This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

[Title width guide. Delete above here if no further edits - already in archive. If further edits, move below here.]

You have speedily deleted the article I created this morning despite the fact that it did not, in my view, fall among the criteria for speedy deletion. Criterion A7 states "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance" and the article stated at that time it was tagged "Care for the Wild International is an animal charity, a non-governmental organization established in 1984 and based in the United Kingdom. Its stated aim is to "rescue, protect and defend animals in need around the globe".[1] It was therefore incorrect to tag it for speedy deletion on the basis of criterion A7 as, "if the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied".

By the time you deleted the article it explained that this international charity had an annual income of £700,000 and I had found two outside references beside the charity's own website which I had added. I am amazed that you thought it appropriate to speedily delete it. Shocked really. It's not that I had a particular interest in the subject, but that you chose to delete it in such a cavalier fashion without any discussion. Perhaps you could explain. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:43, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

• You have been editing for more than three years but apparently have not yet learned that articles need links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Restored to User:Cwmhiraeth/Care for the Wild International. Do not move it back to mainspace until it does contain evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I have added references to further secondary sources and returned the article to mainspace. Thank you for your help. (I do not think it was correct to speedily delete the article under criterion A7 but I have no wish to pursue the point.) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I was hoping you could help me edit the page I tried to create so that it successfully meets all of Wikipedia's guidelines. The page I am referencing is titled The Cambridge Institute of International Education. From my understanding, the page was deleted because I borrowed the description from our website (which, incidentally, I also wrote). Assuming I create new original content for the Cambridge page and cite this s Wall Street Journal article], would the article meet the requirements? Thank you very much for your time and assistance! Alexander Barza (talk) 19:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your institute is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

I would respectfully request that you reinstate Heather Cooper which you speedily deleted. The justification was not sufficient, in my mind and I said as much on the talk page. — Verne Equinox (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

• The article has been around for nearly seven years. How is it that no-one has managed to add any independent evidence of notability? Restored to User:Verne Equinox/Heather Cooper. Do not move it back to mainspace until it is properly referenced. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

• I note that the CSD criteria invoked was "Seems to fail GNG". As far as I can tell, that is not, and never has been, a valid reason for speedy deletion. The article should have at least been put through WP:PROD. I appreciate the work that admins do closing speedy deletions, but I think that it's important that the community's guidelines for speedy deletion be honoured. Pburka (talk) 00:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

You said "not normally deleted". What are the criteria for when they are deleted please? Lesion (talk) 23:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, thanks for your help. Lesion (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

You have chosen to delete my user page, [[.digamma/null]] (.digamma/null) under the authorization of policy G1. Patent nonsense (CSD-G1). It appears this deletion was an error according to a noteworthy exception identified within the specifics of this policy: "This excludes the sandbox and pages in the user namespace". As such, this particular deletion falls outside the authorization afforded by the CSD-G1 policy.

Additionally, acceptable content on User Pages allows for draft works, works intent for future research, and original work. User Page content prohibited includes excessive original work, pages that look like project pages, pages that violate copyright, and blogs. My user page would classify as an essay, notably similar to Keφr's essays. My user page was also not a high profile article and doesn't pose a threat to other readers.

I was surprised to discover this deletion was not discussed on my user talk page before deletion. As explained by practices for deleting other's user pages, I feel this was an attack, lacking this discussion prior to the actual deletion ("Take special care to speak appropriately and explain the concern; many users will take it as a personal affront or attack if an unknown user announces they are going to delete a userspace image or page and an uncivil or heavy duty approach can discourage new users who are unaware of expectations and might enjoy contributing.") and poignantly lacked the good faith stewardship practices of Wikipedians. I realize the Speedy Deletion policy indicates deletion could occur immediately. However, based on the policy for deletion of other's User Pages, it appears discussion is necessitated prior to deletion. I can confirm that I received notification of the speedy deletion tag on my user page promptly from Wikipedia's mail servers due in part by my profile's notification preferences.

In conclusion, I formally request that my user page be restored from the deletion archive or offer an explanation as to why this deletion did not apply to the CSD-G1 exception, violates the Wikipedia User Page content policy, is high profile/visibility, and how it differs from Keφr's essays. — .digamma (talk) 00:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• It was just a deletion - there is no need to write an essay here about it. You admit that the article was an essay and I could not see how it served any encyclopedic purpose. I recommend you publish it on your own website. If you really insist on trying to publish here, raise the matter at deletion review. As to Kephir's essays - other stuff exists is never a valid argument. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Please let me know why you have deleted my page ILead Kolkata. please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajuseoindia (talk • contribs)

• Are you doing paid editing? You have submitted spammy articles on two completely different subjects. ILead Kolkata was blatant advertising with no attempt made to provide evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Wondering why Network Time Foundation was deleted? I am a new user to Wikipedia and have not created content before...as far as I could tell, the information I entered met the guidelines. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CynthiaL75 (talk • contribs)

• What next: an HTTP Foundation or an SMTP Foundation? NTP is such a vital part of the internet that it does not need special support and certainly not being raised to iconic status. After I had deleted the article, I had a look at your website and thought "what pretentious rubbish". Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your foundation is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I created an article Alvan Aliyev Kebirli about a notable person, who has had a very special place in the history of my country. But I can't understand why you have deleted it? Can you pls restore it? Or do let me know the reason for deletion. Thanks, Behije — Preceding unsigned comment added by B Aliyeva (talk • contribs) 13:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

• There has never been an article with this title. What are you talking about? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I am Rahulmdinesh and I had created an article called National Centre For Excellence. It got deleted on 2014 March 31 by some admin. I want Wikipedia to reverse this action so that I can make necessary changes such that it doesn't violate copyrighting. I had really worked hard on this article and it is really frustrating to make a new article. Thanking you, your sincerely, Rahulmdinesh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulmdinesh (talk • contribs) 09:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• I am not "some admin"! It was a copyright violation so we don't restore it. Simply write a new version in your own words. Make sure you include links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources and re-submit it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

My article Livio & Roby got deleted however i have been speaking to another admin who has helped me with this article and they agreed that after we both updated, the new sources would allow the page to be moved back to article space. See User talk:NawlinWiki. Could you please move this article back? Thanks, Ashley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleyc1990 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• I am certainly not going to get into a deletion war with NawlinWiki. Restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello. You just deleted a page I created about a very talented musician and composer Jonny Rodgers who goes by the stage name Cindertalk. I would love to have the page un-deleted as he is a notable US musician. Highlighting the fact that he is worthy of a Wikipedia entry includes that he has released 7 albums with his band Mighty Purple, as well as 5 albums as solo artist under the name Jonny Rodgers and Cindertalk, or that the New York Times called him "stunning," that he has an impressive IMDB resume including film score contributions to popular Hollywood films like "Don Jon" and that he has toured and performed in extremely popular bands like Son Lux, My Brightest Diamond, and Ten Shekel Shirt. Any one of those things should make him worthy of an entry. I have a new version of the entry ready with additional information and references that will support the importance of the artist. He is also going to release a 7" record for Record Store Day that is going to benefit the fight against child trafficking and human slavery, which is going to be announced soon. Perhaps you can set it to draft and I'll update it for your approval? Thanks! bsmckinney (talk)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Just for the record, the way you worded your reply was smarmy and rude and I have half a mind to report you to your superiors. You have no right to declare anyone decent or not. - bsmckinney — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsmckinney (talk • contribs) 23:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• That is the fun thing about Wikipedia: I don't really have any superiors. I am one of 2000 admins who are all equal and whether admins are superior to ordinary editors is distinctly debatable! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Could you please restore Hearty Roots Community Farm to Draft:Hearty Roots Community Farm? I had just moved that page to drafts, trying to help a novice editor who's making stubs for an education project. Based on the searching I've done, that (as well as the other pages s/he's creating) is notable, just needs some time to develop. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 20:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• So why on earth did you not remove the speedy tag when you moved it to draft space? One would have hoped that a Vassar prof. would have spent a bit more time familiarising himself with the way we do things on Wikipedia. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, don't usually deal with speedys, will be better about that in the future. Thanks for the restore. —Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 09:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

RHaworth, I just wanted to bring to your attention some deletions you made that may have been unwarranted. I have made edits to the "List of débutante balls in the United States" a couple of times now with true, verified information with citations. On my latest revisions on February 14th 2014, to the "Arizona" section, you reverted all my edits within 4 hours. I wanted to know on what grounds you found this necessary. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.254.227.21 (talk)

• Be grateful that I am breaking my normal rule and am talking to an IP address. What do you mean by "citations" - the only edits by your IP address were non-links. If you want us to see continuity in your edits, then create an account.

There is a well established standard that Wikipedia "list of" articles should only list things about which articles exist. In the case of this article, I think it is permissible to link to articles which do not have the ball in their title providing they talk about it substantially as with Society of Martha Washington and Texas Rose Festival. If you disagree with this rule, get yourself an account and raise the matter on the article's talk page. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:15, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, Thanks for deleting my work! I have sent a message TWICE asking please not to delete Hotels4u.com as I was still working on it - also marked by the Work in Progress Template, as per Wiki's guidelines. I really don't understand why you couldn't wait for it to be finished and then delete if you still considered it to be spam... It really does take a while for all the correct formatting to be in place and to write this so I would truly appreciate a bit of time.

Also, I find your comment about spammy links completely out of context - how can you delete my page based on a previous link that I added for a completely different page? I can't believe you've actually carefully looked at the links provided in the references for this page because under no circumstances could they be deemed as spam - they are either links to the official website of the business or external resources where information about awards won by the company can be found. If you think they are spammy, say so, don't assume I am adding crap links and then go deleting my page.

The entire structure of this page has been mirrored from an existing page, that of LateRooms.com which actually lists a lot more unreliable links. The information is hardly referenced! I am trying to create a legit page and I would appreciate your help in not deleting it until it's finished or giving a clearer assessment so I can make the changes. Please can you restore and give me a better understanding of what the mistakes are? As I said, I was still working on it so it wasn't final when you deleted it. Many thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxy11 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• Can I take it that you graduated from Nottingham English School and are now working for Hotels4u? Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the company is notable and writes about it here. If you really want to force an article in, read my advice about finding a sponsor. Clearly the people who have edited LateRooms.com would be a good place to start. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

You can take it that you're not always right! And quite frankly you're coming across as a very rude and offending person even towards your fellow editors. Get a real job, it will help your thinking, I promise. And you also need to learn how to spell before you edit other people's work! And I'm sure you know this (as you probably think you already know everything) links from Wikipedia aren't counted by search engines so stop calling people spammers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxy11 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• Where have I introduced a spelling mistake into someone else's work and where have I called anyone a spammer unjustifiably? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

You deleted the live article space versions of many of the user page drafts for the Cambrian portal that I had tagged with a deletion template. Those should be restored and the user versions deleted. Thanks. Abyssal (talk) 23:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• I assure you that most of the ones I deleted had been unambiguously tagged by you. See portal:Cambrian/Selected picture/14 as a random example. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Oops. It looks like for the Cambrian Portal I had moved the userspace drafts into portalspace where the drafts forth portals about the other periods had been cut and pasted there. So, when I was clicking links labeled User:Abyssal/Cambrian_Portal_Page I was actually being redirected to the livespace equivalent and putting the delete template there. Sorry about that. :( I still need the actual live portal pages restored at your earliest convenience. Abyssal (talk) 03:43, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• I find it amazing that you managed to tag two dozen pages without noticing what namespace they were in or seeing the "redirected from …" message. I have laboriously restored them. You will not see your db-user tags because I used selective restore and left the tagged edits deleted. Please be more careful in future. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Please restore List of Teletoon Original Productions, which you deleted per my WP:G7 request, along with its entire history. Thank you. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• For goodness sake! Can you not see the log entry which reads "Dogmaticeclectic moved page list of Teletoon Original Productions to list of Teletoon original series"? Have you never reviewed your contributions history? Guess where the "entire history" is. List of Teletoon Original Productions certainly should not be restored because it would be an implausible redirect. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

My request was perhaps a bit unclear - I was referring to the redirect's history, not that of the article. A redirect at the title in question would likely not be implausible, as the name in the title is used by many outside Wikipedia. (Also, please note that Wikipedia:Civility is expected of all users but particularly administrators such as yourself.) — Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 20:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• I was going to refuse but then I decided, since redirects are cheap, the easiest thing was to restore it for you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Can you please unprotect this redirect? All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 16:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC).

• OK, Gerardo007 (talk · contribs) has probably gone away so we do not need to protect the page from him but I would still like to know what change you propose to make. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I wrote my first article on Wikipedia the other day, I was hoping that I could make a start on it and add to it once I had gathered my sources. I have found that the article has been deleted. I am confused as to why and would really appreciate it if you could quickly explain why it was, so that I don't make the same mistake twice. I think the subject is worthy of inclusion in the encylopedia, and I know i've more work to do. Any help would be most appreciated. Telepathicworks (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• My usual message probably applies: kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks the guy is notable and writes about him here. But since you have started a new version, I have restored your deleted edits under User:Telepathicworks/sandbox. Note that if you can provide evidence of notability, the title should be Cyclops (artist). — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Added new page on "Talangere stone inscription". The copyrighted articled mentioned above has not been linked. Authentic sources have been referred to, while editing the new page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpbolumbu (talk • contribs) 14:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The above mentioned page has been moved to my sandbox. While moving it, you have referenced the article to the "copyrighted article". That "copyrighted article" does not mention about the language. There the language has been assumed to be Kannada. It is a wrong reference. The reference has been deleted.Kpbolumbu (talk) 15:33, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

• It was perfectly OK to link to Jyotsna Kamat's blog. The sin was to copy the text. I have moved your article to User:Kpbolumbu/sandbox because it is not quite ready. If you do not want the blog link then we need at least two better references. Also, you must provide a ((coord)) link to the location. Preferably provide a photograph. The K. V. Ramesh link is wrong. Is Talangere the same as Thalangara? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Talangere is the same as Thalangara. Some times it is spelt as Thalankara also. ((coord)) details are 12°29′5″N 74°59′25″E. I can provide the photographs of the pages pertaining to the article from P Gururaja Bhat's book and KV Ramesh's book also. Regarding KV Ramesh, two links have been provided. One is about the authenticity of the author and the second one is about the book in which the inscription has been mentioned. In the article that has been moved to my inbox, the reference to the kamat dot com article has been provided where the language is mentioned as Kannada and partially Sanskrit. The reference is at the wrong place. Kpbolumbu (talk) 05:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Why was it moved to the sandbox? Are the sources not authentic enough? Kpbolumbu (talk) 15:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

• Authentic is the wrong word. The operative word is "notability". Of the links in this state: 1. is a bio and tells us nothing about the inscription, 2. is broken, 3. is simply bibliographic information and tells us nothing about the inscription, 4. is in Kannada so I cannot tell whether it refers to the inscription. In short, no reliable references so I userfy it to give you time to provide references. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

http://web.archive.org/web/20110814031913/http://sarva.gov.in/kerala/node/85 says exactly about the inscription. First six paragraphs are about the inscription and the pattern of Kannada used over there. But the details like first six lines being in Grantha script with Sanskrit as the language and remaining 21 lines in Kannada script and Kannada language is not provided in the above link which you recognised as Kannada. The language of the above article is Malayalam. The details about the first six lines and the remaining 21 lines are provided in P Gururaja Bhat's and KV Ramesh's book. Kpbolumbu (talk) 05:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• So if Talangere is the same as Thalangara, make that clear in the article thus: Talangere. Don't tell me the coords - put them in the article! I am very dubious about whether it will survive without at least one decent link to a reference in English. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I found three prominent reviews, and will add more later. For now, it meets WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 16:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Zippcast is a new video site that can be put to use. The previous creators form what I know used the page for vandalism. I would like the page to be unblocked so I can put it to good use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theawesome67 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

• Create a draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zippcast. If it is approved, then unprotection will be uncontroversial. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

It has been Denied, because I need to submit elsewhere, but the name has been blocked. Help? -Theawesome67 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theawesome67 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Which of the words "create a draft" do you not understand? Go to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zippcast and replace the current content with the text that you would like to see at Zippcast. That is what I mean by creating a draft. If you do not feel able to do that then there is nothing more you can do - it is listed at requested articles. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

This is for being a great and kind admin who responds quickly to questions. Theawesome67 (talk) 16:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Thanks - makes a change to receive some gratitude! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For getting me to rescue A Beautiful Life (2008 film), which forced me to read many funny reviews. Bearian (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Thanks, see kitten above. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

hello , i am administrator of Mr Rakesh Biswas, why did you deleted the article , we have provided the valuable references ..Kindly see the matter and resolve it . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.219.52.66 (talk) 04:22, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• Shouting, page widening, no link, anonymous, unsigned. Written by a persistent self-promoter and sock puppeteer. Definitely can ignore. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Why did you delete it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.217.203.105 (talk) 09:49, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• Not quite as bad as Rakesh Biswas above but still ignorable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I am rahulmdinesh. I had created an article called National Centre For Excellence which got speedily deleted on March 31. I had created it with full interest and it is really frustrating to recreate a new one. It got deleted on terms of copyright violation, but Wikipedia didn't even give me a at least one day to rectify my mistake and make changes in the page. I please request you to undo this and restore my page. Please :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulmdinesh (talk • contribs) 13:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• "Didn't even give me a at least one day" - what on earth do you mean? You have all the time in the world to rectify your mistake by creating a new non-copyvio version. But we would prefer you wait until someone with no COI thinks your Centre actually is excellent and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Pls RHaworth, Please restore my article "National Centre For Excellence".I will make all the necessary changes.Please have mercy as i worked very hard to create it. :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulmdinesh (talk • contribs) 05:34, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

• As it happens, I had copied this page to my own website to investigate Copyscape. It tells me that the amount of copyvio was small so I have restored it. I have removed most of the peacock language so it reads less like the school prospectus. The article also had copyvios from this page so I am unwilling to restore any of the deleted text. Please read carefully why the submission was declined on March 15. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:51, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

What is the reason for this inexplicable hatred? Dear Mr.RHaworth! I can not understand the true cause of your edits (10 violations in 2 minutes!). Maybe I somehow accidentally hurt you personally? What is the reason for this inexplicable hatred?If something hurt you apologize. All the best! Dmitry Dzhagarov (talk) 15:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• Which do you think looks better: the horrible, unformatted mess of a copy&paste of part of my contribs history which you put here or an elegant link thus: these edits? I think I am allowed a little hatred when someone has posted a piece of pure spam and then creates horrible shouted links to it from half a dozen articles. But it is quite a rare thing for a useful editor to turn into a spammer so I got a bit carried away. I apologise unreservedly for reverting four valid edits of yours. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:44, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

hi- u've deleted this article. but may re-consider the deletion in the light of the fact that every state or union territory in India has an aids control society. Su U've got Tamil Nadu State AIDS Control Society. Plz note. -- Muzammil (talk) 18:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, RHaworth, for deletion of Category:Redirects to English-language terms! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 02:23, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, could you please block another sock of Joshuaforest (talk · contribs) who is evading the block by using 109.144.202.195 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). — JMHamo (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for fixing the vandalism on my user page - it was not Joshuaforest. User:Joshuaforest/sandbox was edited by lots of different IP addresses after his block so I think it is inappropriate to put a sock tag on user:109.144.202.195 - next time it might be used by a completely different person. But a date-specific note on the user talk page seems OK. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Roger, A few days ago my article World's Best Donuts was deleted because it was believed to not be noteworthy enough and possibly be promotion. This is not at all the case, and I like to have the opportunity to rework the article in line with wikipedia's standard. Thanks, Christian Woodley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawoodsta (talk • contribs) 21:31, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your doughnuts are notable and writes about them here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I would like to request a review of proposed new content for the page, Next-Generation Incident Command System (NICS). I did not notice I was being redirected, on this my 3rd attempt to contribute the article, and that it is being protected from creation by you. I have the content located here as an article for creation. I also would like to request guidance if I should delete the content from Articles for Creation, in favor of another more appropriate location for review (dependent upon your acceptance of this new review). – Jlrsn (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Do the words "links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" suggest anything to you. But first, search this page for the word "decency". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sirs, Thank you for your mail. Is it possible to place the same subject after editing the text? I think, it was wise to take more time to write the article. The verifiable part was difficult for me to write in the wikepedia style. I think, I know now more about this. Thank you in advance. Kind regards, Radha Kesharie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kesharie (talk • contribs) 09:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Please note that we do not like being addressed in the plural. Ourself has no recollection of sending you mail. Please search this page for the word "decency". Your case is worse than Jlrsn above. At least he was promoting something other than himself. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

RHaworth,

Hello, I wanted to talk with you about the recent deletion of an article I created about Igor Birman, who is a candidate for Congress in California. I understand that it was marked as spam and was speedy'd for the reasons of G11, saying that it was too promotional. I just wanted to make it clear that this was not my intention. Other candidates of the same election, including Elizabeth Emken have similar articles. I am not saying that two wrongs make a right in this "double standard" of sorts, but I do want to see if I can revise the article so that it can be published.

The submission was done fully in good faith, and it is something of high interest in the area (Sacramento County, California). Birman does have high notability, and the election/candidates have been noted to be one of the most highly contested/highly watched elections in the nation on various news sources. Additionally, his name has mentions in bits and pieces on several other Wikipedia articles about the election and about Igor Birman (the Russian economist), and Birman the only one who doesn't have a full article representing him in this particular context. For educational purposes, I think that this is a flaw that should be addressed in how there is unequal representation about the various individuals who are all noteworthy and of high profiles in the area, all deserving respective articles. (See http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/californias-7th-congressional-district-race-2014-abc-news/story?id=22336073) as an example of the national spotlight in this case. If the article did, indeed, seem to be promotional, I deeply apologize and would like to do whatever I can to fix it. How can I improve the article? I do think that if you do some research, you will come to the same conclusion that I made that the article's content and subject is noteworthy enough to be on Wikipedia. I am a newcomer to the Wikipedia community, and surely I will make some mistakes in the learning process here of becoming a good editor/writer. Again, I apologize and I appreciate your help in advance. Hubbardc (talk) 16:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)hubbardc

• Where on earth did you get the idea of creating User talk:DGG/Archive 87 Apr. 2014? How did you expect DGG to see the message there? If and only if, you are not Igor Berman's agent, you may raise the matter at deletion review. Otherwise, search this page for "decency". If and only if, an article about your Igor Berman is accepted, then you may place at the top of Igor Birman the hat note:
  For the California politician, see Igor Birman (politician).

A section such as "Other Igor Birmans" (should that be other Igor Birmen? Or better still, other Igor Birpeople?) is utterly non-standard. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:20, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I apologize; I am a bit of a newbie with Wikipedia and I am not familiar with all of the standard protocols. I will be raising the matter for deletion review, since I do believe it was taken down prematurely--that is, taken down before raising and giving me the opportunity to respond to any suggestions to edit the article and improve it. If there are any specific aspects of the article that may seem to be promotional in any way, I would be more than happy to work on it and get it fixed. After all, what is the point of being a contributing Wikipedian if one cannot learn from mistakes they make in gleaning the knowledge to submit articles? I will likely need advice/help in drafting articles and edits, and I evidently posted on the wrong place in DGG's talk page. Also, just to clarify, that was not me who put the "Other Igor Birmans" section in the Igor Birman article, I was just making a quick/immediate reference to the fact that his name is referenced in a hodge-podged manner all over related subject matters.

Please remember that there are some people in the Wikipedia community who are new to this, have good faith in their submissions, and need respectful help along the way. I do want to help out the project with my contribution, and I feel that including a high-profile figure that is in a highly contested and watched election would certainly help those who would like to see some information without having to do more of the extensive research that I already have done. Again, I really am sorry for many of my "rookie mistakes", and I want to be a useful contributor to the Wikipedia community, especially in California politics (something of high interest to me).

Any advice to mend the article? Cheers! :-) Hubbardc (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

• You are somewhat long-winded. I am apathetic about UK politics and even more so about US politics. On re-examination, I see that the refs were either to unreliable sources or did not deal with the guy in depth. For further advice contact DGG (talk · contribs) (on his user talk page!) who nominated it for deletion. He is an admin so he can see the deleted state and may be more familiar with US politics than I. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks so much! And I apologize for being long-winded. I just was a little shocked and concerned from my upload being taken down so quickly and I thought there must have been some sort of misunderstanding on either my end or DGG's. Thanks for the helpful pointers. Hubbardc (talk) 02:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

Hi, I would like the Deadin5 page reinstated on Wiki. Other Michigan rock bands have WIKI pages: Pop Evil. Relevance: Dead in 5 has 8 songs in the new "Pro Wrestlers Vs. Zombies" internationally released movie (Troma Entertainment) starring WWE legends. Dead in 5 nominated for 2014 Detroit Music Award Dead in 5 featured in Classic Rock Magazine Dead in 5 to play major music festivals this summer including The World's Largest Brat Fest Dead in 5 to have music featured in upcoming episodes of Best Ink (Oxygen Network) Dead in 5 to record with Soundgarden producer Chuck Alkazian this summer Please advise as to how I can get the article reinstated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragoninkgirl (talk • contribs) 17:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Please search this page for "decency". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:20, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

You deleted Catskill Mountains Film Festival based on the following reason: (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.catskillmountainsfilmfestival.org/about-us/mission/). Aside from the fact that we have now lost all the work we put into this article for several weeks, could I trouble you to explain how a reference to our own website, www.catskillmountainsfilmfestival.org, in an article about our film festival, the Catskill Mountains Film Festival, could possibly be construed as a "unambiguous copyright infringement"? Thank you in advance for answering this question. Wncoady (talk) 23:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Every page of the website is marked "© Catskill Mountains Film Festival". Since it does not go into detail, we must assume that means "© all rights reserved". That means that if it appears on any other website it is a copyvio. But don't bother to rectify the situation - the article was spammy and please search this page for "decency". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
  

Ok, I understand the copy right issue. But I don't understand why the article is considered "spammy". Please help me to understand COI editing regarding articles on Wikipedia. Would I be correct in assuming no one who has ties to an organization would be considered a proper editor for an article regarding that organization? I know of at least two Wikipedia articles that were clearly written by members of those organizations (I happen to be a member of both organizations), to promote those organizations, ARRL and Jack Russell Terrier Club of America, with references to their copyrighted websites. So how should I proceed? Thanks...and I appreciate your patience. Wncoady (talk) 03:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Don't understand spammy? "Enrich the already fertile artistic life of the region" is exactly the sort of peacock language that we consider spammy. Your assumption is correct. Yes, there are thousands of articles created with by people with a COI. Some have just slipped through the net. Some have been written by people who know know how to write here and have created completely saticfactory articles. In any case other stuff exists is never an argument. How to proceed? As I say repeatedly: kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no COI thinks your festival is notable and writes about it here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. I totally understand. We will do a total re-write and re-submit. Wncoady (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• No, you obviously do not totally understand otherwise you would not be considering re-creating the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Do you intend to personally stalk my ID and reject EVERY attempt I make to get an article published on this topic, regardless of merit or absence of COI? You admitted yourself that such articles do exist. If I create an article that meets your criteria, why would it not be published? — Wncoady (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

• Create one at WP:AFC instead, and then RHaworth would be on rather shakier grounds in deleting or rejecting it, if it meets Wikipedia's criteria. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Demiurge1000. I appreciate the suggestion. Wncoady (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

• Demiurge, Wncoady's submission was at AfC. It was deleted as copyvio.

Wncoady, I have no idea what you mean by "stalk my ID". Naturally, I am going to watch your contributions. In the first instance, I shall let others decide whether any new submission is acceptable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I have been creating an article which has been removed due to "copyright infringements". Is there any way to recreate the page to make all the necessary changes? It took a while to give format to the article so it would be great to have at least the format. Thanks for your help! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davewlac (talk • contribs) 08:30, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• You followed my advice to create a link in your message. Unfortunately there has never been any article called Deleted Article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey there, Just wondering why my article about Zpawn was deleted. It stated that it was due to web content, but through the process of creating the article, it ticked all the boxes. I'm not sure what went wrong. If you could give me a detailed response and give me suggestions as to what to change so I'm able to upload once again the article. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AProudScotsman (talk • contribs)

• Please search this page for "decency" but if it does not apply to you … How do you expect an article totally devoid of links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to survive. Indeed, you could not even manage to provide a link to the forum itself. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I was wondering if you might restore this image so we can fix the incorrect fair use rationale? With the subject now deceased, fair use images are permitted. CRRaysHead90 | ^#RaysUp 18:08, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

• I cannot find it in the rule book but I am sure that the non-free rule applies to "living or recently deceased" people. But by all means raise the matter at deletion review. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

RHaworth, We're new to Wikipedia and recognize your astute and frank editing. We'd like to apologise, having not recognized we'd published the page in its infancy. We'll restart in the sandbox and would like to formally invite your guidelines as we work toward our first of hopefully many successful Wikipedia page creations. — The Red Star Movement Team, Trinidad and Tobago, Lyndon austin (talk) 22:35, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You call yourself "we" and sign with the name of a group. Does more than one person use your account? Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

• Please search this page for "decency" but if it does not apply to you … How do you expect an article totally devoid of links to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources to survive? Indeed, it was totally devoid of any references. Please also read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Can you please restore the article that was deleted, I was going to use it to teach a class about how Wikipedia works. after that class is over, it can be re-deleted. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by This is a demonstration (talk • contribs) 11:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

• Restored. Make sure that is tagged for deletion soonest. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, why did you delete Category:Comprehensive schools in Bolton despite the ((hangon)) notice on it and the specific explanation on Category talk:Comprehensive schools in Bury?

Please do not delete any more empty UK schools categories, as an editor has been emptying them out of process, and I am insisting at WT:CFD that a CFD discussion is required. – Fayenatic London 11:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

• How could I think of deleting an article about my town of birth? Feel free to re-instate - I shall not touch them. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I see that I linked to non-matching pages there, so I'm not sure which of those places you were born in! Thanks anyway. – Fayenatic London 13:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

By the way, about your response to others to "search this page for the word X", it's a fair point once they find it, but if people are editing on a tablet then their browser probably does not have a search function. Maybe set up a new moan instead? Kind regards – Fayenatic London 16:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I just saw you deleted my article. I took a lot of time to gather all the informations and references and, according to me, to write a great and interesting article. Let me explain to you why I think this article must stay on Wikipedia : This is for a cultural purpose. Metalstep is a brand new sub-genre of the dubstep and brostep growing music style. One of the biggest artist up to date "Bass Nectar" even talked about it in an interview. I think my article deals with a lot of wikipedia links (EDM, dubstep, electro-rock, post-hardcore...) and that it may be good for Wikipedia to expand itself to the huge variety of musical genres that exist, even underground genres. I'm totally yours if you want to talk about it. Best regards, Screamo432 (talk) 16:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC) Priscilla

• Please search this page for the word "decency". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I have created an article of "Ayaan Chawla" but you have deleted that with reason: (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). I understand your concern but I think you haven't read new reference kindly ready & reply. PradeepChowdhury (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2014 (UTC)