User talk:ProhibitOnions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Onion white background.jpg
ProhibitOnions
Talk archives

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5
6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · X

Current talk page

Talk February 2012[edit]

Proposal to split Park51 to Ground Zero controversy[edit]

Hi. You're receiving this message because you recently edited Park51. Ed Poor has proposing splitting that off part of that article to create Ground Zero controversy. We're discussing it on the talk page here and would appreciate your feedback. Raul654 (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview[edit]

Dear ProhibitOnions,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.


Sincerely,


Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Paul Young, the missing talk page[edit]

Now that the article on Paul Young the singer (and guitarist) has been moved to Paul Young, wouldn't it be a good idea to move Talk:Paul Young (singer and guitarist) to Talk:Paul Young? I tried doing it myself, but this is an admin-only thing, it seems. Regards, Several Pending (talk) 15:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Whoops! My bad - thanks for pointing that out. It's fixed now. Regards, ProhibitOnions (T) 16:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

A request to enjoin discussion at Talk:McKinsey & Company[edit]

Hi there! I hope this doesn't annoy you, but I'd like your input. As part of his request for mentorship, I've been interviewing User:King4057, a new user who self-identifies as a paid editor. We have been discussing issues of COI and neutrality and McKinsey & Company came up. The user seems to think that edits you made on talk and to pagespace represent a bias one way or the other. I ask, because the user is relatively new and inexperienced, you forgive his characterization of you and your edits. You are under no obligation to honor that request. If you'd like to provide your input, I'd very much like to understand what was happening and what your thinking was. Here's a link to the discussion. BusterD (talk) 14:29, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary[edit]

Wikipe-tan mopping.png
Wishing ProhibitOnions a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Boeing 737 Max or "Boeing 737 MAX?"[edit]

You seem to be convinced that the aforementioned article should not have the "MAX" in all-caps. Please explain your view on this at the 737 MAX talk page. Thanks, Compdude123 16:17, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Others have replied to your comments. There seems to be a consensus to have the "MAX" be in all-caps, but I'd like to see you reply to my comments and those of other users. Thanks, Compdude123 02:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

You're an admin; could you please act like one? Most admins I've seen on this Wikipedia do not engage in edit warring, or going against consensus. Please discuss this on the talk page, I really don't see a need to make a big deal over just one word. —Compdude123 22:49, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Just to add, two other admins have reverted your move of this article. And plus there is a clear consensus on the talk page to have the MAX capitalized. —Compdude123 22:51, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Please refrain from personal attacks. The "consensus" you refer to is based on reasoning such as "I think most people would", "People seem to abide by the MOS way too much", and an appeal to the "official" use ("He told me the Boeing official name is MAX, not Max"), none of which holds any water. ProhibitOnions (T) 06:51, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for getting mad at you like that. I was just frustrated that we were still having this same stupid argument in the first place. Can we just settle this and move on, please? Comment on the talk page. Thanks, Compdude123 15:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Can you please explain to me how a statement such as "People seem to abide by the MOS way too much" is not a good argument? It's true; I think people sometimes treat the MOS like it's a law that must be followed all the time. For pity's sake; the MOS is just a guideline, and it should be treated with common sense! —Compdude123 18:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Used your photo in my quiz blog[edit]

Hi ProhibitOnions, just thought of dropping by and saying a word of thanks for uploading the photo of the site with a marking to the exact place where Pope Jon Paul II was fired upon. I have used the photo for framing a question in my quiz blog. Thanks again. Shovon (talk) 09:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Mini Vote[edit]

Hey, I have proposed a vote for something to be agreed on once and for all regarding the Mini issues; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mini_%28marque%29#Vote Yellowxander (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Puhdys1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Puhdys1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Number ones compilation albums[edit]

Category:Number ones compilation albums, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

In case you are not watching it at its new name Category:Compilation albums of number-one songs, it has been nominated again: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 5#Category:Compilation albums of number-one songs. – Fayenatic London 14:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Query: damage to articles[edit]

Hi - as you seem to know your way around this site, can I ask for some advice - having spent yesterday struggling to deal with another editor who repeatedly filled the article on the Olympics Opening Ceremony with inappropriate capitalisation and titles contrary to WP guidelines, I see he's spent today doing the same to another article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_of_sovereignty_over_Hong_Kong). I don't want to get dragged into another edit competition with him - how best to address (if at all), please? IanB2 (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The first step is usually to take it to the talk page, though you should go to that user's talk page as well - if someone's violating Wikipedia policies, you should point this out (though remember to assume good faith); quite often, people don't know they're doing something wrong (especially if new to WP), or can be persuaded to stop. If the user violates the three-revert-rule (ie, changes something back to a preferred version more than three times in 24 hours), you should report this on the 3RR notice board - an admin will then assess the situation and usually block that user for a cooling-off period, provided that you have first tried contacting the user. (Note that although I'm an admin, I can't block someone if I've been editing the article in question.) If you're talking about User:Laggan Boy, he has already been warned; but the hope of Wikipedia is that someone willing to make this many edits will be encouraged to go the extra distance to make them constructive. You should also note that 3RR applies to all editors who revert too often, regardless of the merit of their edits (unless it's clear vandalism, a violation of WP:BLP, etc.). Hope this helps. Good luck - ProhibitOnions (T) 20:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:WarsawMetro1950Plan.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:WarsawMetro1950Plan.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:TD1logo.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:TD1logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup[edit]

Edit-clear.svg
Hello, ProhibitOnions.

You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

ITN[edit]

Where was the discussion on your recent ITN posting regarding the papacy? --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

There was none. WP was late to add this, or indeed anything else to ITN in the last two days. I was being bold. ProhibitOnions (T) 22:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Too bold. All postings must have consensus at WP:ITN/C before being posted. This is not optional. Because it was undiscussed, I've removed it. You may want to propose it on the candidates page, or weigh in on a similar nomination that is already ongoing. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Weak. The event, announced nearly a month in advance, happened four hours ago, and we're still discussing whether to post it. Meanwhile, our top story is two days old. Hence, BOLD. ProhibitOnions (T) 22:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Bongwarrior. ITN absolutely requires consensus at ITN/C, where this story is already under discussion. This is not an optional step which can be ignored if an individual admin feels like it. If you were concerned about a few hours delay (which is normal for ITN), you could have nominated it this morning. Besides, there's no guarantee it will be supported. Modest Genius talk 23:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Huh? But this was nominated hours before you posted it and there clearly was and is consensus against posting it. There's being bold and there's being rogue. -- tariqabjotu 00:01, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
We ran an ITN item about the resignation when the announcement was made. As Tariqabjotu noted, there is clear consensus against running such an item again. Did you even check WP:ITN/C before posting it? —David Levy 03:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
I see that you've resumed editing. I await your response. —David Levy 15:35, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Sure. How about posting some news on ITN that's less than four days old? Seems to me the procedure is a problem: by putting everything up to an often interminable discussion, we are lowering the quality and timeliness of the Main Page. I stand by my earlier BOLD. ProhibitOnions (T) 16:10, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
You didn't answer my question (regarding whether you checked WP:ITN/C). Regardless, your response is rather disheartening. You ignored consensus (at best) or unilaterally overruled it (at worst). You did so by editing a fully protected page, which was an abuse of the trust placed in you by the community. As Tariqabjotu noted, this was a rogue action, not a "bold" one.
If you find fault with ITN's procedures, you're welcome to propose that they be changed. You aren't welcome to deem the community wrong and post a rejected ITN item because you feel like it.
I couldn't remember why I had your talk page watchlisted, so I checked the archives. It turns out that I contacted you in 2006 regarding an inappropriate ITN item that you took it upon yourself to post ("What rules?"). More than six years later, it seems that you still regard this as an administrative entitlement.
No one has requested an apology, but I'd hoped for an assurance that this won't happen again (if only because you recognize the community's disapproval, your opinion thereof notwithstanding). Instead, you say that you "stand by" your action, which leads me to believe that you might repeat it in the future. Is my understanding accurate? —David Levy 20:57, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:TheTwoWhoStoleTheMoon.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:TheTwoWhoStoleTheMoon.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, ProhibitOnions. You have new messages at Talk:Spam (disambiguation).
Message added 19:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Widefox; talk 19:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

and listed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#Spam_.28disambiguation.29 Widefox; talk 19:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tony Currenti[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Tony Currenti has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:55, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Summer hit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page In the Summertime (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Jennifer Lopez[edit]

Surname. I've added the source to the article. It isn't a well known fact that she had taken his last name in the first place, and was only made public when the divorce papers were filed. — Status (talk · contribs) 03:07, 7 June 2014 (UTC)