User talk:Jehochman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Commons images on the main page[edit]

Hello again. As a reminder, when transcluding a Commons image on the main page, please upload a local copy and tag it with the {{uploaded from Commons}} template beforehand.

This is my third request. Additionally, an instruction appears in the ITN template's edit notice – a yellow box with a red "ATTENTION" heading and flashing "stop" icon.

I want to make sure that you're aware of the potential harm, which isn't hypothetical. Just last month, when this photograph was accidentally transcluded on the main page without protection, a vandal replaced it with this (warning: NSFW pornography). And that was merely one instance of many. Please understand that I seek to prevent such an incident from occurring yet again.

Thank you. —David Levy 21:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I only do mages rarely so I think I will just not do them at all. There has to be a better way. Jehochman Talk 22:27, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Can we ask a developer to create a magic word called __NOCOMMONS__ that would prevent display of commons media on a page? This would be very simple to code. The banner-blindness inducing messages in the edit notice are ineffective. Jehochman Talk 02:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I certainly would support such an enhancement. (Perhaps the magic word could even prevent a page from being saved in that state, thereby avoiding accidental omissions.) Would you be interested in submitting the request? —David Levy 22:42, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

About the discussion you closed on AN/I[edit]

Hi Jehochman,

There has been an edit conflict when you closed the discussion that I started on AN/I. What should I do?

Many thanks, Tony Tan98 · talk 03:10, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, Johnuniq fixed the problem. Tony Tan98 · talk 03:16, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

GGTF case[edit]

Howdy Jehochman. It is already happening on the case's talkpage. Groups are hollering, over the possiblity of one editor being banned & not the other :( GoodDay (talk) 17:25, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Let them holler. We don't back down because somebody threatens to act out if they don't get their way. Regretfully I think we'll some people getting banned for battleground behavior. Nothing we can do when people won't listen to good advice. Jehochman Talk 17:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jehochman. What I am going to say is not to criticize you in any way, but just to bring something to your notice so that you can assess it on your own.
We don't back down because somebody threatens to act out if they don't get their way. Is that correct ? I doubt it. I saw Dennis Brown's "long break" comment in the "Final comments" section and in my metaphysical reading of that statement, it could mean that he is going to leave if his favored ed is banned. Subsequent to that, the arbs came up with, and approved the prohibition remedy. I think you are now in a better position to decide if We don't back down because somebody threatens to act out if they don't get their way. is just for keeping people humored or for real. Regards.OrangesRyellow (talk) 05:36, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Well, that's the ideal. We should try to hold the line. I don't know or feel comfortable discussion another editor's doings without inviting him. In general it's not unusual for editors to want to take a break, and we shouldn't ascribe additional motives. We could just ask him what he meant. Also, the prohibition remedy is based on some private information that's not out in the open. Jehochman Talk 05:44, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for considering and responding to my comment. I too like and appreciate the ideal, however, I do not see much reason to let my ideals/idealistic view overtake my perception/depiction of reality. As I said, I only wanted to bring this to your notice so that you can make your own assessment, and I can make mine. Thanks.OrangesRyellow (talk) 06:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Brown shooting[edit]

Hi. You have asked me a couple of times for an alternate blurb. My bottom line is that the item should never have been posted, and I still support it simply being pulled. That being said, if it stays up, "Rioting breaks out after a grand jury clears a police officer who fatally shot a suspect in Ferguson Missouri" or "Rioting breaks out after a grand jury finds the fatal shooting of a suspect in Ferguson Missouri justified" is much more neutral. Neither the police officer or victim was notable, and hence neither should be named. The rioting is all that is possibly notable. And the Grand Jury was sworn to indict if they found grounds to indict. Failure to indict is based only on lack of evidence, not on whim. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I will make that change. You have made good points. Jehochman Talk 21:28, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to personally tell you that I strongly support your actions and reasoning with this posting. Your boldness has benefited all readers here and ITN specifically. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Your WP email...[edit]

seems to be bouncing. SPECIFICO talk 05:16, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Give me a moment to update the address. Jehochman Talk 05:20, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share[edit]

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share
Statue-of-liberty tysto.jpg

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop in Manhattan's Greenwich Village.

6:30pm–8pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Afterwards at 8pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)