User talk:Ronjohn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For older discussion on Ron John's page, see archives: 1 2

I suggest you visit the talk page for Joe Wilson before making edits to the article. What is your reasoning for removing my edit? Reliefappearance (talk) 02:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


Contents

Speedy deletion nomination of Max Hardberger[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Max Hardberger requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wine Guy Talk 10:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Welcome![edit]

Some cookies to welcome you! Face-smile.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia, Ronjohn! I am Scapler and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

かんぱい! Scapler (talk) 08:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Even though we have disagreements over one of your articles, I wanted to welcome you here, sir, and thank you for your service protecting the United States. かんぱい! Scapler (talk) 08:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Montana Fishburne[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Montana Fishburne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 21:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Montana Fishburne[edit]

Please stop creating this article unless you can find reliable sources documenting that she meets the criteria of WP:PORNBIO. The fact that her father is notable is irrelevant, as notability is not inherited. Favonian (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:LaurenceMontana640 397x224.jpg[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:LaurenceMontana640 397x224.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use 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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 22:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sonja Norwood[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Sonja Norwood requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. WikiCopterRadioChecklistFormerly AirplanePro 00:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


Articles for deletion nomination of Montana Fishburne[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Montana Fishburne, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montana Fishburne. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Whose Your Guy (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Terry Lakin[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry Lakin.  Sandstein  17:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:The Affair movie poster.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:The Affair movie poster.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Fershgenet Melaku[edit]

Please do not add unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! (Whisper...) 15:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I'am the source

ADX Florence[edit]

Just to clear up any confusion, Kenneth McGriff is not at Florence ADMAX, he is at Florence High. Both are separate prisons within the Florence Federal Correctional Complex. See here. – Zntrip 16:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Horry James Watts[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Horry James Watts requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 19:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of V-Nasty for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article V-Nasty is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-Nasty until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of V-Nasty[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on V-Nasty requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. →Στc. 00:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at V-Nasty[edit]

Hi Ronjohn, you recently removed a deletion tag from V-Nasty. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:57, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of BAYTL[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on BAYTL requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 00:57, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of V-Nasty[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on V-Nasty, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dennis Brown (talk) 01:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of V-Nasty for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article V-Nasty is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-Nasty (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing AfD template[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with V-Nasty. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it. Snotbot  t • c »  06:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lil Kim.jpeg[edit]

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


Speedy deletion nomination of Jimmy Henchman[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jimmy Henchman requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. AllyD (talk) 09:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jimmy Henchman[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Jimmy Henchman has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have 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 ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Bihco (talk) 14:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jimmy Henchman[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jimmy Henchman requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

March 2012[edit]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to LoLa Monroe. Thank you. --Michig (talk) 07:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

LoLa Monroe[edit]

This is your only warning. Revert yourself immediately or I will report you for edit warring and you will be blocked--Jac16888 Talk 00:00, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Why is youtube a unreliable source. The source ( Amber Rose is on camera clearly stating that Lola Monroe was a stripper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1Nlt6TQoAw

Because we don't allow youtube videos as reliable sources, it would only be of use if it was Lola herself saying "I was a stripper". If she was a stripper, there will be a real source out there somewhere. I will say it again, revert yourself immediately--Jac16888 Talk 00:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Since you have apparently decided to ignore me, I have gone ahead and made a report at WP:BLPN. And FYI, to pass an RFA you need 10's of thousands of edits and to actually be aware of some of our key policies such as WP:BLP--Jac16888 Talk 00:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at LoLa Monroe. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Bbb23 (talk) 00:37, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ronjohn [edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Hello Ronjohn. I noticed you, or another editor created a Requests for Adminship page under your name, and I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. Please note that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Wikipedia editing community sets an extremely high bar for potential administrator candidates. That being said, I strongly urge you to read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, Wikipedia:Adminship is not for new users, and Wikipedia:Not now, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that request and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

If you are determined to run for adminship despite my advice, you will need to transclude your RfA at WP:RFA by following the instructions at WP:RFA/N. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Failure to listen to wise counsel would not only torpedo this RFA, but any future one. Actually running for RFA when you don't meet even the most minimum of criteria would probably add another 12,000 required edits and at least a year before you could even think of trying again. RFA is not a big deal - but the community is pretty serious about how it selects admins (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, Ronjohn, you really have to read WP:NOTNOW. While policy doesn't explicitly say it, you will look pretty bad if you don't.Jasper Deng (talk) 00:35, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. I noticed you put your RfA inside of someone else's RfA, which I've undone. I see other editors above have suggested you might want to wait until you have more experience before you request adminship; I agree with them 100% and hope you will listen to their advice. 28bytes (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll give you 24hrs to properly transclude your RFA. If after that it's still non-transcluded, we can readily assume it can be deleted. It's been "in progress" long enough (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:41, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ronjohn. You have new messages at Eagles247's talk page.
Message added 21:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jasper Deng (talk) 21:45, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Added another reply there. Seriously, just listen to us.Jasper Deng (talk) 00:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

If you want to activate your request for adminship, you need to go to this page and place:

{{Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ronjohn}}

under the section that ends:

---- <!-- Please leave this horizontal rule and place rfa transclusion below - -->

Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


Copyright violation in Taxation in the Bahamas[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the page Taxation in the Bahamas, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition was deleted under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License." You may also e-mail or mail the Foundation to release the content. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more.

While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page.

The above article was copied directly from [1]. Your edits to Cocaine Cowboys 2 also appear to have been copied from [2]. Dpmuk (talk) 04:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
And The Affair (1995 film) looks like it may have been copied, at least in part, from [3]. Dpmuk (talk) 04:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
You were notified of our copyright policies as early as 2008. There is no reason for you to have continued copying content thereafter. I have just removed the content you added to Arthur J. Cooperman, as it, too, was copied. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

RfA closed per WP:NOTNOW[edit]

I'm sorry, but I have closed your RfA early. I hope you don't take this personally, because if you were to continue to contribute to Wikipedia in a positive manner, you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. Good luck! Bmusician 04:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

This is somewhat unfortunate. WP:NOTNOW is really intended for situations in which an inexperienced editor strays into RFA without knowing what they are getting into. Ronjohn was given ample warning that his RFA had little chance of success but was insistent that it went ahead. I had hoped the RFA would have been allowed to run long enough to make it clear that the intention behind the advice offered was genuine.
Catfish Jim and the soapdish 09:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Both ronjohn and I have asked Bmusician to undo the early close (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Final Warning[edit]

This is your final warning. To be honest if you were editing more regularly I'd have already blocked you but we only block to stop harm to the encyclopaedia I think little harm is likely to come from giving you one final chance. You really do need to take notice of what people have said on this page. You have, or appear to have:

  • Logged out to continue a edit war as an IP. This is considered sock puppetry and not allowed.
  • Ignored our biography of living persons policy by inserting material without a reliable source to support it.
  • Copy and pasted from other websites in violation of copyright law and our policy.

Many new editors make some of these mistakes but most listen to the advice they're given by more experienced editors. I suggest you read and make sure you understand WP:SOCKPUPPET, WP:BLP and WP:COPYPASTE. I for one, and I suspect many others, will now be closely watching you and another transgression in any of these areas will see you blocked. I suspect many admins would already have blocked you by now so I suggest you tread very carefully and try to abide by all our policies and guidelines. Dpmuk (talk) 04:41, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

RfA reopened[edit]

Per your request, I have reopened your RfA. Best of luck. Also, please don't use capital letters on my talk page...that can be perceived as shouting... Bmusician 09:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent RfA[edit]

I am sorry, but I have closed your Request for adminship prematurely. Simply put, you only have 842 edits on Wikipedia; while your edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards by which they judge RfA candidates, this particular RfA was all but assured of not passing.

I am sorry about this, and I hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I am confident that you would be able to submit a successful RfA in the future. You may wish to consider applying for an evaluation by other Wikipedia editors for feedback on how to obtain the necessary experience. Once you are ready to request adminship again, there is a great admin coaching program available, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! —Tom Morris (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ronjohn. I notice that you requested that your RfA was kept open when it had previously been closed. Tom closed it as it was definitely not going to pass, meaning that keeping it open is disruptive - effectively using the ignore all rules clause which one of Wikipedia's principles. I was in the process of doing exactly the same myself, but got called away from my desk.
This doesn't mean that you will never become an administrator, but I think you'll need to change your attitude a little before you do become one. And even if you don't, there's plenty to do here instead. If you'd like to discuss things further, feel free to give me a shout. Cheers WormTT · (talk) 14:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Per your message on Tom Morris' talk page:

Per WP:NOTNOW I do not accept the early please allow me my the same right as anyone else and not treat me differently. Please allow this to run it's course even if it has no way of passing.--Ron John (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You are being treated the same as anyone else. It is in nobody's interest to keep an RFA open when it is clear it has no chance whatsoever to succeed. The initial WP:NOTNOW was applied prematurely, given your apparent refusal to accept the advice offered by others that it would not succeed. After 23 opposes and no supports, WP:SNOW is clearly in effect. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 15:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey Ronjohn. I'm sorry this has worked out so badly for you. Can I just say, here and now, there was absolutely nothing wrong with you submitting that RfA. Anyone wanting to take that up, can take it up with me. You do not need any "approval" from anyone to run for RfA. However, it was doomed to failure - as a number of editors have told you. These editors have watched many RfAs, and can see general trends. In fact, I've done a lot of research on RfA, which can be found at RfA Reform. When it is clear that something is going to fail, we do stop the process, because there is no good reason to carry it on - which is something that's happened here. Now, we let it run for a while to show it was going to fail, but carrying it on for a week would just be bureaucracy for the sake of it. This would be true for any editor, and I can give you a number of examples if you like.

With regards to the "attitude" comment, (at least in theory) Wikipedia is a community, no one voice is more important than others. It's the points that are made that matter. However, when one voice ignores what the community as a whole is telling them, it causes disruption. That doesn't mean you are wrong, or that you have to lie about your views, but what it does mean is that you have to accept that the rest of the community is saying and give it a rest. I've got your page watchlisted, I'll try to help out if I can. WormTT · (talk) 07:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ronjohn. You have new messages at Worm That Turned's talk page.
Message added 15:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

cyberpower ChatLimited Access 15:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Achowat's talk page.

Amber[edit]

I don't like your addition cited to that youtube video but decided not to bother removing it -I did however tweak the content as the bio is about her and not L Monroe - diffs - Youreallycan 19:37, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Last time I checked wikipedia is not about what you like you. As you indicated on my talk page that you didn't like my edit. Please provide actual wikipedia guidlines as to why you removed my comment. Please refrain from personal feelings on wikipedia as most wikipedian editors.--Ron John (talk) 19:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I removed the coatracking part again - I see other users are objecting to your contributions in regards to this addition and one, an admin has warned you in regards to a block - I suggest if you continue to edit war this into the article against objections it may have consequences - Youreallycan 19:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012[edit]

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jac16888 Talk 19:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hrs for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:18, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Sarge - Barnstars for you![edit]

Sarge, You've been doing some good edits, so a hefty Barnstarr to, you! Gimme a call and we can work on wiki projects as you indicated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.36.165 (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Ronjohn (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I did nothing wrong I was told by a Wikipedia editor that I could use youtube as a reference here: "Because we don't allow youtube videos as reliable sources, it would only be of use if it was Lola herself saying "I was a stripper". If she was a stripper, there will be a real source out there somewhere. I will say it again, revert yourself immediately--Jac16888 Talk 00:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)" and I did just that with a bit of coatracking, but I didn't know what coatracking was until after, so when another editor changed my edit a bit I left it alone then another editor came by and removed it all together with no explanation or discussion. Bwilkins has been targeting me ever since I put a RFA in. I'm not sure why.

Decline reason:

You were blocked for edit-warring. You do not seem to understand what edit-warring is. Please familiarize yourself with WP:Edit warring. No unblock request will be successful if you insist you did nothing wrong despite the clear evidence in the article history that you did. 28bytes (talk) 14:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

Sarge, the rest of us have your back. Your rationale speaks to the good in all men. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.36.165 (talk) 19:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

More copyright issues[edit]

Your addition to Jimmy Henchman has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:30, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I have completed an evaluation of your major contributions and found copying in 12 out of the 20 most extensively edited articles you've touched. This copying stretches from 2008 to this year. The warning here is given to alert you that you must take this seriously. If you continue copying content, your account is likely to be indefinitely blocked. Please review Wikipedia:Copy-paste and familiarize yourself with our rules regarding using previously published text to avoid any further difficulties. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Strong Capital Management[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Strong Capital Management requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. TheLongTone (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012[edit]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Strong Capital Management, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Strong Capital Management for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Strong Capital Management is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strong Capital Management until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited David Mays, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Source (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) 04:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Jimmy Henchman for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jimmy Henchman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Henchman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Christopher Raible[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Christopher Raible has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:SOLDIER

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bgwhite (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Christopher Dorner[edit]

Ronjohn, please wait for a consensus before restoring Christopher Jordan Dorner.

As I pointed out to you, under WP:PERP:

A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person.

Therefore, any information on Dorner should be placed in the existing 2013 Southern California shootings article, because Dorner is not known for anything outside the shootings, and he is directly relevant to the article.

Furthermore, WP:PERP says the following:

A living person accused of a crime is presumed not guilty unless and until this is decided by a court of law. Editors must give serious consideration to not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator when no conviction is yet secured.

Dorner's guilt has not been proven by a court of law. He has only been named as the suspect in the shootings. To create an article on him implies that he is guilty before he has had a chance to stand trial.

Now, to address your point about James Eagen Holmes, who has a page despite only being known for his crime.

Firstly, Holmes has been formally charged and ordered to stand trial. Dorner, on the other hand, is currently a fugitive. His guilt has not been proven; for all we know, someone killed him a month ago and took advantage of his emotional state to write up a phony manifesto and carry out a spree killing against the LAPD. I know that sounds like bad fiction (it's straight off the top of my head), but we can't prove that it is not the case. The page on Dorner should not be created until such time as he is committed to stand trial. To create a page beforehand presumes that he is guilty, which is not the way the legal system works - even if the case against Dorner never examines Wikipedia.
Secondly, the current version of Holmes' page weighs in at 41,217kB. In other words, there is more than enough content on that page to justify a split from the 2012 Aurora shootings article. On the other hand, your work on a Dorner page is just 1,210kB. Compared to Holmes, we know nothing almost about Dorner.

Finally, I feel I should inform you that constantly reverting the edits to Christopher Jordan Dorner so that it is its own page (rather than a redirect) is edit-warring, and may get you referred to the adminstrators and possibly blocked from editing. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

1) The discussion to gather consensus is here.
2) We cannot create a page for Dorner on the basis that he might be killed before he stands trial. That is a case of trying to predict the future, which is not what Wikipedia is for.
3) There is nothing known about Dorner that cannot go in the article about his alleged crimes.
4) Of course I'm not an admin. I wouldn't be an admin even if they paid me to do it.
In the meantime, I have put in a request for page protection on the Dorner "article". Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I requested that you stop editing the page to form an article of its own, and instead go to Talk:Christopher Jordan Dorner to discuss creating a full page there. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013[edit]

Your recent editing history at Christopher Jordan Dorner shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. GiantSnowman 13:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

yeah! 68.147.17.197 (talk) 23:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
ha ha... No nonsense here buddy. 68.147.17.197 (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Christopher Jordan Dorner for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christopher Jordan Dorner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Jordan Dorner until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you.
Ronjohn, looking at your edits to the Dorner page, I noticed this edit claiming that the issue had been resolved, implying that the AfD discussion had drawn to a close. It had not —the discussion was still ongoing—and so your removal of the AfD nomination template constitutes vandalism. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to MILHIST[edit]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:33, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Phil Robertson shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 16:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:EW[edit]

Provides the ability for an admin to sanction you for declaring clear intent to edit war on the Robertson BLP. Cheers. Collect (talk) 16:47, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a short time for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 16:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Ronjohn (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Your block is preventing me from actually arguing this properly via dispute resolution board or add anything productive to the conversation on the Robertson talk page.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Ronjohn (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I understand that I have been blocked for edit warring and I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contirbutions instead Ron John (talk) 7:59 pm, 31 December 2013, last Tuesday (4 days ago) (UTC+0)

Decline reason:

You can put your unblock request back up when you have respomded to Only's questions. Spartaz Humbug! 00:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page for as long as you are blocked.

This is now your third block for edit warring, and your third time being blocked for edit warring on a biography of a living person. What changes will you make to avoid causing "damage or disruption" and assure that you will only be making useful contributions? only (talk) 12:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)