User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2009 July

Meqdim
I've posted article regarding Daily Ethiopia news group, www.dailyethiopia.com. It is owned and administered by my company meQdim.com. All the material posted on the site belongs to me or the authors, therefore, I request you kindly to give your permission for my pages on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meqdim (talk • contribs) 11:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for declaring your COI. I recommend that you follow this advice. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

your geo converter
Hello, my username in the german wikipedia is Kolossos and I working on geo-stuff there for a long time. I send you a mail, but perhaps you didn't get it. I believe we had contact a long time ago.

You published your geoconverter under GPL. My question is where can I found the source-code and is it real free?

We have in the german wikipedia in the moment a discussion why the reverse function in the geohack seems to have a little mistake (a displacement of 100 m in direction NWN).

And one of the wikipedians want to translate a long list of coordinates from uk-coord to wgs84. So for all of this the code could be usefull.

For questions of stability and security it would be perhaps better your script would also run on toolserver. There is a page where you can ask for an account: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Toolserver/New_accounts

Or if you want, I can publish the program there.

But perhaps it is also better to replace all oscoor Templates. The reason for this is that the faster extracting of geo informations for services like wiki-mini-atlas runs now over the external link table in the database which searching for "geohack". This is an important feature and UK shouldn't be a white area in such maps.

Greetings Kolossos (talk) 10:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like to add that the problem Kolossos is referring to has been discussed under Template talk:Oscoor. My idea is to implement the necessary datum shift both ways: from OSGB36 to WGS84 and back to OSGB36. The latter can be done inside the GeoHack (on the toolserver); we should find a way to realize the former. --Telford (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Oscoor reply
Sorry for the delay. If you call oscoor with no parameters you will see that it is licensed under the same terms as the geohack suite. You can read the source using this simple trick. (I find that the trick does not work under Internet Explorer 6. But that is Microsoft's fault – use a proper browser.)

If you look at the source, you will see that the conversion is done by a simple iterative technique calling LatLon2OSGB36 in transversemercator.php. I did that as temporary expedient to avoid having to convert my original javascript into php. But it works perfectly well so why not keep it? This means that coor will react automatically once LatLon2OSGB36 is corrected.

The code of coor is designed to include('geohack.php') so obviously it would be better to run it on the toolserver. Before I apply for an account, can you please point me to the source code for geohack, etc. - I found it once but have had difficulty finding it again.

You say "perhaps it is also better to replace all oscoor Templates". My responses are: a) I believe there is a bot which goes around and adds geohack calls to articles which use oscoor and b) OS grid refs are important enough, the bots which extract geo information should be taught to detect them and convert them.

I am logging calls to coor_g.php and this listing shows that after discounting search engines, the resource is receiving more than 1000 hits per day. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please have a look at de:Wikipedia Diskussion:WikiProjekt Georeferenzierung.BCr_den_GeoHack: I have written a function which does the necessary datum shift from WGS84 to the Airy ellipsoid used by OSGB36. If this function is called from within LatLon2OSGB36 before LatLonOrigin2TM is called, LatLon2OSGB36 will correctly transform latitude/longitude given for WGS84 to coordinates of the British national grid. We can ask Kolossos to do this for us. --Telford (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. Looks beautiful. Where do I get the source for the geohack suite? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * LatLon2OSGB36 and LatLonOrigin2TM can be found here: http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/wp-world/osgb36-source.php --Telford (talk) 05:12, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

advice on car park articles
Thanks for the tip on publishing on wikitravel. Shame no one else thought to suggest it instead of just deleting and redirecting them. Thanks again! — Stefanchou (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hope you are aware: a) nothing has been deleted – all your edits are available via [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Liverpool_John_Lennon_Airport_car_parking&action=history the history] (but you need to copy the Stanstead stuff – that may well get deleted), b) it was I who did the redirect. What is the connection between you and ? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 09:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Cower – copyright infringement
My apologies. I was involved in the Spirit Of The Game article and did not realize it had been copyrighted. That version needs some revisions and editing. Can you release the copy I had submitted to Wikipedia, or tell me how to get to that source, and I will rectify the submission. I have been getting feedback from my community with several suggested corrections and modifications. Thanks. — CharlieSchmidt (talk) 15:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The source is here. If you want the very light editing you applied to created the Wikipedia version, read this. But I hope you looked at Articles for deletion/Cower – despite the alleged antiquity, this has all the hallmarks of a recently invented game of the sort that we delete at the rate of about one a week – see the AfD discussions in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_for_things_made_up_one_day&limit=500&namespace=4 this list]. Do not even think about reposting until you have found multiple independent references to show that it is notable. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the detailed feedback. I would really appreciate an email copy of what I hastily submitted. I will follow the advice provided and resubmit once I have provided more substantial details documenting the history and popularity of this game. CharlieSchmidt (talk) 19:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Please Help
Having problem with some type of technicla bug on Alexia (acquired dyslexia) I have merged the two articles, and was editing the "Alexia (acquired dyslexia)" article trying to find some research papers to suppor the content etc, when a problem occurred with the "edit" functions of the first two sections of the article. These two "edit" function buttons have both moved dow the articles web page over the text of the third section. I have tried a few edits but nothing I can do seesm to remedy the situation.

Please can you have a go at sorting this out. Best wishes. — dolfrog (talk) 18:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is summick to do with the Dyslexia infobox – this version don't show the problem. Also, I only get it with Mozilla. Opera and Internet Explorer are OK. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I have just moved the "Classification and external resources" template to thw bottom og the article and the problems seem to be resolved but is the bottom of the article the right palce for that particlur template

dolfrog (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Beeston Regis Priory
I’m sorry Roger but I don’t appear to be talking about the same image here. The image:  that I uploaded is of the lined drawing artist impression of what the priory looked like. I had initially mistakenly been led to believe that a photograph File:St Mary's priory pond, Beeston regis 24 01 09 (4).JPG, of the priory pond, had been deleted.

I understand the reasoning for the deletion of the lined drawing, but I have tried to find an attribution of the line drawing that has been deleted but have been unable to do so. The image was a photograph of the information panel on the wall of the priory and has no copyright attribution on the panel. Does this not make it in the common domain as it sits on the wall for all to see *1*. — Stavros1 (talk) 15:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * *1* certainly not – give me time and I will think of a prime example. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Now 31
Would you be able to unlock Now That's What I Call Music! 73 (UK series). Apparently, a release date has been announced and pre-orders are being taken on Amazon. An article has already been created to get around this with Now That's What I Call Music! 73 (UK Series). Or, if preferred, just lock that one too. Thanks. --Wolfer68 (talk) 17:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 18:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Teaching method
came accross the article Teaching method which has a few problems, I have made a few changes which mayt help with the content, but I was wondering If you could checkout the technicla side, oit was a bit of mess, users not using the correct WIKI code to add their contributions. dolfrog (talk) 17:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well done for un-transcluding the Prussian method. That had been there for six months with no-one apparently noticing! I have done a bit of minor tarting-up – is there anything else that you think is needed? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. It does look beter now. Due to my disability I am a compulsive problem solver, althought the article is really not within my remit, it was ashame to have it spoilt by all that inappropriate History. I may want to link to it on the dyslexia project later in the management of dyslexia article.

dolfrog (talk) 22:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Malvern HIlls District
Thanks for fixing it – there are probably still a couple more lurking  out there from the days of  my original (now rapidly dwindling) enthusiasm to put some Wiki things on the right track quickly without investing  1,000s of hours in the manual first.

merge or redirect?
It appears that some members of the various geographical projects are at odds as to how the hierarchy of named places should be treated. When I first  launched into  this project, I was at first deeply  concerned at  the non notability of the many stubs of places that are often little more than the location  of a telephone box in a vast unpopulated wilderness. I have been since instructed, however, that it is established Wiki policy to  create a stub for every  place  that  has a name irregardless of political  or local  convention. I haven't been merging or redirecting anything yet – having met with  the gross incivility of some editors recently who  don't bother to  read what  they  tag, I wouldn't dare to. Anyway, I don't really care either way – I'll follow the consensus. It would probably therefore be best to continue this on the Worcestershire project talk page where it has already  begun at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Worcestershire

Malvern District CPs
According to the Worcestershire County Council web site, Longdon, Queenhill and Holdfast are indeed separate parishes. However, according to Malvern Hills District Council, they  constitute ONE parish: here,  and  here. However, a PDF map downloadable from here shows all the parishes and how they are grouped into  wards. According to the map Longdon, Queenhill and Holdfast are separate CPs. So as you can see, not  only  do  we have to  sort out the mess made by ourselves and other editors, we have to  sort  out the mess made by  the British local governments and/or their webmasters. I'll ask at the next Malvern council meeting... --Kudpung (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Aircraft engines
Thanks for that, it is what I wanted to achieve, but brain freeze took hold.Petebutt (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Damon delapaz
Hi RHaworth, I have removed the speedy deletion tag placed by you on this article. Please see my edit summaries for a rationale. If you have a question or comment do not hesitate to contact me. decltype (talk) 07:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

deleted article still around?
Hi RHaworth, I saw [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindukush_Kafir_people&diff=next&oldid=296079972 this edit], which seemed strange to me. According to Articles for deletion/Hindukush Kafir people, the article was supposed to have been deleted in 2007. Care to investigate? Thank, Drmies (talk) 15:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC) I asked you because I saw that you were online, really, and you're an admin. I didn't see a restoration and was not aware that BD2412 had done anything--there's nothing in the history that I could see. (That's the kind of information I don't know how to access--and maybe I can't, as a peon...) I'll drop BD a line. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure why you are asking me. BD2412's reason for [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Hindukush+Kafir+people restoring the article] is very vague so ask BD2412. If the reply is unsatisfactory, by all means create Articles for deletion/Hindukush Kafir people (2nd nomination). At a quick glance it would appear that the article may be a fork of Kata (people) or Nuristani people so there is probably some rationalisation needed. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually went in as an anon to check. You go to "history" then follow a link "View logs for this page". &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:25, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Right--I saw that too, right after my note here. Thanks again. Drmies (talk) 04:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Rugbymania
Hi on 25th March I have wroten you because I would to create a new page (Rugbymania). You wrote me that I needed some independent RSs. I found some on internet, but when I try to save the page I read that the spam filter blocked my page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink. I looked for here but i can't find these sites: [list deleted]

Can you help me? What do I ought to do? Thank you very much for your time and sorry for my English (I'm Italian).--Cenzin (talk) 17:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC) Ok thank you so much, I cant' understand why two sites are blocked but I found them.--Cenzin (talk) 23:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC) I have clothed the naked URLs and re-named "how to play" title...for the other part of the text I don't know where i can cut...it isn't a how to play, but only a description of the game (I don't write the right things to do, also because I don't want to present my experience :P ) but if you show me the wrong part I can change it. thanks again --Cenzin (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously not all of these are blocked by the spam filter. Working in User:Cenzin/sandbox, add the links a few at a time. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. Now: clothe those naked URLs as per [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ACenzin%2Fsandbox&diff=297814199&oldid=297811785 this edit]. Re-word that "how to play" heading which triggers an automatic "WIkipedia is not an how to guide" reaction in new page patrollers. Cut down the text by about 30% removing the worst how-to aspects. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 23:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

DevInfo
Your PROD rationale for the above artice: "non-notable until refs are provided", has no basis in Deletion policy. Please note that articles are deleted for lack of potential for improvement, not for being in a bad shape at present, or for being unsourced. I refer to WP:ATD for details. A quick Google search reveals that the system is rolled out in the UNICEF organisation; GScholar returns almost 400 hits; GBooks returns about 300 hits. I havent looked at them all, but a glance at the first pages clearly demonstrates notability. Please pay attention to WP:BEFORE before you send other editors scrambling for sources. Power.corrupts (talk) 18:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Erin
Not sure what you are talking about here could you explain please. BigDunc Talk 20:18, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I moved WikiProject Ireland Collaboration/Domer48's proposal for Ireland Article to WikiProject Ireland Collaboration/Domer48's proposal for Ireland Article. End of story. Was [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AWikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration%2FDomer48%27s_proposal_for_Ireland_Article&diff=297748463&oldid=297747563 this link] (which I added to Domer48's talk page) really insufficient to explain my action? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No but your comments that went along with it were completly uncalled for i'm sure you have read WP:AGF maybe you should read it again and be a lot less hostile in future another admin has already commented on your behaviour. BigDunc  Talk 12:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Please STOP moving images → Commons
The Commons does not have the templates to cope with high precision grid references. By all means, feel free to COPY images to the Commons, but please don't delete them from Wikipedia until a suitable template has been added. The descriptions, with the grid references, are as much of the image information as the colours contained within the images; they give the images context within the real world. So far, you've mucked up, and. I will consider any more moves as vandalism.--ML5 (talk) 09:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I am a bit dim but could you please explain to me the difference in precision between the geohack link in File:MonklandCanalFaskineBasin.JPG and the same in commons:File:MonklandCanalFaskineBasin.JPG? (Or if you prefer the horrible dms format, look at commons:File:MonklandCanalLowerFaskineBridge.JPG.) Please read WP:OWN. May I respectfully remind you that you have released your images into the PD; you have relinquished control over what Wikipedia does with them. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As you know, there is no difference between the files you've quoted as these have been transferred without conversion to insufficiently precise 6-figure National Grid coordinates. These two are fine. However, the three I quoted as examples still have the NG format – I will change these as you've now shown me how to do it. A brief note on Commons dms formatting would have been more appropriate than your high-handed comments. --ML5 (talk) 10:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Luther spells
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Luther spells, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please look at the edit histories. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ultimace deletion
Could you perhaps enlighten me as to precisely why Ultimace was deleted? I appropriately referenced my information, and it certainly has importance, since Ultimace is a modification of the original sport Ultimate, therefore there must exist people who may wish to clarify rules of play, etc. 81.135.120.253 (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "Created by two teenagers on the 27 June 2009". 'Nuff said! Get some notability first – your own website does not count. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

QD
Enhancement or quenching of QD, Q-wire and QW radiations. This article has three peer-ref sources! Yes, the article creator wont get an A+ in encyclopaedic writing style, but your harsh PROD of it as WP:OR is just plainly absurd, even assuming that your action is based on simple lack of understanding. I have posted several complaints in this regard, and I will soon take this to AN/I. Power.corrupts (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How many exactly is "several"? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Bavarian Pigeon Corps
I have found a report of a scientific experiment that casts doubt on whether pigeons could carry 70 grams. Please see Talk:Bavarian Pigeon Corps Albatross2147 (talk) 07:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Operation blackjack
Operation blackjack is also at User:Operation BlackJack2009. Username block? And of course user pages are indexed, I've seen them in the top 5 on Google, being obviously used for publicity. I searched this morning, by the way, and could find no evidence of notability. I was notified about it here User talk:Dougweller – I don't know why the editor notified me or exactly what they wanted. Dougweller (talk) 15:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Please unprotect the page "Owl City"
I believe that Owl City has enough credibility to have a page created. I work for his management company and have all the information and photos with sources needed for page creation. He has been signed to Universal Republic records and is due for a July release. -- Stglor (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for declaring your COI. We prefer you to wait until someone with no COI thinks the guy is notable. However, feel free to write a draft article at User:Stglor/sandbox and raise the matter at deletion review. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Please know that this page is going to be created for encyclopedic purposes, not for promotional purposes. All information for the page can now be seen on User:Stglor/sandbox for consideration. Stglor (talk) 21:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Susan Singleton
An article that you have been involved in editing, Susan Singleton, 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. Smartse (talk) 19:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

KdPhD
I noticed you put the redirect on his [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_toaster&redirect=no Super toaster] item earlier; when I went to patrol the page (I check Newpages once in a while, and I didn't know about the redirect edit at the time as I saw the article), I also placed the redirect. Turns out he edited out your redirect and replaced the article, possibly making another change with it (I noticed the difference in size between his own edits). Good thing you didn't mark it as Patrolled at the time, I did so in my turn and am keeping a watch on the page.

I went ahead and placed a kind note on his brand-spankin' new Talk page (turns out I created it). I just checked now and he hasn't edited the article since, so we'll see if he gets the message or whatever happens here. =) I did merge the item into the Toaster article, however, as he did reference his information at one spot.  CycloneGU (talk) 03:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, apart from the fact that there was nothing worth merging to toaster. Did you actually read the text or look at the image? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I did, though I didn't check the reference. I just thought at the time it might fit under High-tech toasters.  My expertise is music articles (check my edit history *LOL*).  Reading the text after, I realize that the last paragraph was cheap and non-encyclopedic, and the rest – really went above there NEway.  Super Toaster thus could just be any of the three in the high-tech list.  (Though I've learned something: there's a toaster that forecasts weather.  That's unique.)  CycloneGU (talk) 04:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Deprodding of Robocup rescue simulation
I have removed the tag from Robocup rescue simulation, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Cnilep (talk) 20:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Peerage hoax sock
From their common keenness on promoting Elliott James Dashwood, Marquess of Dorset to the peerage, it seems likely that is a block-evading sock of  who you blocked this morning. Is it worth making a formal SPI report, or will you just zap him? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Case proven in my view. Just zap. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Prod on Mahesh dilemma
I noticed that you placed a PROD on this after another [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahesh_dilemma&diff=299071482&oldid=299044248 PROD was removed by an IP], so rather than let this sit out there for another week and then find someone reject it for being a second PROD, I'm taking it to AfD right away. Thought I'd let you know, since I'm not really contesting the PROD. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Energy management
Prods on IT energy management and PC power management. The author of these articles had dePRODed them, on my advice (although he did not fully follow my advice, which included adding an edit summary to list his reasons for deprodding). He makes arguments on the articles' talk pages defending the articles. The articles, in their original form, were pretty much spam, but I had made some efforts at addressing that concern. I am not sure that I agree that the articles constitute original research in that the data are all backed up with sources (although the sources might not all be considiered reliable). If you still think the articles should be deleted (and I'm on the fence about the issue myself), I suggest an Afd discussion. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Prod on Paul Buggeman
You prod'd Paul Buggeman, which was actually a typo'd article name; I copied your prod to the successor article, Paul Bruggemans. A long-time active editor created and is working on it; I think it still reads like an advert and have tagged it so. I normally just wikignome sorting; I'm done here. Studerby (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't add dates
to tags I didn't put there in the first place.... Plus, the ones you cited I didn't even know were dated! Postcard Cathy (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Strange. I thought that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Order_of_the_Apostles_of_the_Last_Days&diff=299597519&oldid=299596678 this edit] was the addition of dates to tags which you had not applied in the first place. I must learn to read edit histories properly. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Prod
Just a little reminder to let the article creator know about a prod, re:Gerontological design. Fences &  Windows  22:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Obama article probation pages
Regarding your series of moves and deletions to the Obama article probation pages... I think we're either miscommunicating or you don't uunderstand what the objective is. I will admit that I'm not sure exactly how these pages are best organized. Making them all talk pages does not seem to be right way, for reasons I can explain in discussion. They are not all talk pages. The moves you made leave a mess, with broken links. That disrupts article probation given the nature of the pages, and the need for those notices to be up and available. There is no rush to get things perfect, and the harm to the pages being unavailable is worse than any harm from being in the wrong place. Under the circumstances I will recreate some links and pages to avoid disruption, not to edit war but to prevent disruption. I'll also note that your use of administrative tools to force your position (accompanied by what looks like scolding or a warning) despite my attempt to discuss, seems a bit much. I have also brought this matter to WP:AN for clarification. Please refrain from any action that would further mess up the navigation here, and let people figure out how best to organize this. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for your help on this. Per our discussion on WP:AN, I've moved these pages to be subpages under WP:General sanctions and adjusted all of the internal links, talk pages, links on the general sanctions pages, archive locations, etc.  I hope I haven't left anything stranded.  Anyway, please go ahead and feel free to delete all of the redirects under Barack Obama *and* the redirects under Talk:Barack Obama pertaining to article probation, except the single redirect from the original location Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation, which should remain as a redirect to General sanctions/Obama article probation.  That's the location where the page sat for 1+ years, and where most of the wikilinks currently point.  All the other locations and redirects only stood for a few days so there's unlikely to be anything pointing to them... except an old "Incidents" and another "Archive" page that I don't think anyone links to, and are now archive pages under general sanctions.  One final request.  I moved the content that had been at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation discussion to General sanctions/Obama article probation, but I could not actually move the page over a direct so I did it as a cut-and-paste.  That's the original main page, and it would be helpful to keep the history.  So if you could find a way, please move the history there.  I hope that's all clear, and thanks again for the help.  Wikidemon (talk) 20:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Worcestershire Project articles
Thanks for fixing my  error. I didn't intentionally recreate it; I was editing a section  of of it  when you  made the fix. I didn't realise anyone would respond to  my  call  for help  so  fast  and continued working  on  the page. I've saved my section edits locally and will be able to  update the page you  fixed. Thanks again :)--Kudpung (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Toolserveraccount
Hello RHaworth,

please send your real-name, your wikiname, your Freenode-nick (if you have one), your prefered login-name and the public part of your ssh-key to. We plan to create your account soon then. --DaB. 16:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Longdon, Holdfast and Queenhill
I now have written confirmation from two councillors that Longdon, Hofdfast and Queenhill is the official name of the civil parish that includes these villages. It is true that the various council websites are not clear on this.--Kudpung (talk) 03:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Onehen
Hi, just to let you know, I removed that db tag you put on Onehen a few days ago. The article seems to have been improved so that now, it definitely doesn't look like an A7 to me, as there are links to TV news stories about the organization and its founder. I'm not sure it would survive a notability discussion on AfD, but it's better than CSD:A7 now... Anyway, just wanted to let you know. -- Deville (Talk) 17:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

PlanningPME
hello,

you have put "subst:prod|non-notable software" on PlanningPME but user "194.2.189.252" removed it... seems that he doesn't want to argument the deletion of his page...

I would have voteed to keep the page but, now... -- RonanKER (talk) 14:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

incivility
Thanks, RH, for catching my typo. There is an on-going discussion at WP:Civility/Poll that you, as a veteran editor may be interested in.--Buster7 (talk) 22:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

New thread

 * You still don't get it! Why do you insist on using external format: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_a_Champion_Foundation instead of internal format: Heart of a Champion Foundation for links? I saw your edit summary: the wikipages of … have been linked to Heart of a Champion Foundation. Have a look at special:whatlinkshere/Heart of a Champion Foundation. There are just three links from the (article) namespace, and who created those three links? I did! &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Roger I see your point. I've been working quickly (no excuse) and now understand. Can you help me with the edits for the Heart of a Champion Foundation that will make it not in accordance for deletion? --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, I've seen other pages that are filled with phone numbers, as well as blatant links to commercial websites. This is another reason I believe my page to not be a COI. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I have edited the Heart of a Champion Foundationn page to comply to the internal link policy. Thank you. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Forward From: "Roger"


 * Why on earth don't you use my user talk page? Make sure you create links to the article/s you are talking about and sign your message. As it is, I am not even going to bother to think who you are.

Roger

Thanks for the tip, I will use your talk page from now on. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

PistolP23

 * You still don't get it! Why do you insist on using external format: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_a_Champion_Foundation instead of internal format: Heart of a Champion Foundation for links? I saw your edit summary: the wikipages of … have been linked to Heart of a Champion Foundation. Have a look at special:whatlinkshere/Heart of a Champion Foundation. There are just three links from the (article) namespace, and who created those three links? I did! &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Roger I see your point. I've been working quickly (no excuse) and now understand. Can you help me with the edits for the Heart of a Champion Foundation that will make it not in accordance for deletion? --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, I've seen other pages that are filled with phone numbers, as well as blatant links to commercial websites. This is another reason I believe my page to not be a COI. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I have edited the Heart of a Champion Foundationn page to comply to the internal link policy. Thank you. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Forward From: "Roger"


 * Why on earth don't you use my user talk page? Make sure you create links to the article/s you are talking about and sign your message. As it is, I am not even going to bother to think who you are.

Roger

Thanks for the tip, I will use your talk page from now on. --PistolP23 (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Help you? You're having a laugh aintcher? I sent the article to AfD. You have got to add links to show the subject is notable – do you expect me to find these links for you? "Filled with phone numbers" – which pages – I will zap the phone numbers asap. "Links to commercial websites" are perfectly acceptable if the company linked to is deemed to be notable. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Roger -

I have added links to show that the subject is notable. When you have a moment please see the reference list for Heart of a Champion Foundation. You will find the links prove verifiable evidence of Notability --PistolP23 (talk) 04:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Dyslexia: Orthography article
Hi,, RHaworth.

Would you mind taking another look at the Dyslexia: Orthography article? It needs more work, of course, but I'm wondering if you agree that my changes have helped it move in the right direction.

Also, what would you think about the article title "Orthographic complexity and dyslexia"?

Thanks,

Rosmoran (talk) 23:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi RH

I like the name change it is an improvement

another technical issue, re name article templates to be more logical, some side bar templates which work mainly inside a WIKI project or related articles use the main articles name leaving out the sidebar qualification, which in turn prevents any Navbox from using the same name which would be used on a much wider scale around the more general WIKI environment. In particular I am looking at the linguistics templates as the side bar used on Linguistics and the "See Also" content of that article which I have attempted to include in a new NAVBOX (in progress) User:Dolfrog/Sandbox contents section 6.1.2, any advice as usual will be greatfully received dolfrog (talk) 11:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Samuel Purdey
Hello RHaworth, hope you are enjoying sunny Croydon.

Back in January we exchanged some communication regarding an article I tried to submit for the group Samuel Purdey. Since its deletion, the content has been living over at User:Rolluprob/Samuel Purdey

I've been reading over the article Wikipedia:Notability_(music) and am wondering now if the band does indeed pass at least one of the criteria for inclusion. These are:

No. 2 – There have been several singles (as mentioned in the article) that charted in the top ten of Japanese music charts.

No. 6 – The lead singer – Gavin Dodds was also a member of Jamiroquai and Spacemonkeyz (both featured on Wikipedia and mention his name as a member).

No. 10 – The band have indeed appeared on several compilation albums.

No. 11 – With regard to the Japanese coverage – their most recent airplay success (Whatever I Do) from January of this year – would have had considerable "rotation" in order to achieve this.

I understand that the band only need to meet one of the criteria, and it would appear that criteria No. 6 is met without doubt.

Therefore, could you please advise if I may now try to submit a page proper?

Thanks, and best wishes, Robert

Rolluprob (talk) 11:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Neo-purpose
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Neo-purpose, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable proto-neologism

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Guy A. Richard


The article The Honourable Guy A. Richard B.A., B.C.L., LL.D. has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A very long redirect possibly created by someone with a conflict of interest. Unlikely that anyone would look for this name

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 20:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

About Test Cricket Bowling Cricket Records
If you are a fan of cricket then you know how difficult it is to sum up even important facts and records (leave aside all records) related to Test Cricket in a single page. A single page can't do justice to team records as well as individual records, batting records as well as bowling records and fielding records, captaincy records, wicket-keeping records etc and the list goes on. So I just want to dedicate one single page to bowling records, one single page to batting records and so on... U can see for yourself that the bowling record section on the current record page doesn't even mention these important facts. While similar/analogous data for batting has been mentioned. I have all these facts related to Test bowling ready with me. so please let me proceed. Reply Soon. Regards. Snigdh. Snigdh.Chandra (talk) 08:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Most Career Wicket – Progression of Record
 * Most No. of 5 wickets/innings
 * Most No. of 10 wickets/match
 * Most No. of maiden overs in career
 * Most No. of duck dismissals by a bowler
 * Most No. of wickets through caught & bowled, stumped, LBW, etc.
 * Facts related to hat-tricks
 * We do not duplicate information. Add your new stuff to List of Test cricket records and suggest at Talk:List of Test cricket records that it might be an idea to split the article. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your editions to my page Transliteration of Libyan placenames--Maher A. A. Abdussalam (talk) 00:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Foreign language document
On the page United States Constitution, I post links to translations of the Constitution in foreign languages.

1. I have translations of the U.S. Constitution in Finnish and Georgian. These are not on Wikipedia. I have them at home. I want to post these to the English Wikipedia; the point of my effort is to let English speakers know that there are translations of the Constitution available in foreign languages. How do I upload the translations without violating Wikipedia rules?

2. In April I uploaded a version of the Constitution in Vietnamese. The version has an introduction in English, describing what it is, its source, and permission for use. The translation was moved. I was advised to post to the Vietnamese version of Wikipedia. I do not speak Vietnamese. What can I do, within Wikipedia rules, to upload the text so that it is accessible to English speakers?

The overall question is: How do I get this information to the English-speaking public via Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadcaster101 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Assuming that these translations are in the public domain, you post them to the appropriate Wikisource for their languages. Then you create links to them in United States Constitution. Is that too difficult for you? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it might be too difficult, might not. I have not tried it yet. For example, should I try to post something on the Finnish Wikisource, although I do not speak Finnish? Broadcaster101 (talk) 00:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC) Gave it a try in the Vietnamese version of Wikisource. It worked. I was able to figure out what words meant "upload files" in Vietnamese. Finnish, however, is another story. Opened a lot of links, no luck. Is there some way to locate "upload files" in Finnish Wikisource? Broadcaster101 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC).
 * Try it. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple answer: using upload is wrong anyway – read this note. For Finnish, first set you language preference to English (obviously) then click "special pages" and "upload file" – but do not use it ! Create an article.
 * Regarding Georgian, it would be an insult to more than a thousand years of Georgian literary history to start the Georgian Wikisource with a translation of the constitution of some recently created, upstart country. Publish that translation on your own website and link to it from the article here.
 * You should also re post [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=upload&user=Broadcaster101 these four PDFs] as proper articles in the appropriate Wikisources. Then mark the PDFs for deletion. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 15:36, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Many of these translations do not exist in Word, and several were done before word processing began. The Swedish translation, for example, dates from 1921. The image is a PDF file which was made from a paper copy which was made from a microfiche of the original. I can put the PDF file on the Swedish Wikisource. The rarity and inaccessibility of such translations are part of what give Wikipedia its value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadcaster101 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and delete the pdf of the Vietnamese translation. I am going to have to learn how to do this, but it is clearly going to take a while. Broadcaster101 (talk) 06:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Bascule Bridge
A similar problem with Bascule Bridge as with Railway Bridge. Have a look at the hatnote. Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\Work 19:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't tell me – fix it! &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 22:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Pershore College
Hi ! An article you have created, contributed to,  edited,  or commented on has been proposed for merging. Please see the discussion at  Talk:Pershore College,  and leave your comments there. Thanks.--Kudpung (talk) 10:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletions
I notice you are on deletion patrol tonight for bad articles (via CSD). Could you take a look at the articles made by this editor, this editor and this editor. I have tagged them for deletion as advertising and nonsense respectively. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • 06:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Why bother to tell me? You have tagged them as speedy. You only need my assistance if the authors start removing speedy tags or playing similar tricks. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I noticed you were deleting and to be honest, I just wanted them to get deleted quick, so I could go to bed :) Being a little selfish on my part.  I like clearing things up before heading off for the night.  That was the only reason.  Many thanks on knocking those out so quickly.  Take Care... NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • 06:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

dePRODing of articles
Hello RHaworth, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD templates you added to a number of articles were removed:
 * PROD removed from Chartered Life Underwriter, by User:Kevinwenke, with summary '(no edit summary)'
 * PROD removed from Fox-at-Twilight, by User:Jclemens, with summary '(Decline Prod, asserts notability through inclusion in multiple fictional works)'

Please consider discussing your concerns with the relevant users before pursuing deletion further. If you still think the articles should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may send them to WP:AfD for community discussion. Thank you – SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Prodding
Another reminder that it is courteous to let article creators and other significant contributors know about a prod, e.g. Camp Bestival. In this case I readily found a lot of sources. Fences &  Windows  22:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

p.s. Holistic wedding planning. Oh. My. God. What a terrible article. Fences &  Windows  00:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)