the article, it is a valid entry with relevance to the entertainment industry. Please restore this page so that I can finish contributing to the article.—Precedingunsigned comment added byWikbiographer (talk •contribs)01:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• It smells awfully like self-promotion to me. But you can tryDRV. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)01:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Kind of hard to "self-promote" someone else, don't you think?—Precedingunsigned comment added byWikbiographer (talk •contribs)01:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

As per the DRV, it is suggested that I make another attempt to resolve this with the administrator. The article you deleted passes both the references and notability criteria, so why would you delete it?—Precedingunsigned comment added byWikbiographer (talk •contribs)02:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• You have cited one very brief mention in the New York Times. All the other refs are essentially self-created. Go ahead with the DRV - you have fully attempted to resolve it with this utterly stubborn admin. The DRV instructions also say - notify the deleting admin - you are excused from doing so. And how long will it be before you learn to sign talk page comments? —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)02:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Your reason for deleting the article is now contradictory. You initially cited G4 as your reason, not references. The references listed are completely valid, each giving credible websites to support the facts of the article. This includes three news organization websites, an undisputed video clip and an international student organization website. Or perhaps you deleted the page before I could finish referencing everything in Anthony's article? I'm just simply amazed that someone as unprofessional as yourself is able to be an administrator.—Precedingunsigned comment added byWikbiographer (talk •contribs)02:40, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• You do not deserve it afterthis descent into vandalism but I have e-mailed you two versions of the article. Do not attempt to re-post it in the article namespace until it has passed aDRV discussion. —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)16:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Hai4you211.30.12.197 (talk)13:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, will look at it properly another time. It should probably be at Trader Mill, Sibsey which would match other windmill articles better.Mjroots (talk)13:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The reason why I moved it the way that I did was because I genuinly forgot about using the "move" function, this was due to the fact that I was doing something else at the same time, and used cut-and-paste as the easy option so that I could keep doing the other task at the same time! -Dreamweaverjack (talk)20:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• What an Alice in Wonderland idea! Move is the easy option - one operation. Copy&paste involves at least two edits! —RHaworth (Talk |contribs)20:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)