User talk:RHaworth/2019 Mar 30

AdoptOpenJDK

Hi there, I see that there was a wikipedia page for AdoptOpenJDK and then it got deleted due to copyright infringement. I don't know who previously wrote the article but I was hoping to add some references from some articles that I've collected. When I go to create a new article it says that I should talk to you first so here I am! Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdams1 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• The previous version was created by Adoptopenjdk (talk · contribs) who, unsurprisingly, is now blocked. I can let you see it - read this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Dea Studio

Hi, I was editing an article called Dea Studio, an architecture firm in Albania and it was only a draft and it got deleted for "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". How can I rewrite it so it can be approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vatratirana (talk • contribs) 09:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• There has never been an article called Dea Studio. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Your A11 deletion of that article in Chinese

You might be interested to know that your treatment of 赤道論 as a case of A11 was mistaken. It's known, possibly among other things, as the equatorial paradox (which is a redirect). On the other hand, I figure A10 would have applied since, even though we don't have an article on it, the subject is covered in more detail at the redirect target than it had in the deleted article. — Largoplazo (talk) 14:13, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• Noted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Bit House Saloon

Resolved

Can you please see my request at Talk:Bit House Saloon? This page should not have been deleted, so I'd like the page restore and moved into draft space if needed. Thank you. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

The draft has been restored. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Another Believer: Done, moved to Draft:Bit House Saloon. @Graywalls: I don't believe Another Believer is being paid to edit articles in Portland, rather like me creating Dublin Castle, Camden, Sun in the Sands, Black Prince, Bexley and Curious Brewery he likes popping in the pub for a pint. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Ritchie333, Paid? I definitely was not paid to create this article. I've created a discussion at WikiProject Oregon re: whether or not this draft should be moved into the main space. An editor keeps flagging many pages for deletion, and I've asked them to please slow down. I'm also seeking restoration of Elephants Delicatessen, and there's an going discussion here, if you're interested or willing to help restore the page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't think you were paid to create the article either, but that's what the CSD tagger accused you of - to which I would say that strong claims require strong evidence. I've restored Draft:Elephants Delicatessen - I'm concerned that wouldn't survive a debate at AfD, but that's not a reason to short-circuit the consensus making process and speedying it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:35, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you, Ritchie. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:14, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Harlan Cage

Hi there. You recently deleted my page which I created on behalf of my friends, the band, Harlan Cage. Apparently you deleted the page due to the band's biography violeting copyright of a website which is making the band's albums available as a torrent download!!!! Please could you put our page back on. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeyland (talk • contribs) 19:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mikeyland: I've restored it to Draft:Harlan Cage, and removed the information copied from the band's website. Copyright violations mean something very specific on Wikipedia; see User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to copyvios for more information. — Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:36, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• I suppose if the band is defunct, your CoI is less serious. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikifying!

Continuing from this:

• Talk:Triple H/GA1
• Wikipedia:Featured article review/CM Punk/archive1
• Talk:Matt Hardy/GA1

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ImmortalWizard (talk • contribs) 19:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

• Your original request was "copy-paste". I said: give me wikilinks: from where to where?" You have now given me the "from" but not the "to". But to get you off my back, I have emailed the stuff. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Finnish former municipality

Question, could you restore Template:Infobox Finnish former municipality? I need to rollback all the changes made by that anonymous editor 89.14.152.24, who by the way is CLEARLY using a script... They transcluded all of the if statements rather than substituting them. Thanks. --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:00, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piippola&diff=prev&oldid=887308653... --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Why "CLEARLY using a script"? Any insight? — 89.14.152.24 (talk) 22:31, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, please restore this template so that it can be substed properly. Here's one example of a failed subst that left template variables in the article. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Jonesey95, and the fix is soo easy, especially for people that have AWB, which I don't [1] 77.11.40.113 (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

• 89.14.152.24, you query the use of "clearly". Like Zachpersonn, I do not believe that anybody could do these 86 edits in 35 minutes! without some sort of automated assistance.

  Jonesey95, what did you not understand about "CLEARLY"? Have seen such allegations several times, even back in 2001/2002. But then there were some people clever enough to figure out how it can be done. Best regards from a Vanguard Editor. 77.11.40.113 (talk) 17:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Zack and Jonesey, now restored. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks. WIll start the fix shortly. --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:32, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

All done. Thanks again for the help! --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:13, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

VoucherCodes Deletion

Hi. Yesterday you deleted the page VoucherCodes stating it was Unambiguous Advertising or Promotion. Having reviewed the text of the article I can't find anywhere that suggests bias or promotion. The information provided is accurate and neutral, and could help any readers that want to learn more about not only the company, but its owners. Can you please let me know the reason for deletion? — TaylorJ1294 (talk)

• So what would you call the words "unambiguous advertising or promotion" (without spurious capitals) if they are not the reason for deletion? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Prose such as "VoucherCodes provides savings opportunities for consumers across retail categories including fashion, travel, home furnishings, technology, health and wellbeing and many more." is not suitable for an encyclopedia article. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I meant examples from within the copy, but thank you Ritchie333 for pointing it out. I'm revising the text now and will try again. - TaylorJ1294 (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2019 (GMT)

Template

See Template talk:Db-x3 which I was typing when you deleted the page. This is best taken to TfD for discussion. — Legacypac (talk) 12:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

• Please use wikilinks whenever you talk about a page! restored.

Thryduulf, this is best taken to TfD for discussion. Please do not re-tag with speedy. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:53, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't intend to re-tag with speedy now that it has been declined by an uninvolved admin. I still don't understand how it did not meet criterion T2 and will take it to TfD if it is restored in any fashion which means it presents itself as a speedy deletion criterion unless and until the criterion is foramlly approved (the discussion is still ongoing, and despite what Legacypac would like to think there is opposition to it that has raised points that have not been countered, and many of the support comments are little more than votes left before concerns were raised). Thryduulf (talk) 12:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I believe the only reason it was showing up as a page up for speedy deletion is it was tagged T2. Without that tag it should work just like the other CSD templates, but that is why we are testing it. Any insights on this are appreciated, I'm not a big template editor and am learning.

The unusual way of assessing the discussion is enlightening. Legacypac (talk) 13:05, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

As explained earlier, testing happens after the criterion is approved (if it is), which is exactly how it has worked for every other new CSD criterion. The way I'm assessing the discussion is not unusual at all, it's how discussions on Wikipedia re meant to be assessed: determining whether there is a consensus based on the strength of the arguments presented not just counting noses. Anyway, this discussion should be happening at AN or TfD, not on RHaworth's talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 13:48, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting/Archive 2

Talk page Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting/Archive 2 should be deleted, as the RFC is still well underway at Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting . --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Userbox deletions

User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Fascist existed for over a decade and is transcluded on ~20 userpages. Deleting it, seemingly per IAR, is unacceptable. It needs to be restored, and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Fascist should be allowed to continue. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 16:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

All of these other userbox deletions from today are also unacceptable, along the same lines as above. Please restore them. WP:MFD is the proper venue to seek their deletion. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 17:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I draw your attention to the fact that at least some of these were previously deleted and restored pursuant to a deletion review. I don't like them myself but I nonetheless believe that the best way forward would be to restore them and list them for discussion at xfd. As you may be aware, the deletion of userboxes has been contentious in the past, and there are still quite a few user pages that transclude some of the ones you deleted. Best regards, UninvitedCompany 19:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I have listed these among others at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Anarchist 1. Please consider participating. UninvitedCompany 20:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

• My bulk deletion of The Ministry of Truth's userboxes was a big mistake. I started to restore them because I say: if a userbox template is used by ten users, it does not matter where it is: it can remain. I restored User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes/Anarcho Syn on this basis and twenty minutes later Fastily zapped it again! I quit. Others can sort things out. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:The Ministry of Truth/Userboxes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 03:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Ambreesh Cosmetics

You recently deleted Ambreesh Cosmetics but probably forgot to close the discussion Here at AFD. Kindly check and close. Lapablo (talk) 19:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

• Lapablo, don't tell me! {{nac}} has been created for just this situation. Use it! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft tumpa paul deleted

This page is not unambiguously promotional, all this information are correct and sources are given. This is my first article, I apologize for my writing pattern. It was not formal so i apologize, but now i have corrected it, all unnecessary lines and words have been removed, i have resubmitted please do review and help. Please. Now my page got deleted but i have to create a same one. what to do i can't understand please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unknown author india (talk • contribs)

(talk page stalker) Something odd is going on here. See also Paul Tumpa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Draft:Paul Tumpa. —C.Fred (talk) 21:54, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

as am new to wikipedia it was my mistake i created with her username i didnt understand. then i read all details and created from a different user. please help me. i messed up all. i apologize. i have deleated all previous content. please help me. what should i do now ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unknown author india (talk • contribs)

Unknown author india the page was deleted because it was promotional. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Paul_Tumpa&oldid=887631972 and you also blanked it out before CSD could be carried out. I'm not sure why it was renamed to Paul Tumpa, other than that a user by the name of Paul Tumpa contributed to it. The actress is supposedly Tumpa Paul with Paul as the family name. Regardless, what was written was still blatantly promotional. Sun Network link http://www.sunnetwork.in/Default.aspx?Lang=bengali is a general television network website and doesn't list her name. https://aranyak.webs.com appears to be a business website that employs Paul. The rest are links to wikipedia pages or Facebook. Need other news sources that cover Tumpa Paul in detail. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

• I was, in fact, inclined to let your page go for review but it has been deleted. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks you are notable and writes about you here. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

CSD Discussion

As you recently deleted a template that I CSDed, can you share your thoughts on this thread? --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:51, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thoughts shared. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Course page deletions

Hello RHaworth, I noticed you've deleted some course pages:

• Wikipedia:Outreach Dashboard/Queen Mary, University of London/Research Methods Film Spring 2018
• Wikipedia:Outreach Dashboard/Queen Mary, University of London/Research Methods Film
• Wikipedia:Outreach Dashboard/Swansea University/LAA319 - Competition Law
• Wikipedia:Outreach Dashboard/Brooklyn Prospect Charter School/IB Psychology (SS 2016)

Please can you restore them while they are being discussed at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 09:59, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

• Restored and a few more that you did not list. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:37, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

ACIL Allen Consulting

Hi RHaworth, I noticed that two weeks ago you deleted the article that I initially created, ACIL Allen Consulting. If there was a discussion about this before the deletion, I missed it and I can't now see the talk page to see what the discussion involved. If there was not a discussion about this before the deletion, shouldn't there have been?

When I initially created the article, there was discussion about whether the topic was notable. I included additional sources to establish notability, and it was subsequently approved. I certainly don't think it qualifies as "G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion". I don't have any affiliation with ACIL Allen, and the article described significant criticism of them - particularly over their tobacco promotion. Thank you. -- AntediluvianBlue (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

• This unexplained edit by an account, apparently created just to do that edit, caused it to get a speedy tag. So I have restored it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Article

Hi User:RHaworth recently I create a general article on Eazystock which got deleted due to volatilizing policy of Wikipedia for promoting the business. You are expert and editor and for sure you must had seen something wrong which is why it got deleted. I went through your first article and understood how it will have to be, but just need to know will I be able to create an article or not, please guide! Thanks Aankitmishra (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

• Following the policy, this page was indeed made volatile and, quite rightly, evaporated. Kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks your company is notable and writes about it here.— RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Permission to Resubmit

Hi User:RHaworth I recently had my article for Draft:Shelby J. (Musician) deleted. I have created a brand new version of the article from scratch and I'm hoping to submit this version for approval. As you are the the admin in charge of the article, preventing it from being created again, I was pointed to you for this approval. Please let me know next steps.— Princefriend (talk) 13:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• The preferred next step is that you should kindly have the decency to wait until someone with no CoI thinks this guy (you?) is notable and writes about him here. But I have not (yet) protected the correct format title: Draft:Shelby J. (musician) so there is nothing preventing you resubmitting. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:37, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

OK to restore a draft?

Hi! One of my students moved their sandbox to spatial cloaking pre-emptively, as the content in the sandbox was in no way ready to be moved live. I've cautioned them on this via Wikipedia but also via email. They do have some general notes in the page, however, and I was wondering if you would be willing to restore it to their userspace at User:Nsjlcuwdbcc/Spatial cloaking. If not, is it OK for me to email the student a copy for their class records and so they can pull their information from it? — Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:36, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Shoot, I overlapped you! I received a notification that a student's article was up for deletion and saw that it was the spatial cloaking - I'd assumed that the student had moved the work in their sandbox live again and was trying to quickly move it to their sandbox before it was deleted again. Sorry about all of the chaos! — Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I was in the process of writing up a rather stern response to them about moving their work live, so I'm glad I don't have to do that! Sorry and thanks again! — Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of file:VinesauceJoel.jpg

Please restore the image. There was no copyright violation and I explained in the talk page that it was fair use and I even added a fair use rationale in the file page. — AwesumIndustrys (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

• I did think of refusing to reply until you provided a link. The guy is still alive so what is preventing someone obtaining a free image? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 14:59, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Draft Michalis Tiverios

Could you please send me the deleted draft for Michalis Tiverios in order to make the necessary changes and resubmit it ? I had put a lot of effort to provide primary and reliable sources and references and I was surprised to see that it was deleted. I would be very grateful if you could briefly inform me for the reason that you totally deleted it without giving me the chance to solve the problems. -- Dimiterzop (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

• Learn wikilinks! Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:16, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Viewmont Viking/List of Scientists

Why did you delete this userspace draft as a G13? The draft was not blank and it did not have an {{AFC submission}} template, so I'm not sure how the criterion applies. I ask this purely out of curiosity: I'm a newcomer to Wikipedia's deletion processes and I'm trying to get a better understanding of the speedy deletion criteria. — Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 15:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

• Don't tell anybody but it has been known for me to delete dead drafts from user space even if they have no AfC tag. Technically this one was not dead because the user had done this trivial edit, clearly in an attempt to keep the page live. However the rules for G13 state that such pages must be restored on demand so I have done so.

Viewmont Viking, within the next year, either submit the page for review or request its deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Emotional Speech Blocks Deletion Syndrome

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

From Mrphilip

1st problem, you used a G12 deletion which we uncalled for and you should be reported for using.

This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with

Zero time given for the author to correct or explain the use of text which was simply verbiage from the 21st Century Cures Act of 2016. The University where is was 'cut & pasted' from added one sentence before and after public domain legislation. Did you read the article or just make a decision based on editing software summary of how the characters got on the page?

Additionally you cite improper use of information from the . http://sites.nationalacademies.org/dbasse/cpop/dbasse_190803 I used this page and the other linked from it all about a workshop they held.

Regardless of the what, 17:14, 16 March 2019 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://isgmh.northwestern.edu/2017/01/20/21st-century-cures-act-calls-for-expanded-nih-focus-on-sexual-and-gender-minority-health/, http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/DBASSE_191476.PDF) (thank). — Mrphilip (talk) 03:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Mrphilip, your attitude is not going to get you far. This is a collegial project. Content is decided by consensus. Don't know how it works in your neck of the woods, but in my neck of the woods it is much easier to build consensus by discussing things collegiately rather than calling other, much more experienced editors names and demanding that this 18 year old website change the way it works to accommodate you. Just sayin....you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Also, cool it with the ALLCAPS. It's just rude. John from Idegon (talk) 04:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

If most of the page is copyvio we ax the entire page. The newer and newer authors the faster we ax instead of remove portions. It is your responsibility not to introduce copy vio per the notice that comes on every edit you save. You don't get 6 months to fix it. — Legacypac (talk) 04:32, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

FYI there is also a thread about this here Wikipedia:Teahouse#how many hours should be allowed before deleting draft article reviewed 1x. — MarnetteD|Talk 04:46, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

As none of you have seen this article it might be inappropriate to pass judgement on a minor portion of the articles content. What was a simple fixable copyright error on my part was in reality a subsection within one portion of the larger articles structure. — Mrphilip (talk) 06:05, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Raised the issue here [2] at ANi. — Legacypac (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Mrphilip, please read this and this. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:53, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Mrphilip, here is another of my moans, not directly applicable to your case but you will get the idea. Worse than being a copyvio, your piece was a style-vio: totally slovenly, no attempt at creating a Wikipedia article. If you can show the subject is notable, write a proper article in your own words and 4k bytes max in length. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Begoon/adduploadslink.js

Hi. Thanks for deleting User talk:Begoon/adduploadslink.js, but I actually only created that page to request deletion of User:Begoon/adduploadslink.js, and left a note on it to that effect. As CSD tags don't work on js pages it seemed the only option. Apologies for any confusion. -- Begoon 09:13, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Oops, sorry. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Jaiden Animations

Hi, you deleted the draft for Jaiden Animations that I've been working on. It was deleted because it was tagged for deletion under G4 criteria. That tag was unfairly placed. G4 explicitly states: "It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version," which applies to the draft I was working on. First, I never saw or edited, or was involved with the version of the article that was deleted via discussion. Secondly, that version was deleted in August 2018. I began working on the draft in December. About 11 or 12 of the 27 references that were included in the draft I worked on were all published after August 2018, meaning that there is no way that the draft was "substantially identical" to the deleted version. I would like to retrieve that draft so I can continue to work on it, as I believe that if not already, it's at least on the verge of being suitable enough for inclusion on the mainspace. Thank you Soulbust (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Jean Baptiste Vuillaume

Dear Mr Haworth, I wonder why you would choose to delete the document I posted on Wikipedia regarding the life and traits of Jean-Baptiste Vuillaume without even contacting me. Is that something that makes your life more enjoyable, I wonder? By the way, if you state the document constitutes an Infringement, (something which is rather serious legal matter), I suggest you ask first who owns the Copyright on the page you claim I infringed. Regards, MJZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celtic-Lines (talk • contribs) 19:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Since you ask, yes: I do enjoy keeping Wikipedia free of inappropriate material. The page was deleted for multiple reasons: it was a mis-use of a user page; it was a blatant copyvio - yes, it is your site, you could fix the copyvio but don't bother: it was totally unencyclopedick material. What you should do: if you are confident of your proposed changes and can provide links to reliable sources to support you claims, edit the guy's bio! If you are less confident, propose the changes on the article talk page and there, by all means, provide a link to the page on your website. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Neurosexism

Do you have the text of the page you deleted on 16 March on Draft:Neurosexism, on which I was lead editor? I would greatly appreciate recovering that text. — J.birch2 (talk) 20:06, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

• Text emailed. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:23, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Threatin speedy deletion was incorrect

The article was substantially different than the deleted version so WP:G4 does not apply. While the original deletion was correct due to lack of independent sources, the subject of the article has since received considerable press coverage and now meets WP:GNG. Article was properly sourced. If you still feel the article warrants deletion, then you can of course put it through the normal Afd process. — MaxBrowne2 (talk) 10:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I was actually coming here for the same reason. Of course, personally, I didn't think we needed to give an article in the first place, and think that the article focused too much on the man/music and not the scam that brought him notability. But, yes, he did become notable (for all the wrong reasons) after the initial page deletion. — Lazypub (talk) 10:55, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

• I should have ignored you both because neither of you is capable of providing a link. Some time before 09:40:02 today I loaded a few CSD pages into browser tabs and worked through them. I opened the Threatin page, thought "just another rock band but I like his hair" and zapped it being unaware that 42 seconds earlier Duffbeerforme had changed his mind and removed the speedy tag. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

You want a non-existent link? OK we need Talk:Threatin back as well. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Leah Maines

Greetings! I’m the writer Leah Maines. Today I was told my wiki page was deleted. Please let me know why my page was deleted.

Thank you, 198.37.199.189 (talk) 13:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC) Leah Maines

(talk page watcher) @198.37.199.189: As (what remains of) the article Leah Maines says, it was deleted under speedy deletion criterion G12 as an Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.pw.org/content/leah_maines_1. Hope this helps! ——SerialNumber54129 13:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of VinesauceJoel.jpg

It's because he seldom shows his face and I can't draw so fanart is out of the question. As I said, no free image of him exists so if an image of him were to be in a part of the article about him, non-free images are the only option. --AwesumIndustrys (talk) 13:41, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Bateaux London

Any reason why you have delete Bateaux London but not any of the other articles in Category:Transport operators in London? Do you plan to delete these too? Cnbrb (talk) 13:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Another question regarding User:Viewmont Viking/List of Scientists

I have a quick follow up to this post, if you don't mind another question. I noticed that you restored the page as a draft rather than under the original title. Is that the standard procedure for the restoration of userspace drafts at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion? Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Question about deleting templates and their doc pages

I don't know how admins delete pages, so please excuse my ignorance. It looks like you deleted Template:Domesday86, but its documentation page is still around, at Template:Domesday86/doc. Is that an oversight, or does the doc page need to be nominated separately, or does a bot take care of it, or something else? Sorry to bother you about this trivial matter. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Vanity Links Question

Hi there just wondering how come you are one of the biggest purgers on Wikipedia yet you have 12 links pointing to your blogs on your UserPage? This goes against Wikipedia's no self-promotion, and 'not collection of links' that you so often cite I am curious to find out how come you have these privileges and if there is a way for regular admins to join your Old Boys' club. Cheers, M Hyphunter (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

number9ine

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Number9ine&action=edit&redlink=1

RHhaworth we at number9ine work to bring concise accurate information regarding artists that have not been credited with their contribution to the world we know. This includes artists that worked with Ruby Studios, Tracy (Charles L. Tracy, Ruby (Ruth Tracy), 9 (Patrick di Santo), Anna Cleveland, as well as additions to Halston (Roy), Elsa Peretti (Tiffanys), Joe Eula (Tiffany's), Milton Green, Stephen Burrows. Please advise us on how to move these pages to a convenient holding location for review as we become accustomed to the format Wikipedia uses. Thank you again. (Number9ine (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC))

Tracy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Charles_Tracy

This page is in holding we have been on hiatus due to illness unfortunately, it appears to be a great way to bring important concise information to the world regarding these artist as well as their contributions. Thank you for your guidance, we look forward to your input. (Number9ine (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC))