wikify! I am sick and fed up with people who leave a message here about an article and fail to provide a wikilink to the article. How do you expect me to read the article if you don't link to it? I reserve the right to ignore any message which does not provide links where appropriate or has not been signed with ~~~~. Even if the article has been deleted, you should still link to it. And if that sounds like a grumpy old man, it's because I am ...
This is an archive of past discussions with User:RHaworth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Wikipedia frowns very strongly on people writing about themselves - see WP:SPAM, WP:VAIN and WP:VSCA. I agree with this and almost as a reflex action, tag any case of people writing about themselves. Even Uncle Sam is not above getting my treatment - see GovBenefits.gov! Yours does not make me angry like some blatant ads here do but I will put it through AfD so we can see what other people think. -- RHaworth07:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
So the problems are a) that some of the text does not look neutral, b) the user name is similar to the article name?--Upaplc08:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarity. Most of the edits are in my specialist area which is powerline communication, so it is natural that they are in the same area as UPA. Most of my edits have been to correct NPOV issues related to this equating "HomePlug" (trade organisation) with Power line communications (technology), for this reason I introduced the mention of the alternative group UPA. You will see that there have also been non-UPA related improvements to the Powerline Communication pages. Can you point me to some guide-lines on "single purpose account".
At the moment I can see how to fix all the issues except the issue b) "user-name similar to article name", how do you suggest I move forward there?--Upaplc08:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Whilst I would like to thank A. B. for taking the time to look at these issues I have added some comments to reflect my point of view on these issues.--Upaplc19:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Smile!
Hi,
Thank you for taking time to comment on the Talk:KaosPilots_International page -I have also read your "Google this" page and will do so starting now. I've edited the KaosPilots International page and the KaosPilot page, and hopefully they both now conform to wikipedia standards. If not, let me know and I will do what I can!
EspenSivertsen has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
I definitely think you cannot justify two articles. Merge into KaosPilots International with a redirect from KaosPilot. Be aware that there is a Norwegian band called Kaospilot - some disambiguation should be put in.
I think they still sound like advert / vanity but I will make the following offer: I will not submit these articles to AfD providing that for each article you add at least two categories and create at least three incoming links. Your articles are at present "orphans". Creating links will mean that people who watch the other articles will notice and look at your articles. -- RHaworth08:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Chhavi Sharma
Hello, I noticed that you deleted my article Chhavi Sharma. Ms. Sharma is a popular architect who is working for the poor and social welfare also. I was about to expand the article and found that it was gone. Please review the decision. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anupamjain008 (talk • contribs)
There never has been an article with this title. Chhavi sharma was deleted because it was a classic {{nn-bio}} - no assertion of notability. We new page patrollers have a very short attention span: if you have not managed to assert notability in the first two sentences, we give up. If you re-write the article at user:Anupamjain008/sandbox you can take it to deletion review. Can I take it that Chhavi is your girlfriend [1]? -- RHaworth18:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Peformance Artist and show
Hello, I noticed that you deleted my article Ms Divine and Ms. Divine's Tee Hee Heure
Ms. Divine is a performance artist who has been involved in the theatre arts for a very long time. You can view the external links to see that she actually does exist.
I noticed also that among on of the things that she did, her local show was also vandalized and deleted as not notable.
Public Access TV is a legitimate media that carries a wide variety of programs.
Many of these shows have a wide audience. This particular program Ms. Divine's Tee Hee Heure has been running for many years.
Many users want to learn more about her and her show, that is why I have decided to do an entry for the artist.
Hello Mr Haworth, I am the author of Musical Stones of Skiddaw. Great to hear you grew in Kendal (I was born and bred there myself and still live there) I hope that I have done all you instructed me to in order to get the entry published; I've added info to images, tagged myself as the author and made loads of links in the text. I would be grateful if could you check it for me. Best wishes Jamie Barnes JJ-Barnes12:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello again. I just like to say thank you for your guidance, as the stones entry has now been published by Wiki. Best Wishes JJ-Barnes22:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC) Oh - and the ears you asked about in the picture you linked to, they belong to a stuffed fox, pretty cool ay?
GB/UK
Hi, you changed UK to GB on the commons template {{Oscoor}}. I don't mind, but it makes me curious what the definition is here. I tried to read up on British Isles (terminology). Does your edit refer to the Ordnance Survey or to the grid? Surely the O.S. is a national agency for all UK and not only for GB? Is the grid served by the Oscoor (and Gbmapping) templates only applicable to one island (GB) and not to Ulster or the Channel islands? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LA2 (talk • contribs)
The edit refers to both the Ordnance Survey and the grid. Please read British national grid reference system and Irish national grid reference system. There is one grid for Great Britain and another for the island of Ireland. It has been on my todo list for over a year to change the resource which oscoor calls to accept Irish grid refs as well but I am still waiting for the round tuit. As you can see from the maps, the Isle of Man lies within the GB grid; the Channel Islands lie outside both. Have a look at (vanity link! to) geograph which is collecting photos using both grids. -- RHaworth20:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I am pleased to present you with this Round Tuit. I saw you were lacking one, and feel it is only fair to provide you with one. I would love Ireland to be incorporated too. :) Fiddle Faddle10:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Done. But oh dear, we have lost support for region:GB and thus have lost links to the really useful stuff such as old-maps and geograph. Come back egil - all is forgiven. -- RHaworth08:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
We can't about an article, and if someone chooses to link out, then that is a choice. Wikipedia does allow HTML FYI. The website it linked to was not Commercial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cxi105 (talk • contribs)
I deleted it because it was a crude {{copyvio}} from http://www.fogster.com/listing.php?id=100045 . Also it was written in an hopelessly unencyclopedic tone which led me to believe that you were a representative of Gulf Harbour and were trying to advertise here. Same probably goes for anything else of yours that has been deleted. -- RHaworth09:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Haworth,
Congratulations on finding my Fogster posting. It is also copied directly from
http://www.MrSWFL.com/GulfHarbour and then I added HTML references to link back there. It is a source to tell people about a neighborhood that I live in. What is commercial about that.
Since you are the apparent self appointed authority of Wikipedia, would it be possible for you to make a suggestion of how you would like it worded. *1*
In my years of problem solving, it is easy to tell people what needs to be fixed, but it is a little harded to try to educate them as to how to fix it.
Any suggestions?
I am curious though...if it follows your rules, what if a posting does not follow someone else's? *2* —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cxi105 (talk • contribs)
*1* You seem to have absolutely no sense of English style - is English your native language? An article which contains amazing ... premier ... true destination, whether it be your home or your home away from home within its first paragraph is not exactly encyclopedia material is it? Now read this carefully, I will say it only once: find at least two Wikipedia articles about places such as Gulf Harbour; make sure that each article has been edited by at least two different people; read them carefully noting in particular their style and tone. Now re-write the Gulf Harbour article, in your own words and in the same style. Is that difficult?
*2* If a posting does not follow someone else's rules then that someone else can put it through one of the many deletion paths available here. -- RHaworth00:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, English is my native language. You just seem to be too stuck in your own rules and ways of thinking to ever really understand why others do things or see things different from your perspective. This is unfortunate in your case, because you are probably past an age of change. Being open to new ideas is what shaped the world we live in...from Columbus "knowing" the world was round, or Ford having the idea of the assembly line, or even Space travel. Perhaps those are far reaching examples, but it is clear that you are stuck in your ways, and it is doubtful that will change. 3 books that may help open your perspective: Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, The Traveler's Gift by Andy Andrews, and Rich Dad Poor Dad by Robert T. Kiyosaki. Each offers some fresh ways to look at new things, inspire confidence, and have lessons that can be extrapolate into other areas of life. I would say that I highly suggest them, but that would not matter to you, but scores of others suggest them as well.
The truly wise realize how little they understand!
Since you are the wikipedia maestro I will surely take your words of wisdom into account when writing any future articles. I will model entries after others I read, and hope it does not cause Narcolepsy in readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cxi105 (talk • contribs)
Just wanted to apologise. Of course Im not fussed if it stays or goes - certainly we dont want to encourage users create work-in-progress pseudo-articles that have 7 worthless rows of exact text (good call on that!)... but, as it was only created a few hours ago I thought I'd AGF. When I saw it was you that in fact tagged it I was surprised - as Im not sure Ive ever seen a sysop tag an article - after all the tag is somewhat foreshadowed by your special ability to do the speediest speedy delete of all! :) In hindsight, if you concur I'll move it to the creators userspace (where it should be anyway) and delete. Thoughts? This was a rather longwinded apology for the mix up, so in short; sorry once again! Glen05:18, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
No it looks fine now - I assume it is "notable". I very rarely delete articles on my own initiative. I feel very strongly that even speedy deletions require two people: a user to propose it and an admin to agree and execute it. Since no-one had touched the article, I put myself into "user" mode to propose deletion. -- RHaworth05:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
ganganic philosophy
Dear Mr. Haworth,
I'm asking you why you deleted my contribution about ganganic philosophy. At www.gangan.org you can see that the ganganic comunity is starting, now we are more than 200, I can ask all our members to write you.
Please don't consider non sense our movement, we have alredy many intellectuals, also on donwload.com you can find our music. Also Vauro, one of the biggest caroonists in Italy made a drawing for us.
Please consider my opinion and undelete my article.
I think that everyone can have its own opinion, my I think has a sense, like your.
You can contact me directly at marko@gangan.org.
To delete Ganganic philosophy as "nonsense" was, I admit, a bit dismissive. Thank you for giving me better grounds for deletion: a) non-notable - a community of 200 people is unlikely to be notable, b) pure vanity - you invented it, c) unverifiable - no references were provided to "peer reviews" of your philosophy. My advice, as always, is wait: when ganganism becomes notable, someone else will write about it here. But if you really want to be humiliated, you can take the article to deletion review. If you want people to look at your website, provide a link: www.gangan.org is not a link, http://www.rhaworth.net/ is a link. -- RHaworth18:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Kind regards, RHaworth
thanks for your senior teaching, I apreciate it. Phrase You suffer of mania of omnipotence has a link, correct? "You are my preferred Nero" reffer to a wikipedia entry, it's also correct?
Sorry if I did't made a correct link, I'm new and just starting learning wikipedia tags and source code. --Maestro gangan08:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:David Mumford (TV executive). Then you should do one of the following:
Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:David Mumford (TV executive) where we can find that note; or
Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL.
Wrong guy - I was the one who tagged it as copyvio. Since it is also gross vanity, I don't think the creator should be encouraged to re-create it. -- RHaworth23:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Right--sorry about that. I got confused because I remembered your name from your post on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Poster claims permission about the Dr. Bill Wilson (Rice University) article. With reference to that article, could you please prove that you are the author, and are thus authorized to release the material under the GFDL, through one of the steps described above--emailing permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org or posting a statement to that effect on the site where the article was originally posted? Thanks, --RobthTalk19:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
You also need to point out somewhere that even though a Wikipedia article may have an Indian subject, it is the law applicable to Florida that governs copyright/fair use considerations for that article.
Hi, I've contested your prod on this article. For me, it meets WP:BIO. I have contested a speedy on this one as well and have explained myself here. You are free to nominate this in AFD if you'd like. Thanks and happy editing! zephyr2k03:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The Action Design
Mr Raworth, you deleted The Action Design article within hours, before the band's community had any chance to fill it with relevant information! This is the new band from former members of Tsunami Bomb (Emily Whitehurst and Matt McKenzie), which may mean nothing to you but I can assure you this is not an 'unremarkable group' or vanity page.
And were the community going to discover that the band has actually produced more than a self-titled EP or were they going to provide links to something other than the band's own websites? Take it to deletion review by all means. -- RHaworth06:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The band does pass WP:MUSIC ('Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable'). A groups' official site and myspace profile are very relevant external links included on most band entries. I have no interest in taking this to deletion review, I was simply attempting to contribute to wikipedia's excellent music coverage - your condescending tone is not appreciated.--Nathan-8206:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The IP is indefinitely banned user JB196(talk·contribs·block log) who is just causing trouble on the talk pages because he can no longer spam templates on the articles. It's how the talk page got locked in the first places. –– Lid(Talk)07:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
1. The look and feel was of an essay. There are no references. I dislike any article that springs into existence at this size - I like to see Wikipedia articles appear by colaborative growth.
2. That is correct. See deletion log. I deleted the article because it looked very much like spam - created by user:FleshJoe. I then found that FleshJoe's version was not much different from the version which survived Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fleshlight. But I limited my restore to the edits I had deleted.
3. Try Laburnum Grove and Laburnum Gardens, N21. Laburnum Grove is a stage play by J. B. Priestley (made into a movie in 1936 by the great Carol Reed). The London suburb in which it is set is not named but Winchmore Hill would fit perfectly.
1. Oh. I agree about references, but less about the other bit.
2. Ah. Perhaps I'll restore the rest of the history.
3. Didn't think of that, Laburnum Grove was the other side of the world when I remember the phone being answered "Laburnum nnnn". I only recently realised that the number changed from 522, I thought it was 363 since time immemorial. I'll make enquiries about when Lanburnum Grove and Gardens were built. Thanks. RichFarmbrough, 12:13 13 October2006 (GMT).
I know you have a minor interest in it, so I am inviting you to have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject King George's Fields. I'm not expecting you to join, I know you add what you can when you can. I simply thought you might be interested in taking a look. Of course thsi is very much in embryo stages today. Fiddle Faddle18:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
oops....sorry for the grave error
I was in a hurry that i edited that Tata Administrative Service (now, i have got the spelling right!! *1*) page. I should have checked it again. I shall be more careful now on before starting a page.sriks803:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't realized that that page saved. It was an editing screwup on my part. I didn't mean to even create the archive. Ramsquire22:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Velupillai Prabhakaran
Dear Roger, you might want to go through the history of that page to understand what I literally mean, when I say 'vandalism'. Pls refer to Velupillai Prabhakaran, the talk page and the article history and also the points being made there.
While every effort is being made to ensure that the other version stays as it is, why is effort to balance this article, inspite of several edits being negated due to mass reverts? That's my whole point!! Why is a pro-Sinhala mafia thwarting every attempt to balance this article, inspite of several cited reasons behind Alred Durairaj, Child killer mentions, it always reverts back to the original Anti-Tamil, Pro-Sinhala version. I put up the vandalized tag to clearly suggest that every effort made to ensure NPOV is being negated. Any suggestions??
In the [talk page], I have cited reasons for the need for intervention.
Do you mean that by opening an account on Wikipedia I must be prepared to things like you breaking into my kitchen and insulting me just for not being a wiki-zombie *1*?
Actually I just don't care how upset you can turn people like me trying to be constructive and getting personnaly offending comments, and I don't care about how you get them to apologize when you offend them.
You're not that grumpy old man ([3]), you're a really unpleasant and arrogant old man.
*1* In a word: yes. You were warned if you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly … do not submit it. I would extend that to say or criticised mercilessly. In any case I think I have been perfectly merciful. -- RHaworth18:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I'm sorry you're so condescendent that you think you are to be mercyful, but the debate is not on your level of mercy or auto wanking neitheir the quality of the entry witch I've proven ready to discuss but, as long as you don't insult me in the first place. Your 'mercifulness' is only arrogance, you've only been a perfect scum. User:OXoMoXo09:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I created the "Controversies" article without the "/" to make functional all the links linking the discussed new main article (see Talk:11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings/Atelier) with the "Controversies" article.
To be honest it was your strange comment "this is an orphan page". A) it was not an orphan - orphan means an article with no incoming links and B) we do not necassarily create an article because there are links to that title - it may be more appropriate to change the links as I did! Now if the reason for moving is that "there is now a consenus that this article has an NPOV and therefore belongs in the (Main) namespace", then by all means move it! I strongly recommend you to leave it where it is until somone else moves it - this will assure us that you are not the only person who feels there should be a separate article. -- RHaworth18:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
OK, we will change the links in due time (when a consensus is reached) if that´s the usual procedure. It was not a "talk page" at all, but an atelier to discuss changes on a hotly disputed issue. Thak you.Randroide19:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
You (or someone else) deleted the Rory Dransfield article and created the above redirects. As you can tell by the red-link, Rory Dransfield was deleted, but the protected redirects are still in place. If you could delete the two broken redirects I placed in the heading, that would most kind. Regards — Moe16:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Just trying desperately to reach someone but not sure how. Definitely not SPAM - hate the stuff. Need help re above article. Puzzled why he doesn't qualify - I'm not Mike, I'm writing about him. Made some errors last week talked with Alphachimp and was told after reading article Mike is qualified. Need help please
Hi RHaworth, hope you don't mind if I stick my nose in here, but if you don't have time to work with this, I'd by happy to help Mjwonbat during the learning curve. Mike Jackson is a rather notable person in Oz, it's just a matter of an article being written properly and meeting the criteria. I've helped other newbies do this, and I'd be happy to spend some time with this article, too. If you'd like, I can offer some sandbox space to draft it and have you peruse it before going live, just to make sure we don't trespass on the deleted material recreation grounds. Akradecki16:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Akradecki, Hi RHaworth,
I was beginning to wonder if Wiki was a subtle form of torture! Hours of getting nowhere I was becoming very despondent.
From what I can gather Wikipedia needs the likes of you to deal with the ratbags RH so thanks for being there. With your approval, I’d really appreciate Akra’s nose to get this article properly edited – I’d no idea it was so complicated. As for commercialism the article could be written without mentioning Mike’s current catalogue and would still be appropriate.
As Akra says, Mike ‘is a rather notable person’ here in the Land of Oz. And oh boy do I need help with Wikipedia. I’m used to Apple OS so not very flash at entering the various bits of code. What I’ve achieved so far has been done resorting to a lot of cut and paste borrowing!
Mjwombat, you have got Mike's platinum and gold disks, so who are you if you are not Mike Jackson? But I accept that Akra is not Mike Jackson. So as long as Akra is there to chop out the vanity and confirm that you are notable, I am satisfied. Do you want the deleted text or have you kept an off line copy? -- RHaworth06:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Cool it man. What I always say to people who have put a lot of work into articles, and I am sure that you have, is: take it to your own website. However in this case it may not be necessary. I have even found the precedent for you! - see Wikipedia:Candidates and elections. At least you are not creating loads of candidate bios. I am not sure whether you should even be creating links to all of them - have you checked how many false links you are creating? -- RHaworth09:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, it would have been polite to message me, given I wrote the article only 2 hours earlier.
Secondly, I disagree with your premise. In a number of articles on international conventions in Wikipedia we include the entire English text of the convention. This is so that related articles can link to it. But if you do insist that it can be cut out and replaced by a link, then for goodness sake put a link in! Don't leave the article naked.
Thirdly, if you are going to hack large amounts of text out, please at least be good enough to leave the categories at the end of the article. Don't let your deleting zeal get too carried away....
If you have typed it in, this suggests that it does not already exist on the web. In that case, if the copyright situation permits it, you can put the text up at Wikisource. Secondly - let's have examples of articles with the entire text. I did not put a link in because I did not know one - I was expecting you to supply it. Sorry about the cat. -- RHaworth12:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Rowenlemming
I'm sorry, I didn't understand the message you left on my talk page, are you suggesting that this user shouldn't be welcomed? What did you mean by saying "pushed gently towards his own wiki"? Did you mean he should be pushed to make a L2RevengeMarket wiki? If so, he should probably know the basics of Wikipedia first. Michaelas10 (T|C) 19:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that is exactly what I meant. In same way that a good-faith copyviolator gets a {{nothanks}} message, so this guy need to be pushed elsewhere. Why does he need to learn anything about Wikipedia? I think the present state of his contributions confirm that I was right.
You also welcomed Sjclemmer a blatant and unrepentant spammer.
But carry on welcoming: I always claim that I don't bite newbies but I will admit to growling at them rather more than I should. -- RHaworth07:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
I deleted it because user:AussieWiki2006 had tagged it {{db-spam}}. user:Raghublr who had created the article, a) had a very limited edit history - suggesting a spam artist and b) had edited the article with the db-spam tag in place and had not added hangon. I accept that it is a marginal case, you may well receive a sympathetic response at deletion review. -- RHaworth18:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Further comments : I have a few comments that might help in new users making more contribution. First of all, it is untrue that the hangon tag was not added. I had added the hangon tag where I also had asked not to remove the page and had suggested why the page shouldn't be removed. May be I didn't do the hangon tag stuff right simply because I have limited experience in editing pages. I strongly object to your theory "User had a very limited edit history - suggesting a spam artist". We all start somewhere - you were a newcomer one day! Before adding pages to the Wikipedia, I had seen someplace that newcomers are welcome and will be treated well. If you strongly believe that a page has violations, then I think that you should at least communicate with the user and seek an explanation. Also the world works across different time zones and this should be taken into consideration when expecting a response - my few cents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghublr (talk • contribs)
The instructions could not have been clearer: after adding: {{hangon}} to the top of the article. (OK, you did put the hangon on the talk page.) Communicate with the user and seek an explanation - we were communicating, via the article, edit summaries and the talk page. Don't see what time zones have to do with it - you gave a response, we chose to do differently. Strictly speaking, I could delete the article as a repost and insist you go to deletion review, but I have decided to overlook that matter. (But obviously we don't need the cookery book details about how to install it.) -- RHaworth06:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Watir you on about?
Why was the Watir Extension Toolkit's how to removed?
I am a new user and have been trying to edit some pages regarding WET, an opensource tool. I was following Watir's example (Watir is the underlying library that WET uses). As all opensource developers I get to do this in my free time and was editing the page trying to Wikify it - so i will be doing it in parts - I did a bit and was continuing with it. Now you have removed the 'how to' part. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghublr (talk • contribs)
Please learn to sign talk page comments. Did you read my note about cookery book details above? Have you read 4. Instruction manuals? The Watir article is terrible - far too much an how-to guide - do not take it as an example. -- RHaworth07:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
WatirExtensionToolkit - Is it possible to give an example of a good article?
I will go through the sections of instruction manual. Could you give me an example of a good article (if possible, in an area related to software testing). As I mentioned, I am a new user and am still getting used to the rules of the game. --Raghu Venkataramana07:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Why not keep this thread together? Actually I would say that the present state is a very good article! You have cut out advertising crap such as a Beginner can directly jump into the world of test automation which was in the first version. The present version needs an external link to the WET website but that is about it. Leave the article, or I will think you are just spamming. Ask SunSw0rd to take over for a few edits. -- RHaworth07:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I will add the external link. Should it be ok to take out the wikify, sources and importance tags from the page now? or is there more that I need to do before that's done?
--Raghu Venkataramana07:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Leave all the tags - let someone else judge if the job has been done. Certainly it ain't wikified fully yet. -- RHaworth07:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again. One more question. If it not too much to ask, is there a please_review tag or something. For beginners like me, it may be of great help if we could first write up an article first and mark it as 'review before publish'. An experienced veteran like you could first review it and give feedback on what to change.
--Raghu Venkataramana08:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Can't think of a specific one - {{expert}} is somethink that way. But the Wiki ethos is be bold - publish first - the reviewers will soon appear (as I did)! One good way to advertise an article is to create incoming links to it - people watching their pet articles will see the new link, follow it and, like as not, butcher the nerw article. -- RHaworth08:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Need your help in reviewing the new page
Hello Roger,
I am back again. I spent some time, looked through the guidelines and rewrote the whole article. I have put it up as a user sandbox at User:Raghublr/Sandbox. It would be of great help, if you could look through the article and provide feedback. I will be discussing about that on that page's discussion.
I would like to put this up as a new page - Wet Web Tester. The rationale is that after the initial entry that WET made, it has added so many features that many people just know it as WET for web testing. Since having two pages about the same article is considered spam, I would actually want to either redirect the Watir Extension Toolkit page to point to this new page or dont mind completely deleting the Watir Extension Toolkit page and go to all 'What links here' page and point it to the new page. Is there anything special that I need to delete one page and point it to another?
Well done for discovering your sandbox. I can't find anything to seriously object to in your draft except possibly that the development plan section is not needed. But your keenness suggests that you are advertising this product and we don't like advertisers. Also, is the product notable enough to justify such an article? I do not see any links to, independent reviews of WET - are there any? We do not need two separate articles but by all means move Watir Extension Toolkit to WET Web Tester if you feel the latter is a better title.
The original WET posting was removed because it was considered spam. Therefore...I removed the link to it from Watir -- and I am removing the link to it again from Watir (which you added) because I am assuming that WET will again shortly be labelled as spam and removed. -- SunSw0rd14:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
You DO realize that {{db-copyvio}} now applies to ALL unquestionable copyright violations created within 48 hours, not just those from "commercial content providers"? I retagged a bunch at WP:CP. --Calton | Talk05:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Not a clue. I blank them, but I suppose if they're speedy deletions they'll be gone soon anyways. So what I'm doing is, rationally, perfectly pointless, but I do it anyways. --Calton | Talk06:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Advameg
I object to deleting the Advameg article. I agree that not all wikipedia spammers deserve their own article (isn't that what they want in a way?), but this company has also been accused elsewhere of posting copyrighted material without permission, and of running shady sweepstakes. Please do a Google search they run some websites that are top-3000 on Alexa so it's not just a fly-by-night operation. Mjk235718:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Did you see the "wikify!" box above? Experienced editors are not excused (especially if they can't get the name right)! I am not sure myself whether this encyclopedic or not. I shall probably submit it AfD to get a consensus but I shall be satisfied if the result is keep. -- RHaworth18:59, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure you've never gotten a spelling wrong? Since the word "Advameg" isn't even English (I think it's Polish), I'm not going to worry about it. Sorry if it bugged you so much - lighten up man! Anyway, yeah, put it up for AfD and see what happens. Mjk235719:17, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
How does one convey tone of voice and facial expression in writing? I assure you my feelings over this are as light as possible. -- RHaworth19:24, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Emoticons, my good man. Yes they were ruined by newbies but until everyone has streaming video that's all we got. I'm not mad at you RHaworth all anti-spammers should stick together. I got interested in Advameg after experiencing very very strange behavior from their "moderators" and decided to do a WhoIs on them. Not surprised to find out they were spammers and sweepstakes scammers. Mjk235719:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Quotes in article titles
You said (in the audit trail) The above is a bit weak.
Sorry, but it was the best translation into politespeak that I could manage for what I was really thinking, which was something along the lines of WTF are you doing?. But you certainly correctly took and amplified my point ;-), thanks!
Hi. Do I need to worry about helping with these, or do you folks have it under control? I've been watching them pop up all day on Disney-related pages. I don't know how to do and undo redirects, but I suppose I could learn. Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs20:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
All sorted now. I believe that any logged-in user can reverse a move that they feel inappropriate. Unfortunately Howard352 had done them wrong by using copy-and-paste so admin attention was needed. -- RHaworth06:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I think I've fixed some more of these quotation mark articles, but I've left the following as redirects (as I'm not an admin I can't delete them myself). Do you want to delete them or are you happy to leave them as redirects?
Hi again. Someone with one prior edit (also from today) came along one minute behind you, deleted the Literary sources info from Sherman Brothers, and add a speedy delete, a dated prod, and an AfD template in their place! No reason given, just the templates. It's obviously vandalism, but what's the policy on this sort of thing? Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs08:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, okay! I kind of thought that removing those sorts of notices was something a non-admin isn't supposed to do, even if it's not added in good faith. Thanks! Karen | Talk | contribs09:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
According to the rule book, anyone may remove a prod. A db tag with "..." for the reason is unacceptable. An AfD tag without the associated discussion page and entry in the log looks like vandalism. Put the three together and it is clear vandalism that anyone can fix. Give an edit summary of "rv vandal" and you have covered yourself! -- RHaworth18:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for making your Source viewable. It is a real help! Wish everyone's was, it can be the best form of online help via practical (in use) example. JosephLenard13:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for the Naming screw-up -- Yes, I forgot to type User: as per Siva1979's copy/paste instructions.
And to top it off: I was so proud to have avoided the automatic categorization of my page--which Category:Wikipedia tools would have done had I not inserted a ":" before "Category"--that I ran off a note to Siva1979 suggesting that he fix that!
Thanks for catching it so soon--before I became an even bigger embarrassment! I was hoping to help reduce the workload around here--not expand it. --RCEberwein | Talk18:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Archive
Thanks for updating my archive link on my userpage, even though I did not see a problem with it firsthandedly. Bearly54101:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Would you moved, Category:Wikians to User page Wikians? Why do you think it is a *bad* idea?
Thought that this is accidental and added the same category again. Sorry, if it sounded arrogant, please remove it. Don’t know how to remove the category, myself.
:) Great, I am getting replies. I will certainly look into Reference desk. Well, I am looking for something like this. If the page is not available then,
What if there are more than one question like this, related to various categories? not a new problem, provide disambiguation page. Don't mind, if there are more than one right answers, provide all of them.
For a search string like this "what is java", I got 3146 results. There can not be 3146 results for this search string. I just want to know what is java. I would be happy if there is 3146 results right answers. Find a way to rate the answers and I want best answers first. I want *exact* result and *all* exact results. Again, stress is on "exact" and "all exact". Sounds impossible, I don't think so.
Ah. You are talking about an improved search engine for existing data rather than improvements to the way people ask questions. Without wishing to be rude, the way you ask your question emphasises the need for such an improved search aimed at people who do not understand how search engines work.
A search for what is java (no quotes) yields 3146 hits perfectly correctly - it is the list of articles which contain all three of these words, ranked by things like proximity of the words within each article. A search for "what is java" (with quotes) yields zero hits perfectly correctly - no one has used this exact phrase in any article within the namespaces searched by default. In any case 'what' and 'is' are bad things to use in search arguments because many search engines treat them as stop words, ie. words ignored in a search.
So, to come back to your question, yes, there is probably scope for an improved search engine - who is going to volunteer to write it? -- RHaworth19:31, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm just finding my way round the different areas of Wiki and recently took up the speedy delete issues to see how that works. Having userfied the Patrick Smyth (now at User:Paddysmyth) article (and having done a half-good job, I reckoned), I'm glad you agreed when it was reverted to mainspace and you put it back where it belongs! Sometimes it can be very confusing with all the policies involved, but it's nice to know someone agrees with me every now and then. Bubbahotep18:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
➨ ЯEDVERS awards this Barnstar to RHaworth for reasoned, thoughtful production of ideas when asked for them in a debate that have helped me and others and have thus improved Wikipedia for everybody. Thank you.
Thanks for the tip. I am not sure how to use the Sandbox to be honest, but I will give it a try. And my understanding is that being "clothed" is one of those stodgy old English terms for gaining entry into a guild. I will make it clearer as I edit the article.--Filll16:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
The name must start with, in your case, "User talk:A Kiwi/". Beyond that here are few rules: extra /s in the title are no recommended, obscene or derogatory titles might get objected to! See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page but rember: this is about article talk archives, not user_talk and it don't know about Werdnabot. -- RHaworth17:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your work on reverting Burkem's recent contributions. I think he simply doesn't understand. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help you. - Kittybrewster19:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Watch his contributions. "Prod" any new article on principle. Take to AfD if necessary. Ie. all the usual Thought Police stuff. -- RHaworth19:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Question about a recent deletion
I am new to wikipedia, and added my first article, Hidden Beach Recordings, yesterday. You deleted the article as spam with no other explanation. I would appreciate any feedback on why you felt it needed to be deleted.
Thank you RebeccaSinger20:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
It was deleted because it was blatant spam. I really do not need to explain further, but I will. A big section headed "what we believe" was a blatant case of {{inappropriate person}}. I assume that all the external links were to websites operated by the company. Did you not think of providing links to "third party" websites, ie. independant reviews of the company.
As always, wait until someone outside the company decides you are important enough to justify an article. -- RHaworth21:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
My bad...thanks for the note, I'll make sure to complete every step of the AfD process in the future! --Swpb17:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Question about deletion under consideration
You recently posted that the page for the wild beasts should be deleated. I was wondering if you could explain why? The page is very much impartial and it is for a band who already have a reasonable following and warrant a wikipedia inclusion. Morewill be added to the page in due course as the band progress. Could you explain why you put the deletion order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanpostlethwaite (talk • contribs)
As it happens I am an old boy of Kendal Grammar School. But I did not let that stand in the way of my nominating them as non-notable. Where are the references to the rave reviews of the band by the musical press? But make your pleas by all means in the AfD discussion. -- RHaworth03:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. Can you please tell me which version of the article you deleted? Yesterday afternoon, the Prechter article I had been working on in good faith was written over -- perhaps maliciously -- with copy that was clearly inappropriate. I noted this on Talk:Robert Prechter, and reverted to the version I'd been editing. Long story short, I do not think the deletion was warranted, and I've been doing what I can to get it undeleted. Thank you.
Rgfolsom17:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
If you set up an email address in your preferences, I will send you a copy of the deleted text - fact is there was very little more than the copyvio. I saw your comment "shoot first, ask questions later". Yes. That is most definitely my policy on new page patrolling. There are two copyvio deletion paths {{copyvio}} & {{db-copyvio}}: one requires an entry in the copyvio log, the other requests that the author be informed. The anon who applied the db-copyvio tag, left a note on the talk page which seems OK cos it was not immediately obvious who had put up the copyvio. Re expecting a 7 day consideration period for deletions: spend a little time looking at Newpages - do you really think that every "cool" and "awesome" kid who creates an article deserves 7 days? It is just a question of where we draw the line. -- RHaworth17:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've made my email address available, but I know exactly which version you're talking about. Someone must have reverted to the paragraph you're describing *after* I made the previous revert. I fully understand & agree with your point about the need to delete nonsense pages, yet from where I sit, I do think a glance at the page history and talk page would have shown that an immediate deletion was unjustified. My question now remains, what can I do to get the *correct* version of the article back up quickly? Thanks for your time and any help you can offer.
Rgfolsom18:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Emails sent - note "second of two ..." actually means "second of two consecutive edits on Oct 3 and Oct 5". Strictly speaking, the article should now be taken to deletion review. But if you can create an article that is not a copvio and does not read like an advert or resumé, then you will probably get away with just resubmitting at Robert Prechter. -- RHaworth18:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm making my comments via email instead of on your talk page, as I
don't want to be critical of your work in public. *1*
That said, I'm respectfully insisting that your decision to delete the
Prechter article was not in keeping with what I've read about
Wikipedia's policy. The notability tag said *nothing* about speedy
deletion *2*, only that the article "is more likely to be considered for
deletion." After I saw this I looked up notability and knew I could
meet the standard, and said as much on the talk page. But the
copyright violation comment and the speedy deletion itself happened
overnight, before I could do what I said. Rgfolsom (via email)
*1* don't worry - nobody else hesitates to be critical! *2* absolutely correct. It was the db-copyvio tag which gave me the authority to delete it!
I recommend you to follow the Wiki recommendation to be bold (which is just a more polite form of "shoot first and ...". Read my recommendation above starting with strictly speaking and follow it - why not? -- RHaworth00:56, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:OS grid key Britain.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:OS grid key Britain.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 19:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips. I need people who are more experienced like yourself to help me to learn how to edit Wikipedia. I have not been doing it long and there are a lot of things I do not know. Thanks again !--Filll18:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Somewhat apathetic but I recommend: keeptemplate:UKrailwaystations (old usage) (You do realise it is used in over 2000 articles don't you!) and remove the links to UK_railway_stations_-_? from Template:Infobox UK station (new usage). In the old usage they lay neatly in one line. In the new usage they have had to be split across two lines in a rather ugly and arbitrary manner.
Well i had no idea it was used in so many, but it's only a probem IMO, when both are used. Thanks for the advice, I will go ask around. --ArmadilloFromHell04:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Deletion???
It is proposed that this article be deleted, because of the following concern:
listcruft and copyvio.
Could you further explain why have you flagged the article List of Askmen 99 Most Desirable Women in 2006 for deletion, i dont see any reason for you to do it, why is there a List_of_FHM_100_Sexiest_Women and not this one??, if you're proposing the article for deletion, then you should also propose the FHM's List.
If you think you can make some changes to improve it please do it, but just proposing for deletion is not ok with me
May I ask that you look at the Robert Prechter article again,
to see whether it is developing properly. You might also check the related Socionomics. The question as I see it is: can these articles be
fairly edited without obvious commercial/propaganda interference - most
likely coming directly from Prechter or his Socionomics Institute?
I understand that my edits are completely different from what was written before,
but what was written before were simply adverts for Prechter.
Smallbones22:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Fact is I know nothing about Prechter and economics. I only got dragged into this over a copyvio. I am happy to leave you to your edit wars. -- RHaworth01:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
This is of interest to people outside of Alameda - the world around - because Alameda is a microcosm of the ongoing debate in metropolitan centers around the world around land use, "slow-growth," affordable housing, and toxic waste sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mowster (talk • contribs)
Please learn to use wikilinks and to sign your comments. It will help confirm that you are here to contribute to wikipedia rather than just running a campaign. Anyway thanks for a well reasoned reply. I will seek consensus at AfD and will happily accept the result whichever way it goes. -- RHaworth04:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
It seems contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia that one is forced to invest so much time in learning the arcane and obtuse rules to be able to make a contribution. Using Wikipedia is still more like programming in a language than using a user-friendly tool. I've searched high and wide on the pages of various user pages for the 'wiki-right' way to leave comments, and given up, exasperated. Mowster04:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The message on talk pages, please sign your comment by typing four tildes (~~~~) was visible at the bottom of the edit page when you made the above comment - you searched high and wide but did not search low! But I will admit that there is a learning curve to Wikipedia - suggestions for making it easier are always welcomed. -- RHaworth04:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The Realm of Joy
I was writing that from the National Library of Scotland, and would not be able to take the play away with me. I wanted to get what couldn't be done without the script at hand done then, because the introduction part is trivial, and may be added at home.
I wanted to talk to you about the RGLE. I know I have been dealing with masonry for some year now. I really do not see what the problem is it seems to me because it is something new and is moving so fast. That it is scaring alot of people and yes it does exist because I belong to it. There is an Edward King that has been putting out some bad poop about the RGLE I was mentioned in his article. I an in North Caroilna here in the USA, now he put in his article that we were bogous and he could not get in contact with us you know I e-mailed him back with my e-mail address and my phone number where I could be reached at and til this day he has not gotten in contact with me. This is what I am talikng about people make a big stink but when it is time to talk about it then everyone get quite.
ILL. Saulsberry 33* e-mail: strength357@aol.com Phone: (910) 476-2543 cell
You have democratic right to raise the matter at deletion review. But you have about a snowball in hell's chance of getting any article re-instated. The letter from RAH Morrow reproduced on Edward King's page is good enough for me. RGLE is still totally non-notable.
It is a bit of a waste of time to leave your "copyvio nothanks" message when someone has already left {{nothanks-sd}} - as with User talk:Dayaanjali. But more inportantly, in your message could you please change one of your references to the article title into a link? It helps to improve the audit trail and saves weary patrollers having to copy and paste into the address bar. -- RHaworth11:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the feedback. Per your request, I won't bother notifying the user of a deletion due to copyright violation if it is already mentioned on their talk page. The lack of a red-link to the page title is intentional and intended to discourage people from immediately recreating the article with the same content. However if you feel the need to have a link there, I will add one – Gurch12:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes I do feel the need. Copyvio merchants rarely come back with swift reposts and and when they do it is often to state that they are the webmasters of what they have copied. In this case other treatments are needed anyway. -- RHaworth12:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Svilena kidess, which you proposed for deletion. I am leaving this message here to notify you about it. I'm not sure if she's notable or not, she's got some credits in apparently notable films and apparently was/is notable in Bulgaria. I'm trying to wikify the article now so it doesn't sound like advertising. It's not clear to me whether the article is autobiographical or just started by a fan. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it. Instead, feel free to list the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! ~ BigrTex02:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Quantock Lodge 2005.png
You deleted the following image: "image:Quantock Lodge 2005.png" with the following explaination "(db-noncom)". I don't know what "(db-noncom)" stands for, can you please explain?
When you uploaded the image you selected the copyright holder only allows this work to be used for non-commercial and/or educational purposes. This automatically includes {{permission from license selector}} and {{db-noncom}} in the image description. You clearly did not look at the image description created by the upload. I suggest you read these templates now and follow their advice. Also, if the licence allows it, please upload to the Commons so all languages can share.
Ok, thanks for the tip. I use .png format (under the advice of other editors) as apparently it is loss-less, whereas .jpg files tend to become hazy the more they are edited. The following page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers. I'm sure you are aware of this guideline, but maybe you should take a few minutes to read it again. I doubt that you are unaware that your tone is a little abrasive, if you couch your advice in a more tender terms, it is more likely to be listen to rather than ignored. You like giving blunt advice, so I hope you take my suggestion in the manner it was intended --Quantockgoblin01:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I did realize that you were being (by comparison) quite nice to me!! I will try to read the blurb a bit more carefully in future!! -- Quantockgoblin10:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Deletion of Designs of the time page
Just wondering why you deleted the above page. Stephen —Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenMo (talk • contribs)
The quick and silly answer is: "because you asked for it - this message explicitly requests the removal of the version with lower case t"! But to be serious, here are the deletion log entries:
Ie. It was deleted as a copyright violation. In addition, I would support its deletion since being a copy of the organisers' page, it counts as advertising. Also the notability of the project was not established.
Try writing an article which a) is shorter, b) is in your own words and c) contains some 3rd party references to establish the notability of the project.
Please read my message above headed "Wikify!" and the message on your talk page regarding the use of move rather than copy-and-paste. -- RHaworth15:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
![[3]](http://membres.lycos.fr/rchauch/blancheneigeetles7nains_grincheux.gif){kind=link}
){kind=link}
