Are these both correct ways of Havard referencing? read below plz?

I assume that you mean Harvard. Here's one site's suggestions (see source):

"Citing References in Text – some useful expressions introducing someone’s ideas:

Bloggs (2002) suggests/argues/states/believes/concludes/proposes that ---

expresses/holds the view that ---

draws attention to ---

describes X as ---

describes how ---

refers to ---

takes the stance that ---

emphasises/stresses the need to/the importance of---

According to Bloggs (2002) ---

As stated/suggested/argued/proposed by Bloggs (2002) ---

There is a view/theory/argument that --- (Bloggs, 2002).

It has been suggested/stated/argued/proposed that --- (Bloggs, 2002)

One view/theory/argument/suggestion/proposal is that --- (Bloggs, 2002)

One view, expressed by Bloggs (2002) is that ---

Introducing an idea/theory that agrees with/has built on another:

This is supported by Smith (2003).

in line with the view/theory/suggestion of Smith (2003).

reflects the “ “ “

Smith (2003) accepts/supports/agrees with/concurs with this view/suggestion/theory.

A similar view is held by Smith (2003)

stance is taken by

This idea/theory has been extended/developed/taken further/built upon by Smith (2003).

Introducing an idea/theory that disagrees/contrasts with another:

This conflicts/contrasts with/is contrary to the view held by Smith (2003) that ---

This is not accepted by/has been challenged by Smith (2003), who argues that ---

Smith (2003), on the other hand/however/in contrast, suggests that ---

An alternative view/suggestion is that --- (Smith, 2003)

The opposite/a conflicting view is expressed by Smith (2003)"