Jump to content

User talk:RHaworth/Archive to 2007 January

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is an Online Ambassador on the English Wikipedia
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 ...

Archives

Übersite

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Übersite

I'd like to know why exactly you deleted this. I spent about two hours writing that article, making sure the language was professional and objective, and then you came along and deleted it, marking it "spam."

Spam implies inane babble, unnecessary use of language. Speaking as the guy who wrote it, my intentions were not of the insane, or of one out to harass anybody. It was purely factual, had no bias, was linked to its original sources, etc.

Frankly, I saw the move as extremely cold on your part, especially when I noticed your little tally of articles you've wasted.

I'd expect you to rectify your actions, or at the very least give me sort further sort of explanation. --CodeMalicious 09:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Advertising? Honestly, that's a rather stupid reason. Why not go ahead and delete the page for McDonald's then? You'd say because McDonald's is a well-established brick of society, and deserves to have its history and other notable facts displayed. Well Ubersite is a well-established brick of the internet, and deserves equal treatment. In an encyclopedia, advertising and informing are the exact same thing. In both cases, the end result is to have people know more about the subject. It's not like I wrote it, "Go to Ubersite! It's the best!" That's the advertising you're talking about, with implied bias. There was none of that in the article, and you know it. As far as your Zetawoof reference, I can't find hide nor hair as to what you're talking about. I can't take your claim seriously until I can. --CodeMalicious 09:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Did you read the deletion log entry. Did you follow the link to the Artices for deletion discussion before you wrote your message to me?
You had made no attempt to establish that Übersite is a well-established brick of the internet. "Spam" was slightly inappropriate, I should have said reposted: AfD'd and {{db-web}}. My reference to Zetawolf was clear enough, I thought, but I will spell it out even more clearly. The summary on the last edit of the article is: 2007-01-08 t 07:53:23 Zetawoof (Talk | contribs | block) (db-web (notability not established)). I think that is self-explanatory. -- RHaworth 17:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course I checked both the areas you referred me to, there is no mention in either category of a Zetawoof. If you truly are linking me to the correct area, you and I are seeing different things, because my end has no Zetawoof.

As far as your reasoning that I did not establish a foundation for the site, how would you propose I do that? List the various statistics associated with Ubersite? Cite how Alexa rates it the 40,309th most popular website? How it has almost 30,000 registered users? How it generated more web traffic than the Goatse homepage, which coincidentally is allowed a Wikipedia page?

Please, answer me this, why would you allow a Goatse Wiki entry to exist, but not Ubersite? Surely Ubersite contributes more to the world than a man stretching his anus.

In any case, the numbers I just listed above, which do provide a basis or argument of its popularity...it's bragging. "Look, I have 30,000 members, I'm popular!" That's why I didn't include them. Because the only way to prove worth according to your almighty standards is to cite statistics, but in the end, it just comes off as "spam." I can't win either way, even though it's undoubtedly true the article is worth having. CodeMalicious

  • Even though your sole reason for being here is to advertise Übersite, you could try a little to understand how Wikipedia works. What is this rubbish above about areas and a category of a Zetawoof. Zetawoof - follow the link for goodness sake - is a wikipedia user. How would you like it if I referred to you as a category?
You are wasting your time writing here - I am not going to restore your article. As I have already said, raise the matter at deletion review. There are a thousand other admins - you may just find one who will restore it. -- RHaworth 15:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Obviously you have no idea how to read contextually, because I was referring to the two pages of Wikipedia you sent me to find his comment, the deletion log entry, and the article for deletion discussion. He is nowhere to be found on either page.
Just to make sure you understand what I'm saying, here is how the sentence in question would sound phonetically: "Of course I checked both the areas you referred me to, (brief pause) there is no mention in either category (phrase break here) of a Zetawoof."
Now, if I need to explain to you how the words "area" and "category" could be applied to sections of a website, we have a problem here.
Next time you quote me, make sure you type the actual words I wrote, in the context they were written.
Anyways. I understand fairly well how Wikipedia works. I'm not the complete idiot you take me out to be.
For example, I understand that Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia, where people are able to write their own entries, on subjects they deem need to be recognized and informed upon.
Of course, there have to be some standards, because if people are allowed to write on whatever they want, Wikipedia will no longer be a credible source of information, and delve into an area somewhere on the level of a teenager's blog. That's where people like you come in, deleting articles that are nonsensical, or "not important enough."
Now apparently Ubersite falls into the latter category. By putting it on Wikipedia, I'm promoting it, giving it more credit than it is due.
I honestly think that's false, and that you're not giving it a chance, just because you've never heard of it. But that's not fair, because tens of thousands of other people have, and I've given you the statistics to prove that.
The Ubersite Wiki article would not be the most important topic, I realize that. But the fact of the matter is, it's a subject that affects a lot of people, and that deserves to be recognized.
All that being said, I won't take this up to the deletion review board, because then I'd be convincing strangers of my beliefs. Even if I did succeed in getting it put back up, undoubtedly it would be taken down again by another admin like you.
But if I convince you, the guy who took it down in the first place, well, that means it deserves to stay for good. It means that even the toughest critic saw its worth. CodeMalicious 22:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Twysted

Yes hello, you deleted my page and gave it the tag (Nonsense), however this page was not nonsense, as it was about a person and his life. i posted in its talk page and you never decided to discuss it with me. which on your part is in direct violation of Wikipedia´s User Agreement, i was told that if a page was being contested for its deletion that the person deleteing it was REQUIRED to discuss the terms and reason for deletion, you did not. so either restore my page, or discuss with me why you deleted it. Breaking Wikipedia´s rules is not considered doing a good job on your part. As such i can not post a "wikilink" to my page because you deleted it. Twysted. TheTwystedOne 20:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Cannot post a link - but you just did, you chump. There is no obligation on admins to discuss an hangon proposal. However, I will give you the benefit of an AfD so that you can see whether people share my views or yours. -- RHaworth 20:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
It is very strange, you claim to have commented at talk:Twysted and I remember that there was something, but it seems to have disappeared. Please provide a link to this alleged "User Agreement". -- RHaworth 20:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Dear RHaworth, I'm sorry I included quote signs around episode titles in the new in-depth Trailer Park Boys episode guide. I didn't realize that we do not include those in episode titles. Please accept my apology. --Jonathan.Bruce 04:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Dokdo

If you create another pointless "Dokdo?" redirect, I shall block you. There are enough existing articles about Dokdo, I suggest you add to them rather than creating a context-free fork. -- RHaworth 11:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

<Forthfully> Hi. OK. That's just a test. Thanks.

RAID

Thanks for your comment on the article splitting. it was driving me nuts that everyone was screaming "make it shorter!" yet no one was doing anything. I could have sworn I put "article split" in each comment, but my computer fails to paste sometimes. Anyway, I'll keep that in mind next time to double check! // 3R1C 22:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Marcomé

Hello, i am a Marcomé’s fan. Last month, I wrote Marcomé’s biography under page named Marcomé. I took Loorena Mckennitt page for example . The page was delete and tag protect to recreation. The reason invoke : advertising. How can review this page to ajust it to be fair and respect wikipedia rules ? Also my account and all ip address are blocked ? I would like just to understand.

User:rmamarcome.com — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.36.131.250 (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

When a user with your name, who has done no previous edits, creates an article with that name one is inevitably going to assume that you are the woman herself or her agent and delete the article as advertsing. Furthermore the article contained no 3rd party references which might have helped establish her notability. But you may raise the matter at deletion review by all means.
As to the block on your ID, I suggest you read user talk:rmamarcome.com where people have gone to the trouble of explaining it perfectly clearly. -- RHaworth 01:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The Staff of Forest Guardians

Hi, I realize where you are coming from in the delete of this page The Staff of Forest Guardians, and I have taken your suggestion in removing other earlier drafts from the wiki servers as well. I do however wish to appeal your blocking of my account. I was planning on deleting my older account, but did not know how. I would greatly appreciate any help you could give me on this. I have no malicious intent, I would just like to be able to continue editing and revising my pages. Thank you so much for your time.

Fguardians 19:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I can see no evidence of you being blocked. Why do you think you are blocked? -- RHaworth 19:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

My fault, I misunderstood the sockpuppet tag. Fguardians 20:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Rabbit Ears Television Antenna

Hello, just wondering your reason for the delete. You should leave a reason every time you delete. Thank you.

Colsterdale Towers

You deleted my article on Colsterdale Towers because it "is unquestionably a copyright infringement taken from http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/690552/an/0/page/1#690552, with no assertion of permission." Well, as you can see from the username, THAT'S MY POST on the Google Earth forum, so I hereby give you permission to RESTORE IT on Wikipedia! --Bjmsam 20:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Strictly speaking you should mark the forum posting to say that it is licensed under the GFDL or that Wikipedia has explicit permission to use it - see template:copyvio. However, I am prepared to accept your statement without such evidence.
Especially in an online article, it seems pointless to give the Landranger sheet number against a grid ref - there are so many other ways in which the grid ref can be used. -- RHaworth 20:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Eventually I made a WikiProject

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 Faddle 18:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

WW II airfields

Re User:RHaworth/todo#World War II airfields in Great Britain. Just to let you know that the Blackpool Airport article has moved to Blackpool International Airport and you may want to update the link. I also noticed that some of the other links go to the community rather than the airfield, such as Hinton in the Hedges Airfield and Colerne Airfield. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:08, 8 October 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.

How did you find it, anyway? I hadn't added it to any cats yet. Adam Cuerden talk 17:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Designs of the time

Just wondering why you deleted the above page. Stephen —Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenMo (talk • contribs)

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. -- RHaworth 15:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Kogswell Cycles Page

I am a newby at Wikipedia, so please forgive me any sins I might commit.

Kogswell Cycles recently put up an entry, which was deleted restored, and deleted again. Now it appears to be protected against re-creation. You were one of the administrators involved in the process.

I did not see the orginal Kogswell entry, but I can definitely tell you that Kogswell is deserving of a Wikipedia entry. Kogswell has a large and growing fan base, and the company is making a real impact on the cycling world. See comments at: Talk:Kogswell_Cycles.

Here are a few links to entries on other bicycle companies with some similarities to Kogswell: Rivendell Bicycle Works and Richard Sachs.

Whatever problems existed in the original entry can be eliminated, or a new entry can be created by someone with no affiliation whatsoever with the company.

How can members of KOG (the Kogswell Owners Group) petition to have the company name unprotected to allow for a new Wikipedia entry? Any help you could give would be much appreciated.

I have no professional affiliation with Kogswell whatsoever. I do not even own one of their bicycles, although I will definitely buy one when they come out with a model that is big enough for me!

Sincerely Forbes Bagatelle-Black Fbagatelleblack

Kogswell Cycles recently put up an entry says it all - it was advertising which can be deleted on sight. Certainly we can do without pure ad copy such as : reprise the fine cycling experience of the late twentieth century!
Write your own version of the article at user:Fbagatelleblack/sandbox. Make sure that you establish why the company is notable (and please use wikilink format not external link format for wikilinks!). Then raise the matter at deletion review. -- RHaworth 03:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Brent Simon

Hello, I'm writing to receive a little justification of the "Brent Simon" article being deleted, and protected from recreation. I personally see no real reason for the deletions, if you consider the following:

Brent's recognition started with YouTube and gained worldwide recognition thereafter. Then he was featured on FM radio with a wide range of listeners, then he was featured in newspapers, then international webcasts, G4, then on two affiliate television stations, and finally, a showing on a national USA broadcast of ABC's Jimmy Kimmel Live.

Brent holds all the "qualifications" to hold a Wiki entry. If we were to hold true that there were good reasons (of which there are not) that Brent should not be there, then people like Gary Brolsma and Brooke Brodack should also not have entries, but yet they do. Both of those "celebrities" acquired fame the exact same way Brent did - internet video. Both have been featured in newspaper, radio and television, just like Brent.

Any comments you have to offer are greatly appreciated, I in no way mean any hostility towards you or anyone else, I would just like some response.

Thank You. -- R41N570RM 00:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

  • It may well be true that Wikipedia has yet to work out criteria for judging "internet phenomena" however in this case eight people concur that the guy is non-notable. Which was good reason for deleting and protecting. But, as I told you a month ago on your talk page, you do have a democratic right to raise the matter at deletion review. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RHaworth (talk • contribs) .

Electronic voice phenomenon/Temp

Please restore this article. It is a work-in-progress for a rewrite of the EVP article. I don't want to seem rude but you really need to check the history before you simply speedy "temp" subpages to check for activity. ---J.S (t|c) 15:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I did check for history. Nothing had happened to the article for two hours. Please add some actual content. At the moment the article fully qualifies for deletion with {{empty}}. -- RHaworth 16:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Except there is an active discussion going on about the structure of the rewrite. That's why I put the sections in first before I rewrite content. Please please please don't delete sandboxes with recent activity. ---J.S (t|c) 16:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That isn't usually necessary in my experience. I've never had a sandbox deleted in 2 hours. Oh well, things can be undeleted with ease, and this was just a misunderstanding. ---J.S (t|c) 17:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Recent protection of Princess Daisy

You recently protected[1] this page but did not give a protection summary. If this is an actual (not deleted) article, talk, or project page, make sure that it is listed on WP:PP. VoABot will automatically list such protected pages only if there is a summary. Do not remove this notice until a day or so, otherwise it may get reposted. Thanks. VoABot 01:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk Archive

Thanks. Actually, I created two goofed up talk archives, one under "Archive 1" and one under "Veracious Rey Archive 1". Veracious Rey 06:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have fixed both. NB. to get rid of mistakes like those use {{db|reason}} not {{AfD}}. -- RHaworth 06:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Csaba Zvekan

This is regardening your remark me being a Spammer.This is not true .I honestly wrote this article and and it has nothing to do with spam or advertising.

Old Timeyness

I must admit you are right about the article Old Timeyness. The concept of "Old Timeyness" is one I independentantly recognized. I know Wikipedia isn't the place for original research, but I doubt that no one else has recognized this phenominon besides myself. I am going to do some frantic web surfing and see if I can substantiate my observations. Thanks for the "nicely written" comment, and thanks for being a sharp Wikipundit.◄HouseOfScandal►09:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Try moving it to talk:nostalgia/old timeyness or talk:anachronism/old timeyness and link to it from the parent talk page. That way you get it on Wikipedia and no one is likely to prod it.
Or try calling it Cultural references to the end of the nineteenth century. -- RHaworth 09:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

As per User talk:Gnevin

I was in a rush as I was in work and forgot to sign my post and made a typo . Whilst it is very good of you to try to help , it would be better if you got off your high horse and read WP:Bite which still applies even if i have 10,000+ edits and WP:AGF and my favourite WP:Dont come off all high and mighty with me (Gnevin 15:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC))

Very sorry if you found my wording a bit strong. -- RHaworth 18:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The massacre at Tarlis

The page The massacre at Tarlis is protected and is a redirect to Treaty of Sèvres. Originally, this article was a content fork for the deleted article Tarlis massacre about a alleged war crime that is poorly documented (no notable sources). The redirect to Treaty of Sèvres is inappropriate because the articles are not related. Several other similar content forks have been already deleted[2] [3] [4]. Please delete this article and protect its name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AndreasJS (talk • contribs) 02:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC).Sorry, just forgot to sign  Andreas  (T) 02:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You must be telepathic! I was meaning to ask somewhere about the connection between Tarlis and Sèvres and you have answered my question before I asked it. Given Kaltsef's persistence via numerous sock puppets, it will probable be necessary to protect the various alternative titles. Let me know if you want this done. -- RHaworth 07:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...

... for helping clear up banned Kalsef's crap. Look at this, he also created this article.--Euthymios 18:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. I have protected a few more variants of The massacre at Tarlis. I am happy to continue helping but be aware that user:Khoikhoi is an admin and seems to have knowledge of this subject. I have zero knowledge, I am simply following what seems to be a clear consensus (ie. what Kaltsef calls a cabal!).
Nevertheless I would be interested to know what basis in fact Kaltsef's stories have. For example we get this minute number of Ghits for Anton Kaltsef. Did the guy exist at all or is he just an invention of a propaganda machine? -- RHaworth 18:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you kind sir

For your efforts at stopping vandalism and spam. -THB 19:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Notability

I swear by God there will come a day in the very near future when I will have a valid wikipedia article about myself and it will not be contested! The time will come when nobody will validly be able to contest my notability. But apparently that day is not now; I am bitter, but not defeated! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steven Steven (talk • contribs) 10:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Prodding a user page?

Hi. Is it standard practice to use prod for a user space page like you did at User:Mywikiabc/objective? I've got a short list of spammy user pages but I figured I'd go to WP:MFD when time passed and it became clear that the user was only here to make a spammy user page. Just curious.  :) — Wknight94 (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I cannot quote any precedent or rule book entry for this but it seems a sensible thing to do. A prod plus a message on the talk page gives the sinner a few days to copy the stuff off. Indeed when Calton cleans up userfied vanity pages, he uses a speedy tag to get rid of them. -- RHaworth 20:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
See also User:MER-C/Spam. -- RHaworth 09:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Yep, and it did get deleted. So I guess I learned something, thanks!  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 11:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Removal war ...

... over an article an editor has marked for deletion .

I'm contacting you because I have previously found you to be an active and righteous administrator. Could you please review the article Horilka and that article's Talk:horilka in regard to the changes made by Mikkalai a.k.a. mikkanarxi? He has marked the article for deletion (ref.: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horilka ) and continues to revert it and remove information to suit his aim of having it deleted. You can also find, by examining his contributions that he has repeatedly listed articles related to Ukraine for deletion, including Kovbasa. I am not certain what the best course of action is in regard to this situation, however, it would be a shame to see an article that potential to inform and greater potential for expansion deleted as a result of one editor's crusade. Thank you. DvonD 02:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

You can take the matter to Wikipedia:Mediation but the AfD discussion seems to be pretty clear that horilka and vodka are one and the same thing. -- RHaworth 02:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention! I agree that the discussion seems to be going there and I can certainly understand that argument. Nevertheless, isn't it still hugely inappropriate for an editor to remove content repeatedly in order to have the article he listed deleted? Is no one supposed to edit it in order to improve it while it is being considered for deletion? It just seems like such behavior is injurious to the whole wiki community. If someone does research and seeks our sources to make articles better and they are arbitrarily discarded due to the AfD lister's whim that no periodicals may be used as sources. DvonD 02:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry, I just don't see what you are fussing about. The obvious answer is for Horilka to redirect to Vodka and for a short section in that article entitled "Vodka in the Ukraine". -- RHaworth 03:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I've come to believe that's best as well. My frustration is with the repeated removal of referenced material and citations because one guy's on some ethno-centric crusade. DvonD 03:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The person obviously has no clue about the topic and now trying to go personal. Notice this is my first critique of this contributor. Until now I commented on the invalidity of sources he googled and some false statements he added without sourcing them (he could not). I am a seasoned drinker of horilka/gorzalka/harelka/degtine/vodka (but I am not adding my experiences, I am just deleting bullshit). `'mikkanarxi 04:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ralph Ellis

Just thought I'd remind you that you put a self-promotion tag on Ralph Ellis on 26 November, as it was created by user Ralphellis. The article was expanded and tag was removed the same day, but this editing was also done by the same user. So far no-one else has contributed to the article, and apart from the article about himself (and linking to himself as an author), this user's only other edits are promotion of the theories from his books. -- 144.138.137.6 06:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but why could not you raise the AfD? -- RHaworth 09:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The Virtual Wall

Ref: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/The_virtual_wall

Dear Mr. Haworth,

I object to your request for deletion of the Wikipedia article about The Virtual Wall.

The article about The Virtual Wall is not an advertisement.

I have placed detailed arguments on the talk section of http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/The_virtual_wall and there's no need to repeat them here.

After reading that rebuttal, could you please tell me whether you retract your request for deletion or what I may do to modify the article to be acceptable?

Sincerely, The Virtual Wall 03:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC) Jim Schueckler Jim@VirtualWall.org

  • WP:COI states clearly that you should avoid editing articles related to your organization. My advice would be: allow the article to be deleted and wait until someone else writes about the site. But I have submited the article to AfD and will abide by its decision. -- RHaworth 09:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I AGREE MANY U;

HERE NOT IN USA I IS BE ABLE TO HATE DARKS. WHITE POWER IS RITE POWER. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beesomic000 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Although we are new to wikipedia we have found our welcoming to be very hostile. We appeal to your fairness as an admin to release the page protection on LEGAL MEDICAL ADVISOR. We are being harrassed by user THB about page edits we dont fully understand why. We have steamlined our article and have taken out ALL outside links to external pages. We will be happy to edit the page more if need be. I dont want to continue a deletion war with THB because I feel powerless to defend our point of view because we lack the complaining talents of this user to get users blocked and pages THB would like removed, removed. Please review the discussion page of Legal medical advisor for a better view of this harrassment.

On deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Legal Medical Advisor. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. lpritchard 01:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Your welcoming has been hostile because we do not like spammers. Worse, you comitted blatant forgery of THB's name and vandalised the LMA article twice. So don't expect a shred of sympathy or support from me. (And if that constitutes biting the newbies, consider yourself firmly bitten!) -- RHaworth 09:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy

Please take a look at Sean Harnett, which has had tags removed by creators and is at least in part a hoax (see Talk page). --Dweller 10:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Dweller's Ode to the Helpful Admin

I spend a lot of time patrolling Recent Changes,
Looking for destruction that's been wrought on our pages,
There's so many articles that are based on "the conceit thing",
So thank you doing this bit of deleting. Dweller, 2006 --Dweller 11:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Babingley River

Dear Roger,

Just wanted to direct your attention to the latest developments in the ever-expanding soap opera that is... Babingley River!

Please see: User talk:Jvhertum.

Regards, Jvhertum 14:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Michael 'Warble" Finucane

Hi. Since you previously prodded it, I thought you'd like to know that Michael 'Warble" Finucane is at AfD. NickelShoe (Talk) 18:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Not to pester you

But the user http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Jxtrotter is for the better part a trouble maker, and seeing how you are about the only active admin on wikipedia, I was hoping you could do something about it. Thank you. Sincerely Carlo V. Sexron 11:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC) Carlo V. Sexron "trying to keep wikipedia clean."

  • Thank you

Thank you for your swift and precise removal of said articles. Carlo V. Sexron 11:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC) Carlo V. Sexron

why speedy tag articles?

like this instead of just deleting them yourself? You're a sysop, after all. You can reply here.--Kchase T 11:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I firmly believe that all but the silliest Wikipedia articles require two people to delete them: a "user" to nominate for deletion and an admin/sysop to agree the proposal and actually do the deed. In the case of this article, no-one else had touched it so I put myself in "user-mode" and tagged it. If any concerns had already been expressed, eg. a speedy tag present or deleted or a prod tag, then I would probably have deleted it myself.
The frequency of &quot;why did you delete" questions on this talk page is, I believe, confirmation that my policy is correct. -- RHaworth 12:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. Presumably this doesn't include the "mike plays on the football team at reinhold high school and wants to be an astronaut" and &quot;i pwn n00bs!" articles? In any event, looks like that article got deleted. Cheers!--Kchase T 12:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Even those I used to put speedy tags on. But I have become bolder of late. -- RHaworth 13:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

two sets of eyes

I've just been convinced of the wisdom of your double tagging/two sets of eyes approach in the most persuasive way possible. See [5]. You've won a convert.--Kchase T 20:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Rodney Marks (astrophysist)

Well I wish people would be a little less trigger happy with the tags too - anyway, thank you for your comments on Rodney marks article. As for why an explanation of the importance of the Rodney Marks article wasn't in the first scentence of the article, it is because I write articles with information laid out for readers, not for administrators and deletionists. Since the article clearly wasn't "i pwn n00bs!", I consider any administrator or deletionist who wishes to bugger round with it should have the courtesy to read the article first - and given that the article was tagged within seconds of first posting, without waiting for it to be completed, whoever tagged it clearly hadn't read it at all.

However, since the issue is raised, a note about the importance is now in the last scentence. (I have not said first murder in Antarctica - although some media have said that - because the coroner has only indicated it is most probably murder, and I am not satisfied anyone has researched whether there have been other murders, accordingly I noted the importance was the press response to the story, which hopefully satisfies deletionists :-) Winstonwolfe 05:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Putting the importance in the first paragraph is not for deletionists: it is for the readers! -- RHaworth 05:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

PolishCoA

Move from Template and Infobox PolishCoA FULL structure to Wikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology/PolishCoA. Very well done. Thank you my friend. --Gustavo Szwedowski de Korwin 17:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Bohol/locator maps

Thank you for the message. I could have deleted other list by db-author noting your comments, thus, there is no need for the above talk. As for the other lists, yes, they are my own work and yes, I will make the necessary moves. Thank you for the corrections. Very respectfully yours, --Pinay06 (Talk/Email) 19:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

db-noncom

Fair use rationale for BIA dests 073

Thanks for uploading Image:BIA dests 073.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

jake4.jpg deletion and rebirth

Thanks for the education on the GFDL stuff. I am new at this. It is still a little confusing but the bottom line is all about liability. I spaced out several times on not being logged in while editing the Steel square. It was amusing how that image became a commercial. Your photo on the user page is definitely original. --Jack 02:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Firearms wikiproject

Thanks for correcting that. I hadn't realized anything was amiss.--LWF 23:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Newtonmas

I was very suprised that there was no article about Newtonmas. And more suprised when I saw that it was an article, but has been deleted. I have several friends that use that name instead of christmas when speaking english. (In swedish the standard name for the christmas has no references at all to the christianity: "jul", so we have never needed to invent a new name).

wrong

From Angusmcellan's talkpage or sometihng

"I suspect User:Chikinpotato11 is of an age to be receiving GPA's him/herself! The "GPA in ..." articles are simply cut and pastes from grade (education). The grade_(education) article is too big and does need splitting but I suggest: prod all the "GPA in ..." articles (I think Chikinpotato11 has now given up); revert grade_(education); wait for someone else to do the job properly."

Apparently you were wrong.--Chikinpotato11 21:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned talk page

You deleted Lee Field Walstad back in May ([6]), but didn't delete its associated talk page, Talk:Lee Field Walstad. Could you take care of this as well? Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Done but all you had to do was put {{db-talk}} on the page! -- RHaworth 19:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Karazenpo Go Shinjutsu

Hello;

My name is Jay Madriaga. I had an article titled "Karazenpo Go Shinjutsu" in Wikipedia. You removed this article citing copyright infringement because - as you stated, it was copied from the web site www.umaassociation.com.

I am the writer of this article, and therfore could not have violated any copyrights of any sort. Below is an email to me - from the owners of the web site that you cited, and state that I violated. Clearly, you can see that thsi is not the case. PLEASE restore the article. Wikipedia is about information, not supresion of information.

From: bmastermailman@aol.com To: Eliminator2ZX@aol.com Sent: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 5:01 PM Subject: Re: YOUR HISTORY

Dear Mr. Madriaga;

My husband and I were away for the holidays and this is the first time we have seen either of your messages. However, your protest makes no sense as the first paragraph of our history page clearly states..."This history is copyrighted material by J.Madriaga. It may be used freely provided proper acknowledgement is made to the source of the material." How much clearer than that can we be? We have been posting your history on our web site for years and we have always given you credit for the material!

Sensei Dahrla Mailman United Martial Arts Association 1328 W. Grand Ave. Ste. E Grover Beach, CA 93433 805-473-3102 www.umaassociation.com

"Jmadriaga 14:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)"

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Robth"

The Dec 29 edits to the article were what I call an "insult to Wikipedia". They were a crude copy and paste of HTML from somewhere else. Absolutely no attempt had been made to turn it into a Wikipedia article. It contained a claim that the material could be copied freely but no link was provided back to the source of the article.
I am concerned that this is a fork of Shaolin Kempo Karate. I do not know whether your flavour of karate is at all notable or little more than a personal thoery with few followers. Also I note this strange comment in the 2006-12-24 22:05:40 state of the article: "This guy is an idiot. We have led him to water and he is too dumb to drink it. Bill are you ever going to do your homework or is your head in your ass forever?" Which guy is the alleged idiot?
I am not willing to restore the article - take the matter to deletion review and canvass the views of Wikipedia martial arts experts. -- RHaworth 15:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

2nd opinion requested

I PRODded Nerd pride day. The author removed the prod, added some references, and left a quite polite message at the top of my talk page. I still believe it's essentially a made-up "holiday" that's been celebrated exactly once, but I don't want to start an AfD if everyone is going to say "it's in the Spanish Wikipedia," and "references are provided right in the article." Your opinion? Joyous! | Talk 15:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Nerd pride day

Thanks for your opinion. Nevertheless, my reference to google was just an answer to Bwithh and I have already linked it. About your "not relevant enough in the English-speaking world", let me tell you that I consider myself an anglophile and, under my point of view, if anyone from anywhere in the world should be concerned about an issue, he would perform his search in English (neither in esperanto nor in interlingua). I do not at all agree with your anglocentric point of view, but have broader thoughts about what this wikipedia is. Isn't it an english-speaking world we're living in? I hope you will consider being a bit more polite and a little less demagogical in your future contributions. Thank you again for making Wikipedia a place for censure. I think most of us will prefer more cooperation and less destructive criticism. Please, do not take this as an offense (it is not at all my intention) but as a piece of adviceLeChimp 17:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pallywood.jpg

Hello RHaworth,

I'm a little puzzled by the deletion of this image. Is it possible you could review it and let me know what the issue was? Thanks, TewfikTalk 17:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It was deleted because the uploader had requested its deletion - see idw-noncom. It has been re-uploaded but I am even less happy about the present licence tag. The image is described as being taken by a professional news agency photographer. I want very good evidence that this image has been released under a Creative Commons licence. -- RHaworth 19:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I was being too gentle. It is a patent copyvio - Jaakobou must prove otherwise if it is to stay. I doubt if a fair use case can be made. -- RHaworth 06:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I left a message on his Talk. Thanks for taking the effort to undelete for review. Cheers, TewfikTalk 19:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Nuckin'_Futs.jpg

Hello RHaworth,

I'd like to know why you removed the Nuckin'_Futs.jpg Image?
I was using it for an article I am doing on the animation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marc.GZR (talk • contribs) 15:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Image:M&ts.jpg

Unfortunately, unencyclopedic isn't a speedy deletion criterion for images. List this on IFD instead. --Coredesat 22:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ain't you never read WP:SNOW? At least you took out Image:Murray&theskankers.jpg. -- RHaworth 11:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Just some wiki help

A year ago you helped me by moving some talk off of my user page to my talk page. A newby person did this again. Maybe you wouldn't mind doing it, and advising me if it is something that I could do? I can find my name pretty easy still by the fact that it is red. I do know how to search now, so I really don't have the excuse of not finding my name easily. But I have been making a lot of things in a variety of areas, and it is quick for me to find my name this way. Thanks. Mmcannis (from the SonoranDesert of Arizona).. Mmcannis 23:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply is on your user page! -- RHaworth 11:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Agip logo 569)

Thanks for uploading Image:Agip logo 569.jpg. 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. MECU≈talk 00:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Only problem is that the replacement Image:Agip Logo.jpg had a very dubious licence tag. -- RHaworth 01:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

new pages by user:Webmailnet

Could you do me a massive favour and look into the edits of the above user? He's created some new pages recently and its almost like he's trying to harbour muslim beliefs, I've had one article speedied already (Kuwait kerala islahi centre ) but could you give your opinion please on the other articles? Thanks a million RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or lets have banter 01:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks, I see you've looked at the pages and think there OK, I must have got the wrong end of the stick with them, guess if your not sure its always best to check - I don't want to go putting speedy deletion tags willy nilly! Thanks for your support on the talk page aswell RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or lets have banter 02:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

What, pray, is wrong with harbouring muslim beliefs? Clearly the sentence "We pray that Allah ..." needed to be struck from the above article. Barring that, I would not have classed it as spam. (Actually it was a copyvio from http://www.islahikuwait.org/ ) Clearly the guy needs watching but I see no grounds for strong action such as blocking. Best thing to do is to find an established muslim Wikipedian and ask them to nurture the guy. -- RHaworth 02:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles Crutchfield's bio

Hello, Please comment on why you deleted my article: http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Charles_E._Crutchfield_III%2C_MD&action=edit, I am not sure how to provide a link to a deleted article. If that link does not work, then look up Charles E. Crutchfield III, MD. Thank you. 21:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)kerrygirl —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerry@crutchfielddermatology.com (talk • contribs)

Somewhere on your screen you will see a link marked "my contributions". Follow it. None of your edits have been deleted - yet. But your article is blatant spam and is likely to fail AfD. -- RHaworth 21:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles Crutchfield further qs

Hello, Regarding: Charles E. Crutchfield III

I agree with you. This article is spam according to the rules. Sorry, that was unintentional. We actually thought it was pretty unbiased. We would like to delete the old one and submit a new, completely factual article to replace it. What do you suggest as the cleanest process to do this? I am confused by the info that I read in the WikiHow, and apparently confused about this article being deleted already. Any clear direction that you could give me would be most appreciated! Thanks, 20:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)kerrygirl

Charles Crutchfield's bio - qs 3

Hello. Per your advice, I visited my contributions page. The information on my contributions page said:

19:47, 2 January 2007 RHaworth (Talk | contribs) deleted "Charles E. Crutchfield III, MD" (content was: '#REDIRECT Charles E. Crutchfield III' (and the only contributor was 'RHaworth'))

Unless I am misunderstanding it, it says that you deleted my article. You stated that you did not. Did you delete it? If not, then where is it? A search does not pull it up. I am sincerely asking for help on this confusing issue. Please explain.

Also, please comment on my question about resubmitting the article. You said to wait for someone else to write it. That is not an option for me, as it has been assigned to me by my boss. I am in a tough spot.

So, if I follow the rules of writing a biography, can I simply edit the old article and save it? How do I make it easy to find?

I am thankful for your help. If I can get some clear answers, I will stop asking questions. If you don't want to answer my questions, please tell me who to ask for the best results. Thanks 20:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)kerrygirl

  • So if it says redirect, why not go where the redirect pointed and you will get this deletion log entry. All I deleted was the redirect created when I moved the article. My statement above none of your edits have been deleted was correct at the time - it was 22 hours later when Naconkantari (whom you may contact yourself) deleted your edits.
You are a shameless hussy: that is not an option for me, as it has been assigned to me by my boss. In other words you are shamelessly admitting that you have been asked to write an advert for the guy. Show him this page, show him WP:SPAM. See if he is as cheeky as you and is prepared to raise the matter at deletion review. -- RHaworth 21:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Charles Crutchfield's bio - qs 4

You seem to enjoy insulting people that are asking for your help. I am trying to write a bio, not an ad. With a little advice, this could be a helpful article full of important dermatology information. I appreciate that you explained about the deletion. I hope that someone else will take the time to answer my questions. Please don't interfere. Kerrygirl 22:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)kerrygirl

Nahjul Balaghah

The editor also uploaded the whole thing as a 2.5 MB PDF file (at Image:Nahjul Balaghah.pdf). Is there a speedy category appropriate for that one? I usually don't deal with images/file uploads much. Fan-1967 15:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I was going to leave it because it should disappear semi-automatically because it has no copyright tag. But db-copyvio should fix it, even if you quote the html you already found. -- RHaworth 16:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

My Mistake

Dear Biblbroks, Deville, Steve, Bonadea and R.Haworth - Sorry. I should have read more before creating inappropriate pages. Thanks for all your help in writing to me. I must admit to having filled insome detail under User:C.J. Harrington I will check this and if necessary, edit this out asap. 7 January 2007 C.J. Harrington. User talk:C.J. Harington

Illinois Humane Society

Mr. Haworth,

I am new to the Wikipedia and understand that we must provide a copyright authorization for the text and images used in the article about the organization. (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Illinois_humane_society)

I have emailed an authorization to permissions-en@wikimedia.org

Is there anything else I need to do?

Thanks so much for your care and help,

Paulbodine 03:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Paul A. Bodine, President Illinois Humane Society, paul.bodine@illinoishumanesociety.org

Safelayer Secure Communications

Mr. Haworth,

we have contributed with an article regarding the company "Safelayer Secure Communications" http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Safelayer_Secure_Communications and you reported it as spam. We will appreciate your help determning the best way to improve the contents of the article for not being considered spam.

Thanks a lot, Safelayer 14:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Angel Toribio,

Tony Honickberg

This page still exists on a protected deleted page. Hello I nominated the article and noticed this creation Talk:Tony Honickberg on my watchlist after your deletion. The user refuses to give up. Thanks, Ronbo76 20:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Mitch Epstein bio

You have proposed deletion for the bio of photographer Mitch epstein. While I understand that this article may be an imperfect stub, and Mitch Epstein's significance in the photography field may be challenged, I can attest to the fact that this was not a self-promotional article, and I urge you to reconsider your deletion decision.

In fact, this biographical stub (as well as new stubs on photographers Katharina Sieverding‎, Maggie Taylor, Nicolas Tikhomiroff, and Micha Bar-Am) were written by 16-year-old high school students studying photography, with the hope that their stub may eventually become the germ of a solid biographical article with the help of other Wiki users. (I am their photography teacher, and admittedly a Wikipedia novice myself.) The students were asked to choose a photographer whose career, contributions to the field, and body of work reflect someone worthy of a Wikipedia entry. They did their best; however I am asking them to take your challenge seriously and rewrite the stub to better establish the significance of their subject. I just fear their work will be deleted before they can do so.

Thanks for your consideration! Any advice welcome! Cbaer 13:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as Mitch Epstein goes, the main thing that triggered my placing my Advert message was the fact that the author had edited no other articles. But you explain that above. Re-reading the article, there is nothing seriously wrong with it - she has even given it categories and a stub tag, which many newbies omit. Just provide one or two links to "third party" reviews of his work. The {{prod}} tag gives her four days to fix it, but what is to stop you removing the tag? -- RHaworth 13:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Donaldson

Thanks for your contribution in Thomas Donaldson Amvdboogaard 13:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wild beasts

In october you put this band up for Afd. I was wondering how they meet WP:MUSIC now? For a start they have signed for the same record label as the artic monkeys (I know that might not sound too notable to you but wait for it.............), also they have had an article in the guardian, and appeared on BBC radio 6 music/ Could you tell me if the band are now notable and meet WP:MUSIC? In my opinion they do but I would prefer your opinion RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 04:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Depending on their educational level, the fathers of you and the boys in this band may well have been to Kendal Grammar School at the same time as me or been taught by my father, Jack Haworth at the Kendal secondary modern school. But that don't gain them any sympathy - I would probably hate their music. In any case, I generally abstain from discussion of bands here. (Who are the Arctic Monkeys anyway?)
But since the article had a solid "delete" vote at AfD, the procedure should be: create a new version of the article at user:Ryanpostlethwaite/Wild beasts incorporating your stuff above; then raise the matter at WP:DRV with a link to your new version. Best of luck. -- RHaworth 06:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you'll know the name Robert Talbot? Think he went to that school, but then also became a teacher himself, in fact one of the band members is his son! Would there be any chance you could fish the article out of the deletion logs and put it into user:Ryanpostlethwaite/Wild beasts for me is there? I think that the article itself was quite good RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I've requested a deletion review for Wild beasts, and its entry can be found here (at the bottom of the page). I've tried to show how they meet WP:MUSIC in my user section but its been quite tricky! Anyway, guess its in gods hands now! RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Joel Holland

I noticed this article when it's creator, Joelholland (talk · contribs) removed the prod you put on it. I've readded the potential_vanity template, but I'm wondering if the article should be AfD'd since the prod was removed. A quick search on Google reveals the BusinessWeek mention is his only claim to fame, so I think notability might be in doubt. I've also tagged the article as having a rather large copyvio from the guy's own website (but since there are some parts that aren't, I haven't speedied it). Since you're the original prodder, I though I'd leave it up to you to do. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 08:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • A copyvio tag confuses the issue. Since it is a blatant vanity piece, he will readily give a copyright release of his stuff. It would have been better to take it straight to AfD. I will wait until the copyvio tag has been actioned. But thanks very much for telling me. -- RHaworth 12:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

C.h.u.n.k. 666

ok, thanks for your reply, i find it curious you deleted my original message on your talkpage - are you really an inclusionist? as stated above, im starting a quick wikibreak (probably til jan23), then i will be busy rewriting the article. im confident it can be rewritten in an encyclopedic syle. thanks for mailing the original version over. as also stated above, i had nothing to do with the article before, but if certain phrases confused you, perhaps you should have contacted the article creator and suggested clarification. you are indeed right to think of chopper bikes - if interested, i suggest you check out tall bikes, where you can see a foto of a chopper frame recycled in quite an exciting way. cheers, Mujinga 13:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Prod removed

I removed the prod from Jyrki Niskanen-a prod of mine had already been removed, so it can't be prodded again. However, the person who removed the previous prod, while claiming the person was notable, has done nothing to show that or fix the text blob, so I've sent the article to AfD. Seraphimblade 11:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed prod notice

Hi. I removed your prod notice from Firdaus Kharas. It's no longer an autobiography - the original text was unsalvageable so I rewrote. There were more sources available, but due to time constraints I used the first I came across and I stopped at that.

When dealing with a living person already in the encyclopedia, I think it's better to have a very short but sourced article, rather than pages of unverified text that could have come from anywhere.

Personally, I don't feel autobiography is a reason for deletion, but I do agree there are many reasons why it's not a good idea. I don't like letting that cloud judgement of what should and shouldn't be in the encylopedia though. Anyway, you might want to take a look and re-prod, given there is only a single source. I might, if I get time, expand the article later, if the other potential sources I skimmed turn out to be reliable. Cheers, CiaranG 16:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RHaworth/Archive_to_2007_January&oldid=1136150976"