User talk:Haruth/Archive 1

Tagging of Qar (pharoah)
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Qar (pharoah). I do not think that Qar (pharoah) fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because it is not eligible for speedy deletion. I request that you consider not re-tagging Qar (pharoah) for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. You are, of course, free to tag the article with prod or nominate it at WP:AFD.  Intelligent  sium  00:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Cat Help Request
Trying to locate a list of available Categories. Any pointer much appreciated. Thank you. --Haruth (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * See Category:Categories. Happy editing!  fetch  comms  ☛ 03:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem :)  fetch  comms  ☛ 21:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Y.E.S. 93.3FM
Dude, you really need to familiarize yourself with WP:NOTDIR. 24.4.248.154 (talk) 08:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The Inevitable Flight
Hello Haruth,

Thanks so much for giving my article the structure that you did. It looks much better. I'm going to look into the things that you mentioned and get the required references.

Have a good one!

EssRiz (talk) 09:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You are very welcome - it was a pleasure. I linked in the film project, and hopefully some of them will be along shortly to improve the structure even further :-) Best Wishes --Haruth (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Dear Haruth, I hope you are doing well :) I was wondering if you can help me relocate the link to the film project that you placed on the Inevitable Flight page. Also, can you suggest a way in which I can address the duplication issue towards the end of the article? Thank you so much for all your help! Warm regards :) EssRiz (talk) 05:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi EssRiz. The link to the Film Project is on the Talk Page. The duplication problem is minor, really - and will probably disappear simply by expanding on the details of the various parties involved (eg. by expanding where the sheep farm comes into the picture, what issues the relocation raises, etc.) Just suggestions: it's your article :-) and I'm afraid to say I haven't seen this one to be much help - Though your article certainly gives me enough of a flavour, that it sounds like it's a worthwhile watch. Hope that helps. Best Wishes --Haruth (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Dear Haruth, You are by far the most helpful administrator that I have come across on Wikipedia :) I have made the changes that you recommended for both the off topic component, as well as the duplication. Can I remove the Prods from this article now? Thanks much! EssRiz (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * EssRiz! Not an admin - just another editor passing through. I'll have a look soonest and let you know how it now looks. Best Wishes. --Haruth (talk) 01:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Essriz. Had a look at the edits, and have shifted some of the text to give a little more flow to the article. Hope the changes are OK by you.

Only thing that remains, as far as I can tell, is Notability  of the film, which is not really established by the article. The only references that I can find for the film are at the director's own site, which doesn't make the standard of Notability from the Wikipedia definition. Suggest that, at this stage, the Pheasantry itself may actually be the notable element of the article. Consider renaming the article Dhodial Pheasantry, and perhaps expanding details of its work. The film can then possibly be referenced, without violating Wikipedia's Guidelines, in a section dealing with Current Status of the pheasantry? Just suggestions to consider, as after all - it is your article :-) Best Wishes. --Haruth (talk) 02:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Loyola Public School
I've removed the prod from this article. Please consider my reasoning, and if you still believe deletion to be necessary, feel free to take the article to AFD. Nyttend (talk) 01:18, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nyttend. That looks much better than the version I PROD-ed. I have no problem you recalling the PROD. --Haruth (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Electric golf trolley
I have removed the prod tag from Electric golf trolley, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! wjemather bigissue 22:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that so quickly, Wjemather. Lesson is multi-tasking causes brain to disengage from the topic in hand. Many apologies for not spotting the TROLLEY in the title, or the main text for that matter... :-o --Haruth (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * No worries. It's a common error, probably due to a golf cart not actually being a cart. It is on my list to expand the trolley article – just an image might be enough to make the difference clear for now. I'll get my camera out next time I'm on the course, if I can't quickly find a free one. wjemather bigissue 07:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

List of shopping malls in Holland
I have removed the prod tag from List of shopping malls in Holland, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks!
 * Thanks for letting me know. I prodded that one a while back, and must confess am unsure how to view it now. Can you point me in the direction of how such lists are viewed under the Wikipedia model? Thanks --Haruth (talk) 20:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * By itself, the list is quite acceptable; it's easy to define what belongs and what doesn't belong on the list, it's not a random cross-categorisation of topics (such as "List of shopping malls where jazz music is played during the evening" would be), and it's quite easily sourceable.  You've confessed something, and I in turn must also confess — I virtually never do anything with shopping malls, so I don't know whether it's normal/acceptable/etc. to have lists of shopping malls.  I'd advise you to bring up the issue at WikiProject Shopping Centers.  Nyttend (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow! They have a project. Kind of takes my concerns about lists of shopping malls / notability / encylopedic or not, and shreds them all! Thanks Nyttend. Your advice and direction always appreciated. --Haruth (talk) 22:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

DAB Page Move Help Request
History: Disambiguation cleanup of Princess Victoria. On checking the Talk page, I discovered that there was a 5 year old merger discussion with Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation). As the merger and cleanup didn't involve too much extra, I went WP:BOLD and merged to the more obvious search term. Also redirected the back links to the 'new' page.

Problem: Usually I would now just do a delete process on Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) but never had to worry about a talk page before, particularly one where there has been some historically defensive posturing. Any Wiki Process that I haven't found yet that I should be aware of before going AfD?

Thank you. --Haruth (talk) 08:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know of any official plan, but like most things, you can probably think of a good way. I suggest that you move Talk:Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) to Talk:Princess Victoria/Archive. Put a note on the top of it, explaining that you moved it when you merged the pages. Then, on Talk:Princess Victoria put a note saying that you merged them, and 'old discussions from the page called "Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation)" have been moved to Talk:Princess Victoria/Archive".


 * Hope that makes sense?  Chzz  ►  08:32, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * That's why they pay you the big money!! ;-) Sounds perfect to me. Thanks Chzz. --Haruth (talk) 08:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Heh, no problem. I'm hoping they might double my salary. Give me a shout if you need help, any time.  Chzz  ►  08:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Disambig cleanup tag
- Fayenatic (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Fayenatic. DId you mean to leave me the message? Your reply was to Hutcher, I think. Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 18:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Haruth -- yes, my comment was in response to this edit of yours, not to a preceding comment on the talk page. User:Boleyn has removed the tag now anyway. - Fayenatic (talk) 21:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah. OK. Thanks for clearing that up, Fayenatic. I had a bit of a splurge in the realms of disambiguation to learn something new, and forgot I had even been there. Glad it's resolved. Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 21:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!  Intelligent  sium  00:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Photos
You could have done that without cluttering up my talk page, you Scottish git! Haha, yeh if you'd like to add the descriptions, go for it :). Which are the 55 others?  Welsh leprechaun  18:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Image Move Help Request
Took a detour to the Images lacking a descriptionn backlog, and came across, which shows a field of cows at a large slaughter establishment in the US. For obvious reasons, I don't feel the name is suitable, but it is used in an article, and feel it should probably be kept.

However, as Twinkle doesn't offer me the functionality to move / rename an image (though bizarrely I can move / rename the talk page :-o) I placed a move request which you will easily find here. As you can see the User:RFC_bot, which maintains the list, gets a bit confused when you have "File:" in the parameter list.

Anyway - stop rambling! I just wondered if there is a specific location for requesting image file moves? I've had a cursory search, but couldn't find anything specific, and the Requested_moves page doesn't make it clear that image move requests don't belong there.

Thanks in advance for any pointers. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 02:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Use Template:Rename media,  on the file page - that will add it to Category:Wikipedia files requiring renaming, and in theory it will get renamed, although there is a large backlog. Poke for an admin with  if you need action.   Chzz  ►  02:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Chzz. I should just have called you sooner... :) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 02:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. I've actually already moved your request over from RM to the file page.  Chzz  ►  02:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I don't deserve you! :-) (We won't go into the mess I was about to get into, by putting it on the talk page! :p) Man, that is one BIG backlog - I thought the without description was bad... --Haruth (talk) 03:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * And, I asked a handy mop to move it, and it's done. Now File:Cows on ranch.jpg. Out of interest, there was a kinda reasoning - in Harris Ranch, it states (with refs) that the ranch is nicknamed "Cowschwitz". Still, it wasn't the best of names, so good that it is changed. I've fixed it on the article, which was the only link to it. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  03:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks again (How come you know all the right people? ;)). I'll put a watch on the Harris Ranch page in case someone feels it should be put back in. It is probably (just) OK locally, but lacks a certain PC for a global audience. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 03:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Eric Gill at the Midland Hotel Morecombe
Have only just noticed your tag on the above.

I have added several links (Oliver Hill/Marion Dorn and Eric Ravillious) and made some general efforts to improve standard of article.

With your permission I would like to now remove tag unless you are looking for further moves to bring the article up to Wiki standards. Should this be the case I would welcome any suggestions you may have as I am relatively new to Wikipedia.

Many thanks for your help

Weglinde (talk) 08:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Weglinde. I've made an attempt at bringing it up to standard. Main thing left now is the need for inline references points. Main things that were missing were the introductory section - which perhaps you can extend? Obviously, the layout of the images are a personal choice, but WikiPedia doesn't really like a lot of white space... so any additional text that you can add to each of the sections to fill up the blanks will make it look better. Also, might suggest decimalising the dimensions stated, as that appears to be the standards too.


 * Hope it looks OK for you. Please feel free to undo anything... my version is only a suggestion. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 09:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Haruth


 * I am more than happy with your work on the article and I will now look to follow up on your suggestions for further improvements.
 * When I have done that I shall remove latest tag.


 * Your advice/assistance much appreciated.


 * Weglinde (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You are very welcome Weglinde. My pleasure. --Haruth (talk) 01:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Biographies
No worries; you're far from the first person to make that mistake and you won't be the last, either :-) Bearcat (talk) 04:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

File:2000 test2.png missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:2000 test2.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Haruth (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Also true for:
 * 2000 test3.png
 * 2000 test4.png
 * 2000 test5.png
 * 2000 test7.png
 * Please also reconsider completing the rename request, using a name which is more descriptive of the contents of the image in order that other users, who may find the images useful, can find them easily. --Haruth (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * These maps might be deleted if inappropriate, because the WikiProject where they belong to is non-active at the moment, due to a lack of participants. Also, these maps are not very notable for Wikipedia. They are called test, because they are part of a test to get the right borders in a map.Daanschr (talk) 08:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Daanschr. Will put them up for deletion on that basis. Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 10:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I have given names to all files that i like to keep, so the rest can be deleted if you want that.Daanschr (talk) 13:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Image Copyright (PUF) Help Request
Sorry. It's me again.

FILE this time. In particular licensing.

If an uploader has applied but the image is obviously a scan / photograph of an illustration / picture taken from a book, should the image be tagged with the PUF template, or one of the    File Templates?

As an example is obviously from a copyright work, but user asserts ownership of copyright. It may be that the image is from a source now in the public domain, just not correctly licensed - so feels right - just frightened I'm missing something, like  ...

Thanks in advance. --Haruth (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think you are missing anything. You could always try to speak to the uploader on their talk page, asking for clarification - they've been active in March, so they might respond. Pending no further evidence though, I think PUF is probably the way to go. If you had a specific link to a copyright version of the image, then DI would be more appropriate. Hope that helps,  Chzz  ►  15:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * (P.S. I'm leaving the 'helpme' in place for now, hoping others might add their advice too  Chzz  ►  15:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC))


 * I'm beginning to think you're the only one out there... ;-) Thanks again. Will apply as advised. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Heh; in fairness, I did ask someone else - but they also admitted to not being an expert in the ways of file copyright. I suggest asking either or  both of whom know more about this field. Cheers,   Chzz  ►  16:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * And many thanks for the barnstar! Forgot to say that, doh!  Chzz  ►  16:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Augmental homology
An article that you have been involved in editing, Augmental homology, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Radagast3 (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: :
Hello Haruth, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of National Day Parade, 2010, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.  The left orium  14:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No problems TheLeftorium. Just a difference of interpretation on what constitutes promotional. I have no strong feelings on keep or delete on that one. Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 14:21, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, G11 applies to "Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." The National Day Parade, 2010 article does not fit this criterion. Cheers,  The left orium  14:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Accepted. Though the article is only one sentence long, indicating the date of a future event, an infobox indicating the location, a bunch of "See also's" telling us how wonderful it is going to be and an irrelevant external link as a reference. See my problem? LOL --Haruth (talk) 14:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Merger Menegroth → Doriath
Hello, I saw you reopened the merge discussion for those two articles. The "Discuss" button in the merge template points at Talk:Doriath though, so I've copied your note over there. De728631 (talk) 18:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops. Sorry De728631. Can't remember if I pointed to Doriath originally, but both discuss buttons now point to Mengroth talk page. Feel free to change them both to Doriath, if you think that is the best place, but if you leave as is - should copy your input to Meneroth. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 18:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

LFLN
I have no strong attachment to this article, but I hope you can keep it now that I have created an article for Saint-Yan Airport. JD Caselaw (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi JD Caselaw. I have changed it to a redirect to the Saint-Yan airport. The problem with the other link is that it isn't to an article, but to an external site link in an unrelated article. Hope that is OK for you. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 04:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Haruth, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Haruth/Night of the Grizzlies. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.


 * Shut off the bot here.


 * Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Help Request Newspaper Image Copyright
Another image one, I'm afraid.

I'm in the process of botching up an article, that could benefit from a couple of images (of people involved) which appeared in various newspapers covering the story back in the late 60's. Problem is, none of these newspapers (I assume) will actually hold the copyright, or do they ALL hold copyright? They are most likely family pictures / college yearbook pictures, so I imagine that the families might retain copyright? Given that they were published in so many places, does that make them public domain? If not, which is the recommended license to apply? Fair use seems the only option at the moment, but I am wondering, since they were so widely available at the time, whether some other rule may apply?

Any guidance gratefully received. Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 14:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * As this is a slightly complex question, I've asked the experts - so please see Media copyright questions. Hopefully you will get an answer there soon. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  14:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh-heh! Now I am convinced you are the only one out there... Thanks Chzz! You always know where to point me :-) Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 14:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's all part of my plan to conquer the universe :-) In reality, it's because I spend far too long hanging out in the IRC help channel, which alerts us to help requests. Pop in some time - here.


 * By the way, I corrected a 'glitch' on this page with an incorrect template translusion, and added a section heading to that most erudite comment from an anonymous user, above; diff.  Chzz  ►  14:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Why thank you... I wondered where that had come from ;-) (Though strangely... I recognise the voice lol) --Haruth (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Donna Britt
Hello Haruth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Donna Britt has been removed. It was removed by Jclemens with the following edit summary ' (deprodding, not unreferenced) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Jclemens before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Mount Helal
Regarding your proposed deletion of Mount Helal, the missing source seems to be:
 * Jarvis, C.S. (1938) "The Forty Years' Wanderings of the Israelites." Palestine Exploration Quarterly p. 25-40.

Several secondary sources refer to Jarvis's theory (e.g. via Google), but few endorse it very strongly. I'm not removing the prod, since I'm not convinced that even with such sources this rises to the level of notability. Cnilep (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Oops, I should have looked at the history before writing that. The article was nominated for AfD in 2006 and kept. That makes prod inappropriate. I'll remove the prod tag and add the source, but won't object if you AfD the page on its own. (The 2006 discussion was for several alleged Sinais). Cnilep (talk) 21:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well found, Cnilep. Now that there are references there, I'm quite happy retaining the article, though it might benefit from being merged, along with the references you found, into the Mount Sinai article. Only reason it came up was that I've started on the unreferenced backlog... :-(


 * Can I ask where you found the reference? I tried books, scholar and news! lol Best Wishes --Haruth (talk) 02:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I searched Google books for (IIRC) Helal and Sinai, and found a footnote mentioning "Major Jarvis." From there it was Google and JSTOR searches. Many sources mention "Jebel Helal", from the Arabic جبل 'mountain'. Cnilep (talk) 14:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Why of course! What an idiot, I am! I've done that within Wikipedia - just followed the trail of references to find another! Never thought of doing it outside wikipedia...DOH! Thanks for the pointer Cnilep :) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 14:26, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for you kind recognition. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 15:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

/* The Well Managed Bank */
Hi Haruth,

Thank you for stopping by my talk page. I am disappointed that the Well Managed Bank page was deleted. Can you please offer some additional guidance on editing it to the point where it would be a suitable entry? To clarify, the Well Managed Bank is not something that can be bought or sold, and is not a solution nor ploy to sell solutions. It is an advanced theory on banking given the current global economy and the steps necessary for banks to recover and grow, as outlined by a group of banking experts and professionals in the field. I can link to audio interviews with these professionals and a white paper researched and written on the topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keithamato/WellManagedBank#cite_note-0

Kind Regards Keith —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithamato (talk • contribs) 18:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Keith. I think the main problem, really comes down to the "Well Managed Bank", rather than more broadly focusing on the "well managed bank". The article contains a lot of good information, but "appears" biased towards the concepts and ideas as expressed by Sungard only.
 * The article would probably have a much higher chance of remaining on Wikipedia if it can be written to reflect a more general concept of what a "well managed bank" is, in particular by including additional reference sources.
 * "Well Managed Bank" fails to raise much, other than Sungard itself, whilst "well managed bank" gets a lot more hits in terms of unbiased reference material. If struggling to find additional sources - try searches in Google/books, google/news and google/scholar for articles that might be useful to quote.
 * I think the information is sound, it is primarily the lack of secondary sources that is the problem. I'd recommend focussing on individual points on a paragraph by paragraph basis, and trying to locate a secondary source which backs up the Sungard assertion.
 * I'd also recommend dropping mention of Sungard until well into the article, as it's only relevance in the concepts discussed is the capitalised (sales) use of the term. Nothing gets editors more suspicious of the intent of an article (in the potential advertising sense) than a company name in the lead section!
 * Hope that helps. If I find some time in the coming days I'll attempt a couple of paragraphs with you and add any useful refs I find to your user-page version.
 * Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 21:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Haruth. I certainly have no problem referring to the well managed bank in such a way you recommend, and again no issues with dropping the mention of SunGard deeper into the article. I will make those changes, I'd also appreciate any assistance you can provide in terms of suitable references. Thank you and kind regards. Keith —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithamato (talk • contribs) 18:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

The well managed bank - revised
Hi Haruth -

Apologies as I'm still finding my way around the Talk and talkback system (its more complicated than posting! :)).

I've made some amends to the well managed bank posting and sourced some great references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keithamato/WellManagedBank#Utilizing_the_principles_of_a_well_managed_bank

Please let me know what you think!

Best Keith —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithamato (talk • contribs) 18:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

1240s in architecture
In May, you added two citations to books published by Icon Group International to this article. Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are copied from Wikipedia. Fences &amp;  Windows  20:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And also to List of Spike and Suzy books in English in May. Unfortunately, Icon Group International's books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this). I'm removing a lot of similar references; many other editors have also been deceived by these sources. Another publisher that reuses Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 18:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand
Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 (talk) 22:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm your membership
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC).

Alexander Henry
Definitely the elder. Sorry for the very delayed response, I took a lengthy sabbatical from Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by J appleseed2 (talk • contribs) 07:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Awan Town
Sir.. I badly need to delete some edits I've made on the Awan Town page.. A lot of things could go wrong if those edits stayed like this..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.110.60.34 (talk) 21:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Edits removed. Haruth (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

128.253.53.180
i sori. i try not do dat one again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.253.53.180 (talk) 09:38, 27 April 2010

DYK for Taaffeite
The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

"more links to other articles" & "references or sources"
Hi Haruth,

On the first article I'm editing, I have these 2 messages :

-This article needs more links to other articles to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. You can help improve this article by adding links that are relevant to the context within the existing text. (June 2011)

-This article does not cite any references or sources.

I don't understand why these messages are not removed even if I added many links and references...

What's your opinion ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domotics

Thanks and Regards Kiaitutoi (talk) 13:56, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Kiaitutoi.
 * Just leaving work, and will take a look when I get home for you.
 * The messages are generated by the and one of a variety of  tags at the head of the article. Once you add the internal wikilinks, and place appropriate inline references into the text, you are free to remove the tag items, which will remove the messages.
 * Hope that helps. Haruth (talk) 16:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Had a quick squint. Have to confess, still feels like Home automation, and I still can't get a real handle on the differences. (That's me - not you! All wiring and remote controls to me... lol)
 * Check the main removed info, some of which was worded in a manner considered POV or duplicated information already stated; the clarification tags added (When, who, what, etc); changes to bring formatting to Wikipedia standard style, etc. Have removed the tag, and changed the no reference tag to a request for additional reliable sources.
 * Hope that helped.
 * Look forward to the article developing. :)
 * Best wishes. Haruth (talk) 19:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Donati
Letting you know that I removed the PROD on this article. I tried to make clear in the edit summary why, but want to be completely above board about it. The article was created as a DAB page and was a surname DAB page until May 14, when an IP hijacked it to write the bio that you PROD'd. The DAB page seems worthy of keeping, so I simply took it back to that version. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Yngvadottir. Appreciate you dropping by, and makes complete sense. I'll do more history checks in future :). Best wishes, Haruth (talk) 16:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.63.86.82 (talk) 18:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK entry for Maria Bashir
Hi! Thanks for your review. Could you help me with the style issues in the article? Thanks again. morelM William 17:39, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi M William. I've had a shot at it, removing some of the anecdotal style, and a couple of anecdotal tales which, though interesting, didn't add to our knowledge of Bashir. Please feel free to revert / put back some any of the things I took out. It is obviously a personal feel, and you have taken much time to get everything together. Really enjoyed reading the article as a whole. Thank you for bringing Maria to Wikipedia... :) Very best wishes. Haruth (talk) 18:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The article looks fine now. I would be adding more content, like the death threats, the current cases she is working on and the bomb blasts targeting her, but that should wait for my exams to be over. Thanks for your help in improving the article. :) morelM William 01:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Boro glycerine
The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Frederick Settle Barff
Materialscientist (talk) 16:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

MoonRise
Please consider removing the copyright violation CSD tag you played on MoonRise, it will save an admin some time. The URL you specified is in the public domain per WP:COPYRIGHT.--RadioFan (talk) 20:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Best wishes. Haruth (talk) 20:47, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Shammi Narang
Hi! Sorry for bothering you with this. I have a small query. Should the hook say everything or can it bank on what the reader might expect and get misled? Could you provide your opinion on the discussion am having with an another editor in the DYK page? This entry is under the articles created/ expanded on July 6 section. Thanks. morelM William 01:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry never got back to you before the article went live. I've only put a couple through the DYK system. Appears that the more information in the hook, the less hits the article gets, and concensus appears to prefer short snappy hooks. Think tabloid headline seems to be the way to go... :) Best wishes Haruth (talk) 15:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikify Project

 * Thanks Ryan. Added myself to the list :) Best wishes Haruth (talk) 15:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Complicated Move...
While editing a relatively new article Indian Television Academy Awards, stumbled on the more mature article Indian Telly Awards. The two pages are all but identical, but the older of the two (Indian Telly Awards) includes references and is a little further along the road to becoming encyclopedic.


 * Move: Indian Telly Awards → Indian Television Academy Awards
 * Move: Indian Television Academy Awards → Indian Telly Awards (Followed by copy across of new information prior to redirecting)

My initial instinct was a redirect of the newer page, but the title Indian Television Academy Awards seems more appropriate than the colloquial Indian Telly Awards, which post-move would become a redirect. Merge seems over the top, as they really are so similar, but didn't want to lose the history of the more mature article by simply copying all across and editing in the little additional worthwhile bits from the newer one.

I'm happy to cover the copy-paste of additional information from the newer one once move complete... (Would have gone BOLD but got into a terrible muddle when I tried that in my early wiki-days... particularly given the high number of links to both... :-o )

Thoughts? Policies pertaining? How to? Need a Move Multi discussion? Or am I just making this more complicated than it needs to be?

Thanks in advance. Haruth (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Haruth. There's no problem in retitling the older to the name of the newer, we would just do a history swap. However, a (very quick) Google Books search indicates to me that the title of the older article may in fact be the name we should have as the title of the article. See also this site. The common name of these awards is a relevant standard to follow. Note that if there is content that is worthwhile to to merge from one article to the other (we generally don't merge unsourced content, and we usually don't have long lists in articles like the current one does), then please note the mandatory copyright attribution procedures atWP:MERGETEXT. If you determine that the common name actually is the more recent article, you can hit me up to do the history swap. Just drop by my talk page. Otherwise you can simply redirect the more recent to the older. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Fuhghettaboutit. Very useful advice, which I'll tuck away for when I need it... because, believe it or not, there are two competing award systems in India. So despite the article similarities, they are not related at all. So now I have two cleanups for the price of one... who knew?!? Apart from an entire sub-continent, that is... Haruth (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Haruth I'm confused. If they are about completely different topics—two different award shows, why would they have mergeable content, and why would not each be a proper topic of a separate article? — unless one was incorrectly at the name of the other topic but its content was also about the other award... is that what happened?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Certainly appears to be, Fuhghettaboutit. The confusion arises on a couple of fronts: mainly the date the awards started is quoted as the same in both articles, despite one of them (I still need to confirm which) being a couple of years older; and the Indian Television Academy article actually slips into calling them Telly awards (which they are not). The recipients listed in the trivia section don't help, but to be expected that there would be a lot of crossover between them.
 * May be that the writer of the newer article wasn't aware of the difference either... but each official website is more than keen to point out that they are the "more prestigious" of the two :-) Quite looking forward to sifting through and sorting them out, particularly as most of the google/news hits appear to be non-reliable (each of them own their own news organisation, so whatever one you search for raises lots of hits from themselves!) Of course, what would be nicer, would be one of our Indian editors to pick them up and run with them... Haruth (talk) 13:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OMG! Gets better: Indian Television Academy Awards began 18th July, 2001; Indian Telly Awards began 6 July 2001 (Oldest, and most prestigious). At least that explains why they began in the same year in the articles... Haruth (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * So at this point it looks to me like each should remain at their titles, anything mergeable from the one at the wrong title should be merged into the other, and then the one at the wrong title should have its content changed to reflect the topic of its title. Does that sound about right?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's right. I've edited the offending Indian Television Academy Article to only reflect these awards, and changed the start date to specifics in the hope of steering any other editor away from the same potential mistake. Hopefully the hat note will give the game away too, though I vaguely remember a not to be confused with hat note, but couldn't locate this time around. Thanks again for your advice and input. Best wishes. Haruth (talk) 07:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's distinguish (though aptly enough Confused and Not to be confused with are both redirects to it). Unfortunately, both of these titles in running text sound better with a "the" but there's no way to add that to the templates that I can see. Maybe I'll code a new template for that issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah! That's much better. Thank you very much, Fuhghettaboutit. Best wishes Haruth (talk) 16:09, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

About Wheelchair support surface
Please see the proposal I posted on Talk:Wheelchair support surface several months ago. It got no response but I think if you and I work together we could make a go of cleaning it up. Roger (talk) 07:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Roger. Yes, I'd just go bold if I was you. I prefer your suggested title for the section too. There certainly seems to be enough sources out there to allow the article to develop. I'm going to be a bit busy for the next week or so, but I'll drop by when I have time to see what, if anything, I can add. Best wishes Haruth (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Byron Shefchik
You placed a WP:BLPPROD on Shefchik's article. The article had two reliable references. WP:BLPPROD only goes on articles that has no references or external links. Bgwhite (talk) 00:34, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bgwhite. I slipped up there... should just have PROD'ed as non-notable, but because it was a BLP, ticked the radio button without taking appropriate notice of the requirements of BLPPROD. Will be more careful in future! Thanks again. Best wishes Haruth (talk) 12:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Polish heraldry
Hello Haruth, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Polish heraldry, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: ''Highly probable those "copyrighted" sources have copied from us. This article hasn't changed drastically in months.'' You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. &mdash; Joseph Fox 20:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Joseph. I should have taken more time on the checks. Apologies for the extra work I slopey shouldered on to you there :) Best Wishes Haruth (talk) 18:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Nah, that's okay. This was (as you may have guessed) done with a tool, so sorry for the bold shouty type. :) &mdash; Joseph Fox 19:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

October 2011 Wikification drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 16:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC).

Happy Halloween!
Cheers! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 05:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Wilhelmina. Hope you had a great night :-) Haruth (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Rakin' 'em in!
Original... sometimes, vanilla is just the way to go. PhnomPencil (talk) 15:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yep! Like buses - you wait three years for one, and they all arrive at the same time... lol Much appreciated. (And vanilla is my favourite... :-)) Best wishes. Haruth (talk) 17:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the December Wikification Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC).

African Leadership Academy
Hi

I believe that you've been editing our page (African Leadership Academy). I don't understand why you have made some of the changes that (I believe) you have made.

We are a non-profit school in Africa that is faced with fundraising in the worst possible economy. You apparently removed all of our links to where we've appeared in the press - links that are valuable in building our credibility among potential supporters and donors. Now I admit we don't understand how to use wikipedia well - it's a mixture of lack of knowledge and lack of time to build that knowledge, but removing information that is important to those wishing to understand our legitimacy doesn't help us.

Also, if you are the person who keeps linking our Chris Bradford to the author Chris Bradford's biography, please don't do that again. I have had to undo that link 3-4 times now. The author of children's books of kung fu and magic is not the Stanford MBA co-founder of our charity.

Thank you,

Stephen Parks Communications Manager African Leadership Academy media@africanleadershipacademy.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.133.25.183 (talk) 18:53, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Stephen


 * The changes I made were geared towards simplifying the page, removing a lot of duplication and excessive detail. If you feel that there is anything that I have removed which is important to the reader's understanding of the topic, then please feel free to add it back in to the article. I would recommend limiting the number of external links, however, particularly anything that adds little to the subject of the article.


 * You may wish to add an Alumini section, which you can link to many of the article links I removed. Bear in mind, however, that for WikiPedia, the key is notability, so externally linked articles about people only notable within the school are likely to be removed.


 * Finally, please be aware of self-promotion. It is important to retain a neutral tone in your article for it to remain as you may have originally written it. Generally, other editors will work hard, on your behalf, to try to retain the bulk of the article, by making it more neutral, while others will attempt to assert notability by finding suitable reliable sources to include as reference material.


 * Best Regards Haruth (talk) 19:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Balconette bra
An article that you have been involved in editing, Balconette bra, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 08:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Keith Bogart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Streetcar Named Desire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Careful "reverting vandalism"
This edit was not reverting WP:Vandalism. You should be more careful and you should self-revert that edit. Toddst1 (talk) 22:32, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Toddst1 for bringing to my attention. Haruth (talk) 22:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. You appear to be a prolific vandal fighter. You're bound to have a few mistakes in there. I know I've made more than a few over the years.  Keep up the (generally) good work. :) Toddst1 (talk) 22:41, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks again Toddst1. The redirect misguided me on that one. I really need to get up to speed on all the real names of all these young 'uns. :-D Best regards Haruth (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Rollbacker
Hi. I've been looking over your contributions and you certainly seem to do good work here and appear to be very responsible when you do make the inevitable mistake. I've gone ahead and issued you rollback rights. Please be careful with the privilege - it can be easily lost. I recommend you carefully read up on the what you should do and should not do with rollback, then practice here before using it. I'm confident you'll use it wisely. If for some reason you don't want it, let me know and I'll revert.

You may wish to display on your user page. Happy editing. Toddst1 (talk) 22:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Toddst1, that was a bit out of the blue! Not entirely sure what the rollback function does, but will certainly take the time to investigate fully, and only use responsibly. Thank you for your trust. Best Regards Haruth (talk) 22:59, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * De nada. Toddst1 (talk) 00:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup invitation
I've formatted the WikiProject Cleanup page to include members for those that are interested in joining, similar to how other projects have members. Since you've contributed relatively recently to the project's list page, I formally extend this invitation to join WikiProject Cleanup! I've also created a userbox template for members to use on their user pages. Thank you for your contributions to help improve Wikipedia! Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited List of nomadic people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mehtar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Khasan
Your change actually did more good than bad, because I've been meaning to fix the incoming Khasan links for a long time and your edit provided me with an extra incentive :) So, no trouble at all. As for the dab page, yes, I think having it is helpful, because the lake is often referred to as simply "Khasan" as well, and having all those first names in one place is kind of helpful, too. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 13, 2012; 16:33 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Arab tribes in Iraq, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al-Hassan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for Mar 2
Hi. When you recently edited Glossary of geography terms, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ash (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Verizon Plus listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Verizon Plus. Since you had some involvement with the Verizon Plus redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) 01:22, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Revert your redirects back to ninjutsu, it's no longer a dis (again). --194.145.185.229 (talk) 16:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What kind of idiot changes the main article into a DAB page? I did wonder why there wasn't a generic article, and assumed that the specific types of the sport would all be individually linked through the Modern Schools article. Not so hard to fix though, as only the links which were redirected to Modern Schools of Ninjutsu need to be linked back to the main article. (Those redirected elsewhere don't really need to come back here, IMO. Ninja in popular culture and Ninja seemed more appropriate articles for many of the links in). I'll tackle the relinking later tonight, and review the links into the other two as well. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Haruth (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Haruth (talk) 11:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Либерално-Демократска Партија
I have to disagree with your proposal. Since we generally only permit foreign-name redirects when they're the local names of article subjects, this title is appropriate as a disambiguation page, but since "Либерално-Демократска Партија" isn't specifically related to Liberal Democratic parties as a whole, it wouldn't be appropriate as a redirect to that page. We know that someone who types "Либерално-Демократска Партија" is looking for one of the three parties listed there, while if we redirect it to the main disambiguation page, they'll have to filter through a lot of parties whose names don't use the Cyrillic alphabet. Nyttend (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry: I just now noticed your "please reply at your own talk page" notice. Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Haruth's edits
Why has haruth removed a lot of material from the radio documentary on Darin's life, and mindlessly dismissed this as 'fancruft' ? just made the article less informative imo. example - from the documentary - 'he was taken to see sophie tucker -whom he admired ' - fancruft? or something that builds the narrative of the article? i dunno. just made it less informative and blander haruth.Sayerslle (talk) 12:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Most of my cleanup was to remove poorly referenced, trivia. I may have inadvertently removed some material of worth in the process. Goodfaith edits, but I really don't care that much either way. I would prefer that if you were to reintroduce any of the material, that it be worded in a more encyclopedic manner, and that verifiable references be added, rather than the rather vague allusion to a documentary which no-one is able to access to confirm the assertions made. Not even on my watchlist, but the article has a tendency to appear from time to time in various cleanup categories which brings me back to it. Everyone is free to add as they choose. Please carry on and "un-bland it"... :-)


 * I've also added a response to your question on the Bobby Darin talk page (which was a duplicate of your question here). I only discovered it as I was checking the edits that I made before responding. Appreciate if you have further questions you leave them here, as I will not be watching the Bobby Darin talk page. Thank you. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I dont see what was inadvertant about it - what do you mean by that ? Did you mean to remove the material about sophie tucker, his worries over his appearance etc or didnt you. Plus 'I really dont care much either way..' is annoying- i spent time putting that material in from the radio documenatry. tHe fact it isnt readily available now is regrettable but I didnt realise the rules made it unacceptable. if it does thats one thing, if it doesn't youre just going 'oh all this stuff from the radio documenary can go too..'i didnt make it up. anyway, we'll have to agree to differ about what should have remained - but I think your edits were crap and lazy. just my opinion.  Sayerslle (talk) 15:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Sayerslle, simply add the material back. If you feel the version prior to mine was encyclopedic and passes the standards established for Wikipedia, simply revert it. That is all that I meant by I don't care that much either way - I have no vested interest in maintaining the article one way or the other, other than trying to make it a better article per Wikipedia's standards. If you don't feel that I have achieved that, you are perfectly capable, and welcomed to, edit it to what you consider a better standard. There really is no need for such aggressive, defensive posturing. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 15:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * if its not a 'rather vague allusion' - just a refernce, straightforward - dont call it 'rather vague allusion' - just bloody stupid - words mean things ... as for posturng, that looks aggressive language of you to me, you see, but kind of sly - anyway, thats enough. we don't agree. fair enough. Sayerslle (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

A redirect you created is being discusses at DRV
Understanding the Value of Pharmaceuticals redirect DRV discussion. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify: July Newsletter and August Drive

 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify and the future of wikification
Hi! There is an ongoing proposal at the project talkpage concerning the future of wikification, including possible deprecation of the wikify template which is being discussed at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 10. Your input would be greatly appreciated!

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active member of the wikify project. To update your status, go here.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC) on behalf of Project Wikify

WikiProject Wikify: November Newsletter and December Drive

 * Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify, 22:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify April Drive
Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's April Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 500 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!

-- Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify.

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate; however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Lappert's". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 02:08, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 Wikification Drive
This message was delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To stop receiving messages from WikiProject Wikify, remove your name from the recipients page. -- EdwardsBot (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify: November Newsletter and December Drive
Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To unsubscribe remove your username from this list. EdwardsBot (talk) 22:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

February 2013 Wikification Drive
Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's February Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 500 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!

October 2014 Wikification Drive
This message was delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To stop receiving messages from WikiProject Wikify, remove your name from the recipients page. -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

February 2015 Wikification drive
Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of WikiProject Wikify that the February drive has been started. Better late than never! Come on, sign up! :) Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 23:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Robotics Engineering Center, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harvester. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Ways to improve Mina Benson Hubbard
Hi, I'm Fisheriesmgmt. Haruth, thanks for creating Mina Benson Hubbard!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This is a great start! I'd love to see this article expanded, especially the lead section. It'd also be great to give it a good copy-edit. Let me know if I can help!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 19:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Fisheriesmgmt. Appreciate the input. In its current form it's a bit of a botchup of the information contained in the German and French wikipedias, with a healthy dose of references added. I'll probably walk away from it for a few days and come back for a deep clean. (With any luck, someone may have already come along and done it up by then :) ) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 20:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem! I had never heard of Hubbard so it was actually a cool learning opportunity. I'm always happy to lend a hand with copy-editing, so feel free to reach out if you'd like any help with that! Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Cluster of non-notable articles
I really need to stop pressing Random article...

Stumbled on Fairy_Loup, a non notable waterfall in Scotland, which led to Category:Waterfalls of Scotland. Of the 268 articles in the Category, only 19 are probably worth keeping. A few have developed as far as a note on location, but are unlikely to ever develop further than the one liner per the Fairy_Loup example.

Similarly, all 3 articles in Subcategory Category:Waterfalls_of_Jura,_Scotland and all 6 in Subcategory Category:Waterfalls_of_the_Isle_of_Mull are non-notable.

Is there an easy way? Or am I doomed to trawl the list again to prod each article?

Thanks in advance. --Haruth (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure if it's easier, but you can nominate to AfD multiple articles. See Articles for deletion. -- Edgars2007  (talk/contribs) 09:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Edgars2007. Looks like about the same amount of work, but at least there should be consensus by the time the poor admin hits the list... :D Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 10:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I suspect this process will (and should) be a slow one. There are some where there's really very little to say other than to provide the name and a set of coordinates. Per WP:GEOLAND, those don't really have a chance at being notable on their merits, but ought to be covered somewhere: ideally, in my opinion, merged to their river or stream's article, where possible. Some, such as Eas a Chraosain, are probably destined to be simply deleted and their entry in List of waterfalls of Scotland de-linked. Frankly, that list could use some cleanup before too much deletion happens, though. It would be a shame to lose the coordinate data that many of these little sub-stubs possess when it could be bundled into the list. Meanwhile, some of these waterfalls are going to have sufficient coverage to meet GEOLAND's low bar for inclusion. I've done what I could to expand Fairy Loup, although I suppose there's still some question about whether it's suitable for inclusion. I don't think there's any way to predict which of these are going to be capable of expansion ahead of time, sadly... and efforts to bundle nominations will result in the inevitable no consensus chaos if you manage to let an actually notable example slip into a large stack. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Squeamish Ossifrage. That was impressive! Fairy Loup was the one that started it all and my search results failed to return any of the information that you have now managed to include.
 * Agree wholeheartedly with your comments above. The List of waterfalls of Scotland seems a good start on retaining coordinate information. There has been a lot of work generating all these articles, and, as suggested, seems a waste to lose what little information there is. Particularly if there is hope to be able to get more of them beyond the one liner, as you have achieved with the Fairy Loup. (Just the Hugh MacDairmid info on that article almost assures notability).
 * Will most likely withdraw the nomination on Fairy Loup, the back of what you have already achieved. Certainly the bundling of nominations would just be a waste of everybody's time. Wonder if there is a way of getting a working party together to bring the tranche of articles under the Category into line?
 * Thanks for your efforts. Always good to get another head involved.
 * And if you can reveal your search secrets, I'm all ears! :) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 18:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha! I wish I had search secrets that made this sort of thing easy! If I did, I'd do something about stub referencing all over the project. Basically, I try to formulate helpful search strings. With this waterfall and its unusual spelling, it was easier than some (I've got a silent film on my to-do list titled It Is the Law which is going to be a nightmare...). I usually do several search cycles with assisting keywords (here: Scotland, waterfall, Dumfries), and always run through standard web searches, book checks, news, Google Scholar checks for anything that might be appropriate there, and targeted searches to check for material at the Internet Archive. There's a certain amount of art to it.
 * And, yeah, there's just an immense amount of work to do here, and with Scottish geography articles in general (so many redlink streams and rivers!). I don't mind pitching in a bit, but this is actually well outside my usual research areas. It might be worth dropping a line at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland. I don't know how active the project is, but if interested editors there wanted to get behind a Scottish geography taskforce, it could do a lot of good. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Mine neither, Squeamish Ossifrage. I'll pop up to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland and leave a note - see what happens... :) Thanks for all your valuable input.
 * Best wishes. --Haruth (talk) 19:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

List of Historic Scotland properties
Hi, I notice you're adding sites to the list List of Historic Scotland properties, but I'm not sure they belong there. This list is for the 300 or so properties under the care of Historic Scotland and open to the public. Specifically it's for the sites which are in the Historic Scotland handbook (or which are listed on their website ) as places for the public to visit. The sites you've added seem to be listed buildings and scheduled monuments, which although are indeed "listed" as such by Historic Scotland is not really what the list is about. (A list of all Historic Scotland "listed buildings" would have tens of thousands of entries.) Pasicles (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Pasicles. The additions are from the latest list of Properties in Care available from the Historic Scotland Website. Will add link when I get to the bottom of the page... the document can be downloaded as a pdf here. It is a full list of scheduled monuments, but if you go to the end of the document, the Properties in Care are listed separately. Hope that clarifies. (And no worries... no way am I putting in the thousands... ;-) ) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 00:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah I see. Thanks for that. I assumed that their website was complete, but I guess some of the minor sites are missing. Okay well I retract what I said then - go ahead and complete the list. :) Pasicles (talk) 00:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem, Pasicles. It looks like some of them are not on the website as they cannot be visited, and others get "lumped in" with the bigger attraction next door. Only decided to add them as their appeared to be articles on a good number of them already. Thanks and best wishes, --Haruth (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh. Hang on... just re-read your first comment. "... and open to the public" is not clear in the article lead. Would you rather it remained only a list of the ones that can be visited? That would just be an edit of the lead rather than the addition of the dozen or so that I'm currently adding. Thoughts? Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 00:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh heck, I don't know. Hmm. I created the page because we already had a list for Wales and England, and I thought it was about time someone did the equivalent for Scotland. It never occurred to me that there might be grey area of unvisitable sites. I guess you should go ahead and add the additional sites. Wikepedia is meant to be an encyclopedia, not a tourist guide, and if these extra buildings are in the care of Historic Scotland, then they belong to the list. Heck, Scotland is supposed to have a universal right-to-roam I think - so one can probably at least view most these places from the outside. :) Pasicles (talk) 00:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha... gotta hate the grey areas, Pasicles! :) True that most can be viewed, and (whisper) close up if you give up right to insurance claim if it falls on your head... ;-) I'll add the rest on the basis of completion. Thank you for your input on this one (and thank you deeply for creating the article as it stands - significant amount of work there, and without it I wouldn't have been even tempted to start!) Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 00:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Arrochar Alps
 * added a link pointing to Ben Vorlich


 * List of Historic Scotland properties
 * added a link pointing to Loch Leven

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Council of Tortosa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aragonese. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Manga de Dokuha
Hi, Haruth. Hm, I see. It's a good concern. I'll see what I can do but usually only a few entries of the collection gained big media coverage. Only retailers (but not only Amazon) have the release. It's almost unbelievable but even its official site has not the release dates (although it can confirm each installment release as well as its ISBN)... Do you have any suggestion on how to handle it? Greetings, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 21:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

April 2015 Wikification drive.
Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of WikiProject Wikify that the April drive has been started. Come on, sign up! :) One hand on the mouse, one hand on the keyboard... and the feet can do the rest! Hee-hee! (talk) 03:30, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

June 2015 Wikification drive.
Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of WikiProject Wikify that the June drive has been started. Come on, sign up! :) &#34;A wiki of beauty is a joy forever.&#34; Seriously. That&#39;s how long it&#39;d take to read! (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify: Current Backlog Reduction Plan
Hey, I noticed you marked yourself as a member of WikiProject Wikify and you are currently listed as active. I was wondering if you would be able to assist with our current backlog reduction plan. While traditional drives are more structured month-long sprints by WikiProject Wikify members, there is currently lacking activity within the project and in order to significantly reduce the incredible backlog, members are encouraged to review all articles marked with the Underlinked Template Message - underlinked - a list of which can be found here - to analyze the worthiness of the template message on the given article. Articles that have nothing to link or are have had wikilinks sufficiently added should have the template removed to clear the backlog and make it easier for editors to find articles in genuine need of wikification. This can be done by any editor; however, all editors should consider joining if they haven't done so already. Thank you!

The Novac (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Night of the Grizzlies book cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Night of the Grizzlies book cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)