User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2008 August

"Advertising"
I'd like you to define what qualifies as advertising. There are numerous, numerous, numerous pages about authors, actors, play writers, tv writers, video games, movies, tv shows - aren't these all advertising? Don't they all convey and promote information about an individual or a product? How can you possibly differentiate between which author or which TV actors of the same celebrity status are allowed to be on Wikipedia and which are not? How can you say that one person is "advertising" while another is providing useful information. It seems like the line of what defines advertising is far too shady and arbitrary. This needs to be addressed because you are randomly and arbitrarily promoting some people and some products over others which turns Wikipedia into a biased institution lacking any authority because its contents are privy to your inconsistent whims of what can and cannot be included. I'd like an explanation immediately for this unacceptable offense.

Pirate Cat radio
Hello, I'm confused about your comment. Are you calling for a deletion of the Pirate Cat Radio page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piratecatradio (talk • contribs) 06:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Confused about what comment? Of course I am proposing deletion - it is blatant advertising. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

College of the North Atlantic
Hello, I have been trying to make changes to the CNA page but of course it keeps getting changed. I am an employee of CNA and have been asked to add new information, such as contact information and coordinates along with a new page for each of the campuses. I did make 17 of the same pages while i was waiting for information to be edited (took longer then I thought), I now have the information ready for each page. Please let me do so as I am working for CNA and have been assigned this task. Thank you ReaganCampbell (talk) 14:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I see that StaticGull is concerned about your COI. I suggest in the first instance you restrict your activities to completing the table in College of the North Atlantic with its present columns. If StaticGull accepts that, you could add extra columns for numbers of students and departments based there. We do not want addresses and phone numbers - Wikipedia is not a directory. Do not change any of the "College of the North Atlantic &hellip; Campus" redirects without StaticGull's prior approval. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

S144
Hi there, I made S144 earlier and it was marked as not being notable, I added some more information and removed the tag as i thought the notability had been fully described. Obviously there was still more information to add but I did not suspect that a deletion would have taken place already. Also, the same version was not re uploaded after it had been deleted, there were differences and the room is notable. I believe that the article should become unlocked. Interuptus (talk) 06:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is unlikely that any but the users of the room would ever consider it notable. You could raise the matter at deletion review but I advise you to see reason. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref: Commons - Gaelic Wiki
How's it going? Thanks for the recommendations. Didn't really understand the 'commons' function very well. Thanks for the pointer. Now that I've uploaded it, how do I tell the Gaelic Wikipedia folks that the images exist in the commons, and that they may be interested in them, etc...??? I.e. What's next? Thanks again.Warren Fish (talk) 03:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Thanks for helping out the newb! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrenfish (talk • contribs) 01:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Find the Irish Wikipedians noticeboard here and leave a note. Wait for the Gaelic version of Eask Tower to be written and then add your photos to it. Spam your photo into An Daingean - it may get deleted but it also may get used in the proper place. Put your photos into the proper Commons categories as the other images in Dingle. Note that Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. and similar decisions mean that Image:EaskTower Sign June2008.jpg is almost certainly a copyvio. Do not be surprised if it gets deleted. (But I won't tell anyone that you used in the Eask Tower article.) &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Penguins
Hi, When I patrolled List of Penguins, it was a very well-made list of all types of penguin, completely linked up and all with one or two pictures of the species. I even liked it so much I sent the link around, and now people report to me that the page was down :( Could you reinstate it? Your deletion reason looks valid, but when I patrolled the page, it was a pretty and good page. Please just revert the previous edit that made it into the article you deleted instead of deleting. Thanks! Stijndon (talk) 09:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Well, excuse me for being born yesterday. I assumed that as a non-admin I could not recreate it, or should not recreate it since I should not assume that an admin made a mistake. Thanks for being friendly, I really want to learn more about how to properly edit now. Stijndon (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you think I was born yesterday? The only version of List of Penguins which has ever existed is this one which scarcely fits your description above. (OK the kid has done a bit to turn it into a list but only after I moved it.) What is this rubbish about re-instating - have you looked at the deletion log entry? Why are bothering me? What is preventing you re-instating? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs)

Spongebob cruft
A lot of this seems to come verbatim from Spongepedia. Do you have any idea what the copyright status of that would be? Looking around it, I can see no reference to GFDL, but no other reference to copyright either. JohnCD (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Maybe. I have tended to stay away from episode articles since I remember there was a bitter and long-drawn argument some time ago which seemed, by default or exhaustion, to be won by the inclusionists. It was only the transcript in this one that spurred me into doing something. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Dunno about Spongepedia but wikia:spongebob:Main Page is licensed under the GFDL so deleting as copyvios won't work. (If you are looking at one that I deleted - yes, I may have been wrong to do so - it probably needed AfD!) But we should point people to wikia and discourage articles here about individual episodes. Suggest raise the matter at Talk:List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes proposing a clear policy which can be used to justify speedy deletion in future. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Spam
What exactly is "guerrilla spam"? :) Rockfang (talk) 04:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Advertising masquerading as an article or an article with no real purpose except to advertise something. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Cytan23
Based on Special:Contributions/Cytan23, it seems he's a single purpose account shilling for the malaysian furniture industry using copyrighted materials to do so. Blockworthy? ThuranX (talk) 18:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not quite grounds for blocking but I shall watch the user. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Tsarskoye Selo
You left a comment on my user talk, and after I found you left a message, I went to the page Tsarskoye Selo, looked at the languages and there was no Russian. There must be some mistake somewhere. -- Sammysk (talk) 18:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC) How do I create an interwiki link? I have the URL for in in Russian, though: ru:Царское_Село_(музей-заповедник) although it is not very complete --Sammysk (talk) 23:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, I thought my message was clear. There probably is an article on the Russian Wikipedia. Go there, search around. When you find the article, come back here and create the interwiki link at the end of Tsarskoye Selo. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * My Cyrillic ain't that good but what is Царское Село? 91.106.74.209 (talk) 20:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry I didn't understand, but my native language is Russian and I only learned English four years ago, and it is still hard for me to understand sometimes. --Sammysk (talk) 23:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You create an interwiki link like this. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

World Malaria Day
Dear Mr Haworth,

My name is Sarah Pickwick and I work for a charity called Malaria Consortium. I recently updated a post on World Malaria Day which is a new international day that the malaria community is celebrating and yet it only has a one line presence on wikipedia. However I noticed after adding the additional text it was deleted by yourself. I would very much like to have this information on wikipedia and I can assure you that it was entirely informative and neutral regarding my own organisation. Perhaps if I knew your reasons for deleting it I could address them so that the article is acceptable.

I look forward to your response and ultimately to getting more information up on wikipedia on this issue. &mdash; Malariaconsortium (talk) 11:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)).
 * However, virtuous and charitable your organisation may be, Wikipedia policy on COI is perfectly clear: you should not be writing here about this subject, especially when you admit yourself that it is new. In the first instance, leave a note about your proposed changes at Talk:Malaria Awareness Day and contact an established editor who has contributed to articles in this area such as malaria and World Health Organization. In any case I always consider it the height of idleness to copy ones own website (worse, to copy someone else's website!) and think you have created a Wikipedia article - text almost always needs to recast for here. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

User:RaidenX0
Thanks for blocking 'im. Was contemplating reporting him but you saved me the trouble. :) Happy editing. – LATICS   talk  06:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree, thank you. I usually just clean up articles here and there, so I appreciate your stepping in before having to be asked. Author X (talk) 09:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Interwikis
Hi, I'm from pt.wiki. Can you put interwikis in same tamplates?

The templates are blocked, and you are a sysop.

I put those interwikis with this messege in all interwikis with have the tamplate.

If you can, please, put:


 * template:fs start

ar:template:fs start bg:template:fs start ca:template:fs start es:template:fs start eo:template:fs start fa:template:fs start fr:template:fs start gl:template:fs start hr:template:fs start hu:template:fs start it:template:fs start mk:template:fs start pt:template:fs start ro:template:fs start simple:template:fs start tr:template:fs start vi:template:fs start


 * template:fs player

ar:template:fs player bg:template:fs player ca:template:fs player es:template:fs player eo:template:fs player fa:template:fs player fr:template:fs player gl:template:fs player hr:template:fs player hu:template:fs player it:template:fs player mk:template:fs player pt:template:fs player ro:template:fs player simple:template:fs player tr:template:fs player vi:template:fs player


 * template:fs mid

ar:template:fs mid bg:template:fs mid ca:template:fs mid es:template:fs mid eo:template:fs mid fa:template:fs mid fr:template:fs mid gl:template:fs mid hr:template:fs mid hu:template:fs mid it:template:fs mid mk:template:fs mid pt:template:fs mid ro:template:fs mid simple:template:fs mid tr:template:fs mid vi:template:fs mid


 * template:fs end

ar:template:fs end bg:template:fs end ca:template:fs end es:template:fs end eo:template:fs end fa:template:fs end fr:template:fs end gl:template:fs end hr:template:fs end hu:template:fs end it:template:fs end mk:template:fs end pt:template:fs end ro:template:fs end simple:template:fs end tr:template:fs end vi:template:fs end

Thank you.

OffsBlink (talk) 06:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have done fs_start. I have unprotected the others and will let you fix them. Please:
 * use the proper template names, eg. mk:Шаблон:Фудбалски состав старт not mk:template:fs start
 * let me know when you have done so I can re-protect them
 * if you have admin rights on another wiki, apply for them here as well - it is not automatic but there should be little problem.
 * &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Done, in all other wikis, I put "fs start", "fs player", "fs mid", "fs end", but here at en.wiki I put all in the original, because you ask for me. I put the original in template:fs player, template:fs mid and template:fs end, but if you want all interwikis in the original, you need put in template:fs start this: because the template is protect

ar:قالب:Fs start bg:Шаблон:Фс старт ca:Plantilla:Fs start es:Plantilla:Fs start eo:Ŝablono:Fs start fa:الگو:Fs start fr:Modèle:Fs start gl:Modelo:Fs start hr:Predložak:Fs start hu:Sablon:Fs start it:Template:Calciatore in rosa/inizio mk:Шаблон:Фудбалски состав старт pt:Predefinição:Football squad start ro:Format:Echipă de fotbal start simple:template:fs start tr:Şablon:Fs start vi:Tiêu bản:Đội hình bóng đá đầu

OffsBlink (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC) No, you doesn't unprotected, in the article still have view source. And why do you don't want to put the interwikis, why I need to put? OffsBlink (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. I have unprotected Template:Football squad start so you can fix it. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:31, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Very sorry. Now unprotected. Soccer bores me totally. You want the edits - you do them. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, intelligent people also makes mistakes. I already put in all templates the interwikis, now, you can protect again. OffsBlink (talk) 21:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You already can protect the 4 templates. =] OffsBlink (talk) 03:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Masculinity for boys
A tag has been placed on Masculinity for boys: A guide or peer educators, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Stijndon (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We edit conflicted. Re-apply your tag to the new title. Published by UNESCO probably means it will need AfD but try speedy first. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to make it clear. Masculinity for boys: A guide or peer educators had become a redirect by the time you tagged it for speedy. I reverted that tag because: a redirect is harmless, best left in place just in case the original author uses it as a route to their article, its fate can be determined once the fate of the substantive article is determined. I said "re-apply your tag to the new title" above and waited but you did not, so I did a prod - a speedy tag was inappropriate. The prod got removed, now I have sent it to this AfD discussion please "vote". (I hope that is not too confusing - keep up the new page patrolling.) &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the second time I got tricked by a redirect... I'll try and pay more attention. Voted delete, of course. Stijndon (talk) 16:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Volano Software Inc. spam and trolling
FYI, see this blacklisting entry:
 * MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist (permanent link)

I'm not sure that this will stop our Volano Software spammer/troll, but it may slow him down some. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Happy Late Birthday!!!
Sorry its late. This was the first time that I was able to get on since way before your birthday. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!
 * Once again... sorry its late.
 * Thanks and Happy Editing Tm93 TALK 05:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Psd to html
Just to keep you informed, as I see you were reorganising the different versions of this rather curious article: I looked at it again and found that it is a copyvio from the site linked at the bottom (which says "Copyright all rights reserved"). So tagged. Moreover, I suspect it's spam, because that web-site doesn't tell you how to do the conversion: it offers to do it for you for $79. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Celtic Tree of Life
Hello. I'm not sure if this is the correct way to "talk" to you.. Apologies if it is not. I am new to Wikipedia.

You have deleted my addition to Tree of LIfe modern interpreations page. I'm sure as a new user, that the text was not up to Wikipedia standards (I'm learning). And would appreciate your help in this matter.

I strongly believe that the "Celtic Tree of LIfe" is a notable modern interpretation, and relevevant of mention on this page. Any google search shows 500,000 plus entries for "Celtic Tree of LIfe". (Also the new cuil.com search engine) Jen Delyth's "celtic tree of LIfe" design shows up as #1 in popularity and appears all over the web as "an ancient design". It has truly become a modern icon in our times. I am not trying to write this article for self promotion, but because it is an important subject, worthy of discussion.

Although I'm not sure how to source this correctly as fact. (could you help?) But its an extremly  well known symbol in the USA, and fast spreading in Europe, understood to be an ancient core symbol. (which it is not) - which seems entirely within the scope of discussion of "modern interpretation".

In addition, this page (Tree of Life), is lacking any mention of Celtic Tree of LIfe. I understand this is complicated, as there are no written records, and possibly no "Tree of Life" philosophy per se in Celtic antiquity. However, the Celtic religion is known to be centered around tree worship (Roman and Greek sources discuss this). HOwever, there are NO actal Celtic Tree of Life symbols per se (except for the stylized plant and vine motifs etc..) in Celtic antiquity. And yet today, many thousands of people (maybe millions) associate the Celtic Tree of LIfe symbol by Jen Delyth, as an ancient one, and it has a growing iconographic influence, (modern interpretation).

Many people have approached me about including this symbol and discussion on Wikipedia. Could you help us find an appropriate page/channel etc to include this releveant and important addition to the page? I also think it will be of interest to Wikipedians.

Wikipedia also contacted me about using Jen Delyth's symbol for their plant biodiversity project. But the Creative Commons copyright was an issue.

Thanks a lot, respectfully, Scott Silverberg SSilverberg (talk) 21:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The difficulty I have is that you would appear to have a COI and we do not like spammers here. I saw your cheeky claim 'referenced in several Wikepedia pages'. I made that just three pages and in two of those the refs had been added by user:Jdelyth!


 * 'Any google search shows 500,000 plus entries for "Celtic Tree of LIfe".' Why blatantly exaggerate something so easily checked? I make it 34,000 hits.


 * 'Many people have approached me' - I shall assume that is also an exaggeration.


 * I saw your mention of "Wikipedia member, editor and freelance contributor Juan J. Peralta". How does a "Wikipedia member and freelance contributor" differ from any ordinary Wikipedia editor? Do you know Juan's user Id here? I suggest you contact Juan and ask him to do this edit (or a toned-down version of it). That I would fully accept. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Mr. RHaworth, Your tone is rude and insulting, and it seems is not taking my being a new user into account. I am not a spammer, and have not intentionaly exagerated anything at all.

I just googled "celtic tree of life" again, and despite your claim, google says 516,000 mentions -.

And although google mentions should not account for how "noteworthy" someone or something is, a search in google for "Jen Delyth" comes up with 14,700 searches, and most of those pages are about this particular person. The new "cuil" search engine has over 7,000 which are pretty solid.

And yes, I have had at least 12 people approach me about how Jen's Tree should be on Wikipedia.. Probably more over the years.. Maybe "many" is relative, but having never used Wikipedia before, it seemed like a lot. I am not particularly internet savy, so maybe that sounds like exageration to you.

I have no idea how Wikipedia works, or who Juan J. Peralta is, but it seemed like he was an official member of Wikipedia, and brought our attention most strongly to Jen's Tree of life being a popular symbol. He is in charge of the biodiversity project on Wikipedia, and asked for its use to head the project.

Either way, you clearly are unaware of the importance of this symbol, or its prevalance out in the world. I would think that this would be what Wikipedia is all about, to give the community the possibility of ascertaining this, not having one person who is unaware of something, shut it down, as it seems you are doing simply because I am a new user not used to the way things work around here. I have not however been rude, insulting, or dishonest as you are implying.

We have also been cleared of the COI by the administrator, and I am most certainly NOT a Spammer. I am sincere, and insulted by your calling me "cheeky", when I have been respectful, polite, and asked for editorial help and advice. I have never used Wikipedia before, or much of an internet person generally, and its been quite difficult. I'm learning fast, and respecting and responding to the communities wishes. I did not expect to receive such rudeness, and personal insult, I thought actually it was "against the rules of conduct".

It was also not my intention to exagerate anything. I may be inexperienced with Wikipedia, however, I do have something to contribute. And that is that Jen Delyth is a well known and respected Celtic artist, who is mentioned on other pages, (and and who has created an important design that is taking root in this country, whether you're aware of it or not. I respectfully invite you to do more research, and allow the community to make its mind up, not just you.

I will indeed contact Juan, although we turned him down, despite the positive "promotional" opportunity it may have given to have Jen's design have a high profile place in Wikipedia pages, as we respect its copyright, and were not in a legal position to decide on the consequences of creative commons.

Scott Silverberg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SSilverberg (talk • contribs) 05:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you aware of our COI policy? If I had my way, you would not be writing here at all about Jan or Tree of Life. I see no reason to treat you with kid gloves. The difference in Google hits arises from whether you put quote marks around the phrase or not. Omitting the quotes comes up with pages such as this which you must admit is a bit peripheral to Jan. "We have also been cleared of the COI by the administrator" - which administrator, where? You will have a very hard job persuading me that writing about ones wife is not a case of COI. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Mr. RHaworth, After feeling humiliated and responding with some emotion (see above), I reread your post, and am uncertain as to whether you have edited the "tree of life" contribution as to allow it to remain? Or whether you are saying if we invite Prof. Juan J. Peralta to accept the edit or not? (His email gives his user name here.. [user id censored - I am not sure whether that user has publicly revealed his real name] ) I'm sorry that I am just not familiar with the way you all work.. despite reading and trying to absorb the protocals here. I will quote from Prof. Juan J. Peralta's correspondance, some months ago Greetings. I'm a member, editor and freelance contributor of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. and as such I would like to query you about the chances of allowing a non commercial derivative usage of the "Tree of Life" icon, copyrighted by Ms. Jen Delyth, as illustration for a new subproject of en.wikipedia.org which I am glad to endeavour as part of the WikiProject Plants section. I have personally found the image as outstandingly representative of the relationships between botanical life, trees as emblems of it, and human cultural elements in present and in history regarding the first two. These are actually the primary attributes or features we would like the new WikiProject Trees subproyect to act and promote while creating and editing Wikipedia articles. 2-Ms. Delyth image is a powerfull-concept image that effectively conveys the meaning of the WikiProject Trees subproject 5-A text, url and description page will be added to the image, identifying Ms. Delyth as creator and owner. I hope that you can help me recitfy any blunders that I may have made in sincerely entering into the educational, wikipedia community, with my contribution, and advise as to how to continue with this. I'm not sure that Prof. Juan J. Peralta should have to edit a post on Celtic Tree of LIfe, as this is not his field. I only mentioned him as a reference, and to show this is not spam, but a sincere attempt to contribute. thankyou again, Scott Silverberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by SSilverberg (talk • contribs) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

RHaworth, please see my user talk page for response. Actually I am not Jen's husband. We do not live together as of several years ago. You have no right to talk to me like this. I am not asking for "kid gloves" treatment, but simply that you treat me with respect. I thought the COI was referering to the sock thing. Since I am not a spammer, and am a new user, and ahve been transparant from the beginining, all you have to do is advise, and edit, and correct. You do not need to be insulting and insinuating. Which is not part of the Wikipedia agreement if I understand correctly.

I would like to request an alternative editor to help with this issue, since you clearly have your own views on this subject. Thanks Scott Silverberg —Preceding unsigned comment added by SSilverberg (talk • contribs) 06:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * A very significant part of the "Wikipedia agreement", in my view, is that people with a COI should leave it to others to write about their areas of interest. You have chosen to ignore that recommendation. Do not be surprised at my response.
 * "Uncertain as to whether you have edited the tree of life contribution as to allow it to remain". I realise you are newbie but it is very difficult not to be sarcastic in response to a comment like that. Surely this edit and its edit summary is unambiguous? But to try and be constructive - yes really! Juan Peralta is probably not appropriate. Look through the revision history of tree of life to find editor/s who have made a significant contribution. Contact them and ask them is they are willing to add a paragraph about Jen's design. If I see the info. added by an established editor then I will accept it. You could also ask them to endorse the Jen Delyth article. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

To quote Wikipedia guidelines "When writing on a talk page, certain approaches are counter-productive, while others facilitate good editing. The prime values of the talk page are communication, courtesy and consideration". You are not constructive, you are entirely sarcastic, this has been a very difficult experience for me.

I have NOT chosen to ignore ""Wikipedia agreement", about COI ".. As I have made clear several times, as a new user last night only, I did not understand about COI... Why can't you simply let me know without so much rudeness and humiliation!! I have tried to edit and remove the pages, I do not understand this continual harrassment.

I am entirely confused about your rude comments about the "edit" above. Ah.. now i see, you posted a bad link before, showing the opposite of what this new link shows.. Which was very confusing to me. You are incredibly insulting.

You have given me the most horrendous experience with Wikipedia.. I thought this was a community, not a one man editorial! I am not interested in "endorsing" Jen's design. You just simply do not understand the subject we are discussing, and yes, I understand that I am a close contact, but did not understand that was against the rules last night. I thought it was about having unbiased language and content, and the needing of outside sources and references, which I have provided.

You are entirely disrespectful, and arrogant, and I would like someone else to intervene with this bad treatment I feel I am receiving from you. I am not seeking to argue my case for the pages, I am letting you know how out of order you are with your rudeness, and inhospitable treatment.

Do you think that just because this is an internet discussion that it is ok to be so rude and dismissive? Perhaps you dont' know how difficult it is in 24 hours to grasp the entirety of the Wikipedia rules and regulations. I am sorry I entered into this community. This has been an ugly experience. I am going to ask for a review of this case as I do not think you are unbiased towards me. Scott SSilverberg (talk) 07:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Noted. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

GPOCS/GPOP
Dear Mr. Haworth,

A new Wikipedia page names "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program (GPOP)" was created today by Pattersonmap (11 August). This creation was indeed correct and should be standalone because it is a completely new item on Wikipedia (i.e., it has nothing to do with other articles on Wikipedia, no matter the similarities). Unfortunately, several changes were made by you to merge this page with previous pages such as GPOCS. As a result, the revision history of GPOCS was merged with that of GPOP. I would like the merges to be undone if possible because the two programs (GPOCS and GPOP) are different and should not be in the same revision history. I would appreciate it if you can split up the pages so that GPOP has a standalone history again. Finally, the title of the new page should read as follows: Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program (GPOP)

Thanks, Anil V. Rao —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilvrao (talk • contribs) 21:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I suspect there is some politics involved here, but we can sort that out later. I am willing to unwind my merge. Please look at the edit history and then clearly annotate this copy of the history to show which edit you want where.
 * No, mixing name and acronym in one title is horrible . The title should be Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program plus the redirect at GPOP. Also, how many (non-redirect) incoming links are there to the article? None. So what is your excuse for this edit? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for any confusion the GPOP page may have caused you, but I do not think there are any politics involved. I would be grateful if you could simply separate the history of the page "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program" from any of the other seemingly related pages (e.g., GPOCS). The original creation of the page is legitimate. Making this separation will help readers in the future. Thanks.

Anil Rao —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilvrao (talk • contribs) 22:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you read my message above? Merging histories destroys the evidence. How do you expect me to separate the edits? I need the help of someone familiar with the subject to tell me what to do. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for sounding completely confused and somewhat stupid about all of this. All I wanted was for GPOP to be a fresh page with its own history, not history with a continuation from other pages. As it stands, GPOP is now has a continued history dating back to February 2008. What I would like is for the page GPOCS to have its own history on Wikipedia and for GPOP to have its own history starting from its creation today. If my request is not reasonable, please let me know and we can just leave things as they are. -- AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I repeat: please look at the edit history and then clearly annotate this copy of the history to show which edit belongs to GPOCS and which belongs to GPOP. Do you understand? It is not as laborious as it may seem because the pattern will soon become obvious. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks you for your consideration in this matter. I have attempted to provide annotations to the edits made to the respective pages GPOCS and GPOP. If this is inadequate, please let me know. Otherwise, if it is possible for you to make the appropriate changes, I am grateful.

Regards, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 23:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good, we are getting there! I have queried one of your markings and request you complete the job with explicit GPOP / GPOCS tags. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I have made more annotations to the edit page. Please let me know if I followed instructions correctly. My apologies if I did not, but I am trying my best to follow what you are advising.

Regards, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 23:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making the changes. Only one relatively small thing. The program GPOP actually stands for "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program" (not "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software"). Also, GPOCS stands for "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimal Control Software". If these two changes could be further made, I would be grateful. So if one searches on GPOCS it should redirect to "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimal Control Software". If one searches on "GPOP" it should redirect to "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program". Thanks again for the help.

Regards, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 00:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Why cannot you make these changes yourself? Remember to move, not copy and paste. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I cannot move the page to "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program" as that page already exists and is a redirect to "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software". Do you know how to allow me to make the move? AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 01:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops! Sorry, yes I think I made a mistake there. Should be Ok now. Are you going to do anything about links to show that either of these packages exists? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

User:SSilverberg
Hi RHaworth! On 11 August you posted a sock puppetry banner on the User page for User:SSilverberg. Today he has posted a request for assistance at WP:EAR. See New user in trouble. I have welcomed him at his User talk page, and posted a response to the sock puppetry banner on his User page. Please see what I have written and, assuming you agree, do what you can to resolve the sock puppetry situation. Happy editing. Dolphin51 (talk) 02:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for removing the sock banner so promptly. I think justice has been done, and SSilverberg can now get on with the business of learning about editing Wikipedia.  You asked why the sock banner was preventing him from expanding his User page.  I guess the banner wasn't preventing him in any technical sense.  The presence of the banner was a bit intimidating, as it would be for most new users, and that is why he resorted to an appeal on WP:EAR.  Cheers.  Dolphin51 (talk) 07:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

One More Request
I have fixed everything regarding GPOP with the exception of one thing for which I would like your help. There is a page now titled "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software" which redirects to "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program". I think it is unnecessary to have the page "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software" as no such name actually exists. How can "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software" be deleted? This way there will be only one page (i.e., "Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program") which, I think, will make things easier for readers of Wikipedia.

Regards, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 03:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I see absolutely no reason to delete Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Software. I have turned it into a disambig page. Will you please provide proper disambiguation within the two articles, or should I propose both for deletion as "non-notable"? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

GPOP
I was looking at the page Gauss Pseudospectral Optimization Program and noticed that you had commented about its notability. It is a new program and is essentially just getting started, so the notability may take some time. My co-authors and I have, however, written extensively in the open-literature (please see the references in the article) on the Gauss pseudospectral method which is the method that is implemented in GPOP. So I do not think that there is any real concern with notability except the newness of the program. In fact, there is a paper that has just been published that uses GPOP, so I think the notability will soon not be a concern. If it is OK with you, I will remove the notability issue. Please let me know. -- AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 17:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I am disappointed:
 * You have not managed to create a basic introduction: "... is a software package developed in 2008 at the University of Florida"
 * You have not created a single incoming link to the article, so how do you justify removing the orphan tag?
 * You have not made the slightest attempt to explain the difference between GPOP and GPOCS.
 * I am totally dubious about the program's notabilty. I shall seek consensus at AfD. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I will do as you ask, but I do not know how. Can you tell me how to create an incoming link. Also, I will add the paragraphs you suggest. Please give me the opportunity to do so before you request any kind of deletion. Thanks for your help. - AVR - 74.229.204.183 (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "Can you tell me how to create an incoming link". I find it rather amazing that you ask such a question. Is it not self-evident that you create an incoming link like this? Too late, as you can see, I have already started the AfD discussion. But don't worry - an AfD is open for at least five days. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way you an undo your AfD? I really want to fix the issues, but I am relatively new to Wikipedia and did not completely understand all of the approaches required to do all of the things you ask. if you give me a chance, I will fix the problems. Thanks, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 23:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I could withdraw the AfD but I see no reason to do so. It is not a question of the quality or content of the article: I feel that, at this stage, the program simply does not meet Wikipedia's notabilty requirements. It is a problem that you cannot fix - only time can fix it! (I repeat, there is no hurry with the AfD: given the subject, I can well see the AfD in five days time getting a relist tag!) Incidentally, have you read WP:COI? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

If you remove the AfD, I assure you I will put forth an effort to justify an article on GPOP. Just to let you know, the GPOP article was written to inform people of a program that can be used in academic research and classroom teaching. I see other software programs on Wikipedia that were put there extremely shortly after their creation (e.g., PROPT, which was put up only a day after it was released). Such articles have not been deleted despite the "non-notability". Thus, I feel I should be given an opportunity to rectify the present situation. I will work on the aspects you indicated and will try to get everything in place shortly.

Regards, AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The AfD tag does not prevent you putting forth the effort. "GPOP article was written to inform people" - Wikipedia is not a bulletin board or forum. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I have followed what you suggested (at least I hope so). Please let me know if what I have written is more acceptable and that enough links have been established. If not, I will try again. -- AVR -- Anilvrao (talk) 00:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You have not created any incoming links and you did not use wikilink format for outgoing links - but neither of these things matters. I do not wish to be rude but &hellip;


 * I do not think that GPOP is notable enough for Wikipedia at the present time. Nothing you do to the article will change my mind. I am not going to withdraw the AfD - we will see what other people think. If you glance at the Celtic Tree of Life discussion above, you will see what my attitude is to people with a COI. There is no need to leave me any further messages. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Power Reverse Dual Currency
Regarding your deletion request of Power Reverse Dual Currency. This is a well known structured deal among major investment banks and by gooling PRDC you will get many hits. I have improved the page in a more scientific way and added references. I am removing your deletion request box. Regards, --Malin Randstrom (talk) 04:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC) Thank you for your advices making this a better article -- I am a beginner editor of wiki and need guidelines. I have added about 25 references to other wiki articles as well as a Categories box. This done, I am removing two of your info boxes. There are two wiki articles that refer to this page now, yet those may not be sufficient. I am focusing now on adding external references on the PRDC subject besides the Japanese PDF document in. --Malin Randstrom (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You cheated - you moved the goal posts! I did this Google search and got 25 hits. You reposted it (naughty - see this moan) without the word "note". The number of hits for that are not great but enough to stop me fussing, because, unlike some of the other people I have been talking to recently, I think you have no COI. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have just looked at your user page - fascinating! First person is preferred there - "I am" rather than "she is". &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Have added references and there are two other wiki articles that referrence PRDC. I hope this is ok as I am removing your maintenance tags now. --Malin Randstrom (talk) 16:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You could probably manage more than just two incoming links. I would like to see a couple more references to show the notability of the product rather than giving more details - articles in online financial journals surely? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Children's rights UK
Timeline of children's rights in the United Kingdom. You helped me in a difficult situation before. Please could you advise me what to do about this dispute re Jersey ? I tried to resolve the guy's issues, based on reasoning. I probably should ignore it, since its a drop in the ocean. But, hey... SJB (talk) 09:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought wiki would cover the linking, but needed the reassurance. Freechild will make the transfer. This is becoming a habit ! SJB (talk) 08:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
/!\ GAY WARNING /!\

THIS USER IS A GAY AND A DELETION TROLL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rootrocksliekcats (talk • contribs) 13:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note. To anyone inclined to delete the above: don't. If we leave it, the creator will have no excuse for reposting it! &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hollywood Blvd
Yesterday I created a page for the Hollywood Boulevard Cinema Bar & Eatery. I am unsure about the reason for the deletion, as it mimics the format of other theatre chains' pages almost exactly. I did not intend to create a page for mere advertising purposes, but wanted to create one as an informational tool. The owner of this facility has done many great things to change the movie-going experience, and has also contributed greatly to the Hollywood legacy. Please specify the reasons why this page wa deleted. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HollywoodBlvd (talk • contribs) 14:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It was deleted because two of us felt it was blatant advertising. Your user name suggests a COI. My best advice is: find an established Wikipedia editor to create the article for you. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Links etc
Noted - nothing further to say on the issue SatuSuro 07:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You may well be puzzled about what "WP Indonesia En" means - it even puzzled me. I asked SatuSuro who gave an inscrutible reply. After careful consideration, I think they are trying to say: please put  on the talk page of any Indonesia-related articles you create. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Even less so after the above comment SatuSuro 07:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion
You deleted 2 of my pages, could I find out why? -- HappyCat12 (talk) 20:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I have deleted none of your pages. Try clicking "my contributions"! -- &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

DoubleJay Creative
You speedily deleted the DoubleJay Creative page under G4, but the copy is NOT substantially identical to the deleted version and I added a great number of additional articles and sources to specifically address the reason it was previously deleted. Therefore, I don't see how it fits that policy, and think it should be restored. If someone will tell me the specific issues with the page I will address them, but since the entire reason for its deletion before was non-notability (and there were those on the talk page that disagreed with that, even then), and I have added a great number of new sources, this action doesn't seem to make any sense to me. -- Dingstersdie (talk) 17:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not a question of the quality of the article, but of the notability of the company. The AfD decision was reasonably clear. Also I am always suspicious of SPAs. Raise the matter at deletion review. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for DoubleJay Creative
An editor has asked for a deletion review of DoubleJay Creative. 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. Dingstersdie (talk) 16:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Dave Kleber
That Articles for deletion/Dave kleber -- I'm just getting started with this deletion stuff, and in about 3 seconds, you had it done. Wow -- extremely impressive!!  DRosenbach  ( Talk 06:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the barnstar. I hope you will make an habit of using a speedy tag (which is what Dave kleber needed) or a prod tag before you raise an AfD. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Was wondering why this article got deleted, or if I could get the text that was attached to it ... apparently it is an article about me, and I would like to know what info was posted, and why I am now blocked out from editting the information. MLBTopProspect (talk) 06:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would also appreciate it if you could reference the article in some other fashion, as I find the exaltation behind deleting my name slightly defamatory, and would hope for more professionalism on a reputable site. MLBTopProspect (talk) 07:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I have e-mailed you the text. I have protected the title because it was reposted as nonsense. Please see WP:AUTO - it is by far the best if you wait for others to write a (sensible) bio of you. "I would also appreciate it if you could reference the article in some other fashion" - what on earth do you mean? The article was called Dave kleber (which incidentally should have been Dave Kleber) how else can we possibly reference the article? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just referring to it as "that article" or something along those lines. Some sort of sensitivity would be appreciated, again, seeing how it is an article after my name.  I would expect administrators/editors on here to have better judgement than to boast about how "extremely impressive" it was to delete something attached to my name.  Talking about deleting it for pure reference is fine (as I do agree that it had to be deleted), but to give out "awards" and such is slightly over the top and completely unnecessary.  It would be appreciated if you took my name out, and referred to the article in some other fashion if you're going to "pound your chest" on how great your deletion skills are. MLBTopProspect 13:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MLBTopProspect (talk • contribs)

What in the world is going on here, RHaworth? I have never seen something like this before.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You are being over-sensitive. We have not established that the article was about you. Please note who was writing - I was not "pounding my chest". In fact I find barnstars rather embarrassing - I do not seek praise for wiki quality control. To remove the barnstar might have been deemed offensive by DRosenbach who is clearly a useful editor who needs encouragement. But why don't you address your complaints to DRosenbach? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would say that DRosenbach and MLBTopProspect are having a conversation in parliamentary style using me as Speaker. Carry on, or talk to each other direct, I do not mind which. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

DragonSpell - deleted. Need text please
DragonSpell was my first Wikipedia article (I'm 11 years old... give me a bit of slack here please).

My article was deleted - I'm wondering if you could please send me the text so I can work on it offline and try to meet Wikipedia standards. -- Drakewarrior (talk) 03:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC) (see email address on my profile)

PS I worked hard on it.
 * And how do you expect me to send you the text? Read this! Before you re-post it: satisfy yourself that the subject is notable. Establish the context - if it is original fiction then we don't want it - if it is about a book then say what the book is, link to the article about the author and shorten your text; we do not like long plot summaries. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * On further examination... You may have your text by all means but I feel the subject is adequately covered here already. I recommend you to find something else to write about. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 04:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ridiculous quotes
The Ridiculous quotes came about because I created the page after searching for it. It was a mistake and I'm glad you've deleted the page.Delaszk (talk) 21:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Named Trains: Central America
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Named Trains: Central America, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Named Trains: Central America is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Named Trains: Central America, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 18:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

The George Hotel
Hello,

I am sorry about the name of the article. I did not even think about the other hotels and i will bear that in mind for future posts.

I have the copywrite for the information and so I can post the information onto Wikipedia.

Can you advise me on what to do to stop my work from being deleted again when i post the history on the hotel using text that I am allowed to use??

I look forward to your feedback

Craig Craig burns uk (talk) 03:02, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Did you actually read the above? How many George Hotels are there? Do you not think it rather arrogant to post the article to The George Hotel? What is the point of posting the same text when you have been told that it is a copyvio? — RHaworth (Talk