Jump to content

User talk:Ronhjones

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chhuti writes (talk | contribs) at 07:23, 1 July 2014 (→eRevMax: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Status: Unknown


Friday
3
January
00:22 UTC
Welcome to Ronhjones' Talk page

on English Wikipedia

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.


Note for other Admins - If you want to change any action I have done, then you may do so without having to wait for a reply from me. Your judgement at the time should be sufficient.
Note: To any interested parties. This is my main account, there are no edits under my old IP address 109.224.128.22 (terminated March 2014); a few minor edits under my even older static IP address 87.127.178.158, my work IP address (but that is shared, and not all the edits there are mine) 193.113.135.87 or 193.113.135.112 I also have User:Ronjones for logging in outside home. Current address is IPv6 - somewhere in the range of 2001:8b0:9f0::/48
All threads on this page will be archived after 14 days of non - activity.

User:MrKIA11/Archive Box

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

Jose Andres

Hello,

I was hoping you could please inform me If I'll be able to update the page with the information I was trying to change.

I am working with the company that wrote the original content.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sibrianb (talk • contribs) 14:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The standard answer I always give is that WP:COI editing is strongly discouraged - the relevant paragraph is COI editing is strongly discouraged. COI editors causing disruption may be blocked. Editors with COIs who wish to edit responsibly are strongly encouraged to follow Wikipedia policies and best practices scrupulously. They are also encouraged to disclose their interest on their user pages and on the talk page of the article in question, and to request the views of other editors. If you have a conflict of interest, any changes you would like to propose that might be seen as non-neutral should be suggested on the relevant talk page or noticeboard.. So, in theory you can edit, but most editors don't like it, and it has to be done extremely carefully. The recommended route is to use paragraph 2 of Wikipedia:Contact us - Subjects. My note to you was to show you how you could prepare to use text from another web site - there no point in suggesting a change if that would be copyright violation.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G7

Can you do José Pirela and Rob Kaminsky when you get a chance?--Yankees10 23:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Yankees10 23:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please help bring sanity

You may recall me from Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2014_June_4#File:WugTest_NowThereIsAnotherOne_FairUseOnly.jpg. I do understand the importance of respecting copyright (being myself a consultant in intellectual property), but that goal is not served by robotic busybodies who don't know which end of the stick they've got hold of. An example would seem to Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2014_June_10#File:Rei-pub_neohantoni.png. A 200-year-old seal of a state of the United States is certainly PD, and a deletion "discussion" with but one participant isn't a discussion. A note on the talk pages of articles using the proposed-to-be-deleted file might be a smart idea. Could you please restore the file, and have a word with Mr. Stefan2? I'd do it myself but I've found that prior interactions with him aren't fruitful. EEng (talk) 02:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I restored it, Stefan2 would be there real quick. Since I didn't delete it, it would be best to talk to the deleting admin at User talk:TLSuda - the problem is that it has the wrong license - you had this text This image is ineligible for copyright and therefore is in the public domain, because it consists entirely of information that is common property and contains no original authorship - there's a shed load of original authorship in that image. You need to pick the correct one from WP:ICT/PD - {{PD-old}} might apply - did the creator die before 1913? - otherwise it could be {{PD-US}} - it's up to the uploader to do the research and decide on the correct license. {{PD-ineligible}} was not the correct one to use here.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Speedy Deletion of Files

These files were deleted from the Orthodoxy Cognate PAGE Society entry. The photos were taken by us and shows the activities of the organization. I hope you would allow these to be uploaded.

Theorthodoxchurch (talk) 08:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files that have been uploaded elsewhere before uploading here need explicit permission from the copyright holder. This can only be done following one of the two methods at WP:DCM - either show permission on the web site, or send to OTRS. Permission will need to be at least CC-BY-SA. Once the permission has been verified, then the images can be quickly undeleted.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thanks for your message. I've emailed back to permissions-en@wikimedia.org giving what I hope is full permission to use the image, and confirming that I'm a Director of the company.

all the best

Jon

JonZanran (talk) 10:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the banner at File:Zanran query page.jpg to reflect that, and give OTRS enough time to process the e-mail.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heather Smith, Australian Author.jpg

Hi Ron,

We recently resolved an issue re: "File permission problem with File:Heather Smith, Australian Author.jpg", but that original note is still on my talk page.

Is it OK to delete it now the issue's been resolved? Wasn't sure of the WP/correct way of doing this? thanks.ThatWriterBloke (talk) 19:22, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REMOVED - removing a message, indicates you have read it.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G13

I've raised a question at WT:CSD about the use of G13 for userspace drafts. Perhaps you might be interested. DGG ( talk ) 22:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Fasha photos

Hi Ron, Thank you for your attention about the permissions but the problem I had permissions for all photos I uploaded to the article and I sent it already to the permission department long time ago without anyone answered me , so could you please help me to solve this problem to keep the photos and bring back the photos you already delete.--Ahmed Mohi El din (talk) 23:59, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently an issue with OTRS searching in that we cannot search for a url. However I did find just two letters from yourself
  1. Ticket#2014032210006501 — permissions for Sarah Fasha - which I answered, and you did not reply to my note of 22/03/2014 12:41
  2. Ticket#2014041010008261 — permission "This screenshot of Mr . David Levin", and you did not reply to the OTRS agent's note of 10/04/2014 12:26
As I said, we cannot accept images "for Wikipedia use only" - The license needs to be at least cc-by-sa-3.0 - but we need the release to come from the copyright holder - not yourself. This is usually the actual photographer who will own the copyright, unless the photographer has explicitly released in writing.
Do note that we will need a release for each photo you intend to use - they can all be listed on one e-mail, but must be fully listed by individual file names. There is no way these images can be on Wikipedia until the release has been given.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

Dame Yasmin Bevan

Hi there, you have recently removed the Yasmin Bevan page - could this please be restored immediately - so that I can then amend any mistake/ errors as necessary. Watkins89 (talk) 08:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Restored as contested PROD. Do note that the original PRODer may decide to go to WP:AfD instead.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Olympiacos CFP, Olympiacos BC vandalism after vandalism

Hello Ronhjones, there has been extensive IP vandalism (combined with swearing) in the above-mentioned articles. I think it's for the best if they become semi-protected (so we can put a hold on all these IP vandals). Thank you for any help you can provide in this situation. Gtrbolivar (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've done Olympiacos CFP for now. Olympiacos BC - there are a huge amount of editing - 20+ per day - are these all real or is the some POV editing going on? I don't know what version is the correct one.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Economy of Pakistan

My regrets, I unknowingly reverted you there. I thought I was reverting Bhardwaj which was edit-warring with multiple users there and other articles. I did not intend to call you a sock. Faizan 08:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been called worse, edit was probably a response to something at AIV, not of great importance. :-)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lapithas

There is a double redirect from Lapithas to Mount Lapithas. I was going to submit an edit request, but I noticed that you deleted the talk page. Should I recreate the talk page in order to request the edit? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll sort it out when I get home (I don't use my admin account on a PC that can be shared)  Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Versus You

Hi,

You have nominated my article for Copyvio, because of copyright issues but it isn't a direct copy, from somewhere I have to get informations or should I write a Fairytale and I also cannot invent a new language. Ok some parts can be similar but I don't now how to say that differently. Slowly I loose the patience to work on this wiki because everything i do, isn't good enough for anybody. That's the third or fourth time that my article maybe gets deleted. I am at my wit's end. --Irukandji85 (talk) 09:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite - it was put up for a speedy copyvio by user:Justlettersandnumbers - I declined the speedy on the grounds that the whole article is not a copy - just some sentences, and changed it to normal copyright investigation for a possible clean up. Data from other sites has to be completely re-written in you own words, not just change a few words here and there  Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is going to seem awkward...

Hey there Ron... I notice you deleted Draft:Propulsion methods utilizing fuel accelerated from a remote fuel source as a G7. I'm afraid (despite the fact I flagged it for MfD and should obviously be grateful it's gone), that is not a valid deletion reason. The draft had multiple editors which completely invalidated G7. As such, might I ask you to restore it and let the MfD take its course? I won't blame you if you say no, and I won't be offended nor beg. I just would think it best to let it get deleted per the normal process and for a valid reason. If you're willing to entertain this, thank you, if not, that's fine as well and I hope you have a wonderful day (evening?) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 22:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Definitely evening - almost midnight :-).  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What significant content was added by any author other than the one requesting deletion? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
None. Can't say I understand what is going on, but I'm having a hard time caring at the moment. Still, in the interest of following through, I'll try to piece together what happened. Matthewhburch (talk) 00:43, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I started cleaning up the content not very long before it was deleted and intend to see what I can get out of the see also articles' references to try and make a stub at least out of this draft. But I'm hungry, and will likely not get back to it until tomorrow. The world won't end if it sits 5-6 more days for the MfD to conclude if I can't salvage at least a stub. :/ — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Not a great deal - but there is https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft%3APropulsion_methods_utilizing_fuel_accelerated_from_a_remote_fuel_source&diff=614559843&oldid=614554754, and I missed the MfD notice already there. Why not let the MfD run it's course?  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If User:Matthewhburch does not want it - why not wp:userfy to User:Technical 13 user space?  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:26, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Doing so would suggest bad faith on the part of Technical 13, since that user already MfD'd the page in question. I would prefer to assume that Technical 13 is acting in good faith. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If userfying a page does what I think it does, Technical 13 is more than welcome to take it over. Matthewhburch (talk) 01:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, which part of this edit do you see as adding significant content? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Ronhjones & Demiurge1000 Part of the reason of wanting the db-self declined is also to ensure that the user in question doesn't get it deleted to avoid the MFD discussion only to have it restored 2 weeks later when nobody's watching. Having a validly ran MFD on the books for this submission arms the CSD:G4 trigger if the editor decides to try and pull a fast one. It has been my observation that the leading editor (prior to Technical 13) has a very unique way of interperting WP policy, rules, guidelines, practices, and consensus. I have little doubt that the editor's goal is to get this furvor over their behavior to die down and then do a round of WP:FORUMSHOPing to get the answer they want. Hasteur (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hasteur, if I were to have ever chosen to attempt to implement the page again, it would be more in line with Wikipedia requirements now that I understand what this community has done to bastardize the term 'notable.' Matthewhburch (talk) 01:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some of us are not on Wikipedia for furore (furvor? fervour? fervor?), nor indeed for the purpose of arming triggers. His article submission was declined, and he was argumentative about it. Let it go. If the material magically reappears in mainspace, it can be just as magically nuked. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)As I said - I missed the MfD - Hence I preferred to put it back. Technical 13 had started to rephrase some of it. As for my userfy suggestion - I would expect Matthewhburch to be asked first!  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:46, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Matthewhburch has been asked here, indirectly, and agrees. Matthewhburch (talk) 01:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give a few hours for that to happen. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think it should be userfied to my user space at all. It is a collaborative effort and as such it should stay in draft space at this point. To do anything otherwise would imply that someone indeed OWNs the article. As I said above from my mobile phone when I was a bit soberer (I suppose that's a real word since my spell check isn't yellin' at me, although it sounds funny when you say it), it is in draft space, not article space, and letting the MfD run its course isn't going to kill anyone, and if I manage to cite even one or two more things to a reliable source and strip everything that is not citeable out and make a stub out of it, even better. I might suggest that it be moved to Draft:Remote fueling as that would be a more appropriate final destination (more of a layman's term so it isn't overly technical), and I can obviously do that myself, but I'll discuss it with the other editors interested in the draft on the draft's talk page first. Now, please excause me while I finish this whiskey and pass out... — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 00:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Be sure to consider the fact that a less wordy phrase will likely be considered a WP:NEO There is a discussion on the talk page behind the draft that starts by addressing this. A short term would be nice, but remember, it has to be famous, err 'notable'. LOL Matthewhburch (talk) 01:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Matt, I've considered it, and I've posted my thoughts on the draft's talk page. They key to remember here is that neologisms aren't prohibited if, and only if, they meet the inclusion criteria of: To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term. (emphasis mine) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 01:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's no real problem with userfing so long as all agree. I've userfied several pages into another user's space - the contribution history is still intact, so there can never be a question of owning. If Matthewhburch does not want it in Draft, then I think we should respect his wishes.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly request

While I'm here on your talk page Ron, I'm noticing that you have some font tags in your signature. I'm fairly confused why they are there as they don't seem to be doing much of anything. I've been going around to a few user's I've noticed with similar oddities in their signatures because as you may or may not be aware, thos tags are obsolete and we are warned not to use them by the things like MDN (there's a whole discussion on these tags on VPR if you are interested in learning more. As such, I've been asking editors if they might be interested in updating their signature, and if you are interested, I suggest replacing: 

'''[[User:Ronhjones|<span style="border:1px solid;color:#dfdfdf; padding:1px;background:#ffffdf"><font color="green">&nbsp;Ron<font color="red">h</font>jones&nbsp;</font></span>]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Ronhjones|&nbsp;(Talk)]]</sup>


with: 

[[User:Ronhjones|<b style="border:1px solid #DDD;color:green; padding:1px 3px;background:#FFD">Ron<span style="color:red">h</span>jones</b>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ronhjones|(Talk)]]</sup>


which will result in a 183 character long signature (46 characters shorter) with an appearance of: Ronhjones (Talk)
compared to your existing 229 character long signature of:  Ronhjones  (Talk)
— Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 00:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - that's a very old set of HTML - 5-6 years old :-). I'll investigate tomorrow.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tweaked to make it exactly the same as before. Replaced at commons as well. Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's enough tweaks for now. At least it works. User:Ronhjones/Sandbox2 will soon fill up otherwise... :-) Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted John Philbins page???? Seriously?? Why?

Aloha as we say here in Hawaii. I was looking up a very very famous actor- John Philbin- that apparently you decided because YOU don't know too much about him to delete his Wikipedia page! He is a semi-legend in the surfing world. Because of his staring role in the most famous of ALL Hollywood surfing based movies - North Shore which 80% off the 30 million + surfers around the world know of and quote on a daily bases. John Philbin! It was noted it was deleted because he didn't have more than one significant role??? go to IMDb, watch the movie Point Break- one of Americas favorites, where he was one of the main "bad" guys. Or the very important and a big time favorite American motion picture - Tomb Stone- again not just an extra but plays one of the main "bad guys", a character that is in the entire movie... He's had so many roles and again is known by 100% of everyone involved in the multi-billion dollar a year surf industry- the CEO's, the fans, the Pros etc... And also super well known the Movie industry in the USA. .. Anyways, His page in no way shape or form deserved to be deleted. I believe you deleted it right? So if you did you must please put it back up. He is a well known actor and has had over 50 rolls. Big and small- everything.. Point Break with Patrick Swayze and Keanu Reeves and Garey Busey! Just look at IMDb please. Seriously I can't believe you deleted it when you obviously don't know enough about him or these films he has been in. No hard feeling's, I am just blown away that an american actor that is so well known here in the USA is not on Wikipedia... I hope this message gives you some more information on something you clearly didn't know about. In the future please don't delete things just because you do not know much about it. I honestly just hope this helps you... Seriously Best wishes!!!! Robert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.95.208.187 (talk) 01:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any PROD deletion can be restored by request. However I would note that it's a poorly written page and unlikely to survive.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 19:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G7

Can you do Dariel Álvarez?--Yankees10 20:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I though it was quiet... ;-) Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man.--Yankees10 20:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Line drawing of gaff rigged Herreshoff H-12 sailboat.png

Hello, For now, the best solution may be that the file (Line drawing of gaff rigged Herreshoff H-12 sailboat.png) be deleted. I will re-upload once I have a clearly posted notice of copyright. Thank you for reviewing. ttrbbr (talk) 20:58, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you are getting permission via OTRS then no need to upload - nothing is ever deleted - just hidden Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this information. I'll follow-up as soon as the CC copyright license is added to the image. If this is technically beyond the image owner, I will locate a similar image appropriately tagged with copyright. ttrbbr (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Olympiacos BC

Hello Ronhjones,

Apologies for my late reply to your earlier response and thank you for your help and your immediate attention. The vast majority of IP edits in Olympiacos BC are disruptive and unconstructive. There are many cases of blatant vandalism (combined with swearing): [1], [2], [3], [4] (and goes on and on). Moreover, if you look at the rest of the recent edits, you'll find out that the main purpose of almost every IP editor is to become the team's head coach. They change the starting five, they make their desired transfers, they move players from one position to another. There isn't a shred of real contribution to the article or to wikipedia for that matter. I strongly believe that the article should become semi-protected if we are to put a hold on this continuous vandalism. I really appreciate your help. Gtrbolivar (talk) 14:43, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So many edits - one could not see the wood for the trees. Thank you for sorting out the reverts, page protected. Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:38, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ronhjones. Much obliged. Gtrbolivar (talk) 02:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

Afd you might be interested in

Remember [5] ? I have nominated for Afd today, check Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Alpha Complex. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also wanted to suggest that from next time we shall simply go for Afd than prodding the article again. Prod tag is taken seriously, but not as seriously as Afd. A user is allowed to remove PROD tag, I agree that there should be a legible reason, but no one really investigates the removal of PROD tag unless the article is violating copyright. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 08:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added my comment on the deletion page. Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:05, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Was assessing a few unassessed articles, found a expired prod, check Benazir Shaikh. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:59, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The week-end (and a lovely one it was here) rather gets in the way of editing - since I was mainly on the boat (and no internet). To be sorted tonight. Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

False accusation.

I did not vandalise the pteranodon Wikipedia page, the facts I stated are completely true. The noun 'Pterodactyl' IS a misnomer! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakes709 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did I say vandalise. I think not. I said WP:OR which is what that edit was. Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:01, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jakes709: You may want to check, WP:TRUTH. You will know that just having the knowledge about some fact is not enough, and you have to back up with a reliable source. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted Daniel Holms page... Why????

Daniel Holm is a fully professional football player who is in the first team squad of the biggest club in Denmark. Why the hell did you delete that page??

Kongen af fodbold (talk) 09:43, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Kongen af fodbold: You are talking about Daniel Holm or Daniel Holms, first clear that. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Daniel Holm expired PROD, failed WP:GNG --Rocknrollmancer (talk) 11:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If no one contested a PROD (by removing the banner) it gets deleted (unless it an obvious vandal attack). PRODs can be contested post deletion and immediately restored - which I have done. Do note it's likely to go to WP:AfD instead. Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

eRevMax

Hi

Just wanted to know about the deletion of eRevMax page in wikipedia.Is there any specific reason behind this?

thanks

Aparna

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ronhjones&oldid=615121442"